White in middle of pack?

[Londonlad147]

which situation was this comment aimed at? Not the same we are discussing on this thread is it?

Sorry, no, that was aimed at something someone said on the FB topic.

[Terry Davidson]

I still think our rules ref is correct. The only way to get the right answer is to ask the rules person on the WPBSA who are the official owners of the rules. I think once the referee is asked his opinion 'Is this an impossible hit?' he can answer 'Yes' or 'No'.

If someone knows how to contact the WPBSA rules committee please do so. Even though this would happen very rarely it might be good to have it resolved by the official voice for the rules.

[DeanH]

are not Williams and Moore on the rules committee?

[Londonlad147]

are not Williams and Moore on the rules committee?

No, but I know a man who is!

[Brendan Moore]

are not Williams and Moore on the rules committee?

Yes I am on the rules committee, so is Eirian. If you look at Londonlad147's post earlier, you'll see what we both think should happen in this situation.

[Byrom]

Yes I am on the rules committee, so is Eirian. If you look at Londonlad147's post earlier, you'll see what we both think should happen in this situation.

Just to clarify something for me Brendan if I could ask - if there is no natural angle to hit a ball when snookered without say coming off a cushion or two with side would you call a miss?

[Brendan Moore]

Just to clarify something for me Brendan if I could ask - if there is no natural angle to hit a ball when snookered without say coming off a cushion or two with side would you call a miss?

It's impossible to say for definite without seeing the situation, as each snooker should be taken on it's own merit, but more than likely yes I would, especially if you are talking about the pro game.

[Byrom]

ok well I was placed in a snooker in a comp recently - miss rule in operation white was towards the top rail behind a colour and close to corner yellow side pocket - one red left and I had to come off either one or two cushions and swerve off side rail with a tremendous amount of side to stand any chance at all as there was no natural angle to hit the ball - miss was called several times but some guy watching said it was not a miss because there was no natural angle and I was obviously making a genuine attempt to hit it and just missed it twice - it just seemed unfair in this situation to me - pro or otherwise so I thought while we have you here I would ask.

Thanks

[Londonlad147]

I still think our rules ref is correct. The only way to get the right answer is to ask the rules person on the WPBSA who are the official owners of the rules. I think once the referee is asked his opinion 'Is this an impossible hit?' he can answer 'Yes' or 'No'.

If someone knows how to contact the WPBSA rules committee please do so. Even though this would happen very rarely it might be good to have it resolved by the official voice for the rules.

So are you now satisfied that your senior ref is wrong, now that you've heard the correct answer from the horse's mouth?

[Terry Davidson]

So are you now satisfied that your senior ref is wrong, now that you've heard the correct answer from the horse's mouth?

Nope. If that is so then what does this mean 'As for your comment Tim, the Referee MUST tell the player in the situation you describe because the rule book tells him/her that he must.

Our rules expert stands by his original evaluation and has read this forum post.

[Terry Davidson]

Yes I am on the rules committee, so is Eirian. If you look at Londonlad147's post earlier, you'll see what we both think should happen in this situation.

If a player decides himself without asking the referee and plays directly at a colour despite intervening reds then a MISS would be called unless the referee had decided it was impossible to hit. In the case you described you let the player attempt to hit the ball on THREE times for a loss of 12 points before you corrected the situation.

On the rare occasions where this happens I have seen (in both Canada and International) the referee decide an impossible hit when asked by the player before the shot and the question was always answered by a simple 'yes' or 'no'. It seems to make sense to me since if that didn't happen and the referee wasn't wasn't allowed to answer then the player could keep playing and trying to hit the snooker and keep being awarded a MISS until the snookers required stage unless he played directly at a colour and the referee did not call a MISS.

Also, we all know the ONLY person present who can decide if a snooker is impossible to hit is the referee, even though he may not be the best qualified to do so. If, as a player I decide a hit is impossible then I would play directly at the ball on despite intervening balls but if the referee didn't agree with me he would call a MISS. I would then ask the referee to re-set the balls and ask for an opinion from the senior referee or the tournament director. Who is the best qualified to assess an impossible hit? I would say in most cases the player is.

It doesn't make sense to me the part specifying the referee's OPINION is even in there since this does insinuate the referee (in this type of case) can tell the player yes or no IF ASKED, since that would show the player knows the rule.

So how does one apply for a re-examination of the Rules Committee decision in this or any other type of situation as I think angled ball needs a little work too along with the purely subjective part of the MISS rule.

Incidentally, our rules expert here feels the referee should answer yes or no if the player asks (and he has read your answers and 'stands by his decision'.

[Londonlad147]

Let me pose a different scenario.

The cue ball is tie on the side cushion near the green pocket. The last remaining red is also on the same side cushion, but at the other end of the table near a corner pocket. There is a colour about a ball's width off the cushion between the cue ball and the red. If the player asks if he has central full ball contact available, would you expect the referee to answer?

This has been discussed at European tutors and examiners' meeting and the answer is 'no', although the referee may well wish to prove to himself (only) whether or not there is full ball contact available.

It is exactly the same principle as the 'impossible shot' scenario.

