Deliberate foul

[maidenmu]

What would happen if I was 66 points in front with 67 remaining after potting a red with another red over a pocket and I not on any colour. Could I nominate e.g. yellow and plant the yellow into the red potting the red. The other person would then need snookers as I would be 62 in front with 59 remaining. Would the ref call for a deliberate foul and either put the red back and force me to retake the shot or award the frame to the other person for a deliberate foul?

[DeanH]

There is no such ruling in Snooker as "Deliberate foul" but it is covered by the Conduct rule as per "Sec4.1(a)(ii) any conduct by a Player which in the opinion of the referee is wilfully or persistently unfair;...".
In your scenario, it will be a Foul & Miss, if the non-offending player requests the replacement of the balls and the offending player to play again; the ref should also warn the offending player that another occurrence of such behaviour and the frame will be awarded to the non-offending player. Play on...

[maidenmu]

Great thank you. Obviously it is bad sportsmanship to gain an advantage in this way but I wasn't sure if the ref could call it a miss when you did hit your nominated ball. My next question was what if it less obvious that you wanted to pot the ball over the pocket e.g. you accidentally screwed the white into the red after hitting your nominated ball but I think 'in the opinion of the referee is willfully unfair' covers that scenario.

[DeanH]

it is tricky but to me the first part of the F&M rule is "to their ability" and not just "to hit the ball on" is more paramount.
Your second scenario becomes even more tricky and difficult for a referee to assess the "intent".
Maybe a Miss wont be call as you say due to hitting the ball on was achieved.

Hope LondonLad pops on as he once wrote a good piece about "intent" and the judgement of.

How many times do we see the pros going in off so the opponent comes on with ball in hand and has not gained anything; how many times - to us viewers - it looked "deliberate? :biggrin:

[Selbyjustbegun]

There is no such ruling in Snooker as "Deliberate foul" but it is covered by the Conduct rule as per "Sec4.1(a)(ii) any conduct by a Player which in the opinion of the referee is wilfully or persistently unfair;...".
In your scenario, it will be a Foul & Miss, if the non-offending player requests the replacement of the balls and the offending player to play again; the ref should also warn the offending player that another occurrence of such behaviour and the frame will be awarded to the non-offending player. Play on...

What happens if I deliberately move the balls on the table by my hand?

[DeanH]

What happens if I deliberately move the balls on the table by my hand?

Same rule applies, warning not to continue that behavior else the frame and if continues the match to the opponent.
As to whether the balls are replaced, I think this would be a F&M and the non-offending player would have the usual three choices.

[Selbyjustbegun]

Same rule applies, warning not to continue that behavior else the frame and if continues the match to the opponent.
As to whether the balls are replaced, I think this would be a F&M and the non-offending player would have the usual three choices.

https://youtu.be/y1sDiLapr0g

Dott didn’t do it on purpose here, but what happens if some player does it every once in a while?

[Billy]

https://youtu.be/y1sDiLapr0g

Dott didn’t do it on purpose here, but what happens if some player does it every once in a while?

Yes, someone has already said this, but Graeme should have either potted the white directly into the pocket at this point, or lifted it off the table with his hand to give ball-in-hand back to Mark.

[travisbickle]

There is no such ruling in Snooker as "Deliberate foul" but it is covered by the Conduct rule as per "Sec4.1(a)(ii) any conduct by a Player which in the opinion of the referee is wilfully or persistently unfair;...".
In your scenario, it will be a Foul & Miss, if the non-offending player requests the replacement of the balls and the offending player to play again; the ref should also warn the offending player that another occurrence of such behaviour and the frame will be awarded to the non-offending player. Play on...

Can’t be a foul and a miss because he played the ball on (yellow)surely?
Unsporting maybe, but only a 4 point penalty in my book.

[DeanH]

https://youtu.be/y1sDiLapr0g

Dott didn’t do it on purpose here, but what happens if some player does it every once in a while?

Dott should have left the cue ball to roll into the pocket; then there would have been no further issues
If a player does this every once in a while (in the same match) I would expect the referee to quietly talk to the player saying, "please let the ball drop into the pocket".
This situation has been discussed many, many times

[DeanH]

Can’t be a foul and a miss because he played the ball on (yellow)surely?
Unsporting maybe, but only a 4 point penalty in my book.

hm, thinking you may be right, as discussed earlier, I am sure I added a bit more, but cant see my edit.
Maybe just up to the non-offending player to get the snooker required.
Now the referee has the option to award the frame immediately after a gross infringement of the rule, but does this "deliberate foul" constitute a gross infringement?
Should a new clause be added to the rules defining a "deliberate foul" and the penalty?
Easier than leaving it to the individual referee.

[JimMalone]

I really think this is a highly interesting debate. Would be fine if Snooker had rules for cases such as this.

[JimMalone]

Now the referee has the option to award the frame immediately after a gross infringement of the rule, but does this "deliberate foul" constitute a gross infringement?
Should a new clause be added to the rules defining a "deliberate foul" and the penalty?
Easier than leaving it to the individual referee.

Not in the case of the original question. But I think if a player moves balls by hand deliberately as asked later in the thread he surely should lose the frame?

[Londonlad147]

Hope LondonLad pops on as he once wrote a good piece about "intent" and the judgement of.

Did I? Must be lost amogst all the other gems I've written ;-)

[Londonlad147]

In your scenario, it will be a Foul & Miss, if the non-offending player requests the replacement of the balls and the offending player to play again; the ref should also warn the offending player that another occurrence of such behaviour and the frame will be awarded to the non-offending player. Play on...

It cannot be a foul and a miss because the nominated ball (yellow) has been struck first. Also, the difference in scores after the foul means penalty points are required by the non-offender, so that would preclude it anyway.

The scenario presented by the OP is a difficult one, and it really depends on how clear cut the actual events are. Is there any doubt that the player was aiming to pocket the red? If there is then you've got to give the striker the benefit of the doubt.

Also with there still being other reds on the table, the needing fo penalty points isn't so crucial so it could be argued that there would be no real reason for the striker to have deliberately tried to pocket the red. If it had happened on the last red, then maybe one needs to take a different view.