[Terry Davidson]

Yes I am on the rules committee, so is Eirian. If you look at Londonlad147's post earlier, you'll see what we both think should happen in this situation.

I'm not clear on which situation you are referring to. I was referring to the following 'striker pots a red and cueball ends up in the pack with no colour available by a direct route. There is one narrow path to a side cushion however the player believes it is impossible to hit any colour ball.'

In my world after having seen a few of these situations the players concerned did ask the referee for his opinion and he did give it.

What Brendan and Eirian (and London) are saying is the referee is not allowed to state his opinion before the shot is taken which is covered by yet another rule which is not aim specifically at the 'impossible hit situation'. So we are left with this scenario...player decides hit is impossible so plays directly at a colour and hits intervening red, referee decides a hit was possible so declares a MISS.

In Brendan's scenario above player decides he can hit a colour and attempts it 3 times and on all 3 attempts the referee has ALREADY decided it was an impossible hit SO WHY DID THE REFEREE CALL A MISS AT ALL? If the player was taking a shot where he hit an intervening ball and the referee has decided it was impossible then no MISS should have been called, however Brendon called 3 of them.

The job of the referee is to keep the match fair to both parties and also to make the final decision even though he might be the LEAST qualified of the 3 individuals concerned to make that final decision. In my opinion this interpretation of the 'impossible hit' situation is not fair in the least to the striker. Even if he knows the rule (and note in Brendon's scenario and also the John Street scenario the players didn't know the rule) he has to decide whether it is impossible or not. The only way he has to get a decision is to try the shot and see if the referee calls a MISS. If he does then the player has to re-evaluate the shot after the balls have been replaced and see if there's any possible way to hit a ball on.

The referee is not allowed to explain the rule to the player as that's in the rules, but after the shot the player gets to hear the referee's decision so how is it specifically covered in the rules that the referee must wait until after the shot to declare his decision?

[Terry Davidson]

Let me pose a different scenario.

The cue ball is tie on the side cushion near the green pocket. The last remaining red is also on the same side cushion, but at the other end of the table near a corner pocket. There is a colour about a ball's width off the cushion between the cue ball and the red. If the player asks if he has central full ball contact available, would you expect the referee to answer?

This has been discussed at European tutors and examiners' meeting and the answer is 'no', although the referee may well wish to prove to himself (only) whether or not there is full ball contact available.

It is exactly the same principle as the 'impossible shot' scenario.

I'm sorry, but that is nowhere near the same situation as a cueball buried in the pack.

In your scenario above the referee had better use either his ball marker or another ball to check and see if that intervening ball is indeed a full ball's width off the cushion. While he's doing this (if it was me) I would be observing him very closely and that would be the same thing as if I asked him.

As a player with the situation you outline I would check how far that intervening ball was from the cushion and if it was over a ball's width I would likely play directly at the ball on. If I hit the intervening ball I would expect a MISS call. But if I felt it was too close to call then I would likely play off the top cushion with LH side.

Of course the other thing that could happen in this situation is when the referee replaced the intervening ball he may get it 1 or 2mm further from the cushion and it would be easier to hit the ball on. In any case I would never ask a referee if I had full-ball contact.

But let's make this really difficult for everyone. Using your scenario the intervening ball is 2-1/16" + 1mm off the side cushion (so full-ball contact is available) HOWEVER the far middle jaw is sticking out a bit because the table is not perfect (sad to say my own table's yellow side is like this) and it's IMPOSSIBLE for the player to make full-ball contact. As a referee (which I assume you are judging by your remarks) how would you call this one?

I'm thinking specifically about the rule which describes the referee's call over equipment flaws where equipment was not provided by the player. If the player tried the straight shot, hit the jaw and bounded away to the right as a referee I would immediately see on a perfect table it would be impossible to get that reaction and I would call a FOUL but not a miss but I would have to be certain the intervening ball was not in the way.

OH, and by the way...here you are attending European referee's training seminars and you're asking us members to decide on really unusual scenarios which a bunch of qualified referees have dreamed up (likely after a few sociable drinks too). Totally unfair as most of us are ONLY players and are basing our calls on experience of playing and not refereeing.

[Londonlad147]

I'm sorry, but that is nowhere near the same situation as a cueball buried in the pack.

...

OH, and by the way...here you are attending European referee's training seminars and you're asking us members to decide on really unusual scenarios which a bunch of qualified referees have dreamed up (likely after a few sociable drinks too). Totally unfair as most of us are ONLY players and are basing our calls on experience of playing and not refereeing.

You've got two scenarios where you're effectively asking the referee in advance what his call would be. The detail of my example is perhaps a little obscure, but the same principle applies if you've got say an uncertain path through a field of scattered reds to all the colours down the other end of the table.

In one scenario you;re saying you'd expect the referee to answer (is this an impossible shot?), but not in the other (have I got central full ball contact?). Both could result in a miss being called or simply a foul, depending on the referee's answer. The referee's response is likely to affect the shot that the striker plays, and that can't be right. The answer to both questions MUST be 'I can't tell you'.