Referee's discretion Vs the rule book

[Billy]

Earlier in the week, during the match between Liang and Swail, Liang looked at taking on a very thin brown to the baulk corner pocket. As the shot was so fine, it may have appeared to the referee that he was taking green instead, so Liang nominated the brown as he should. He then decided the brown was too tough and opted for an easier blue into the centre. He nominated the blue and played his shot. No problems there, but my question is this.

In that it was blantantly obvious Liang had simply changed his mind and decide to play the blue instead, and in that there were no other colours anywhere near the blue, had he not re-nominated the blue, would the referee have called a foul? I'm sure the rule book says he must, but it would be a harsh decision to penalise a player for not re-nominating a colour, when it is so obvious which colour they have eventually decided to play, despite having nominated a different one beforehand.

[DawRef]

Section 2, rule 12(a) states:
A nominated ball is the object ball the striker declares, or indicates to the satisfaction of the referee, he undertakes to hit with the first impact of the cue-ball.

Therefore, in answering your question, I would say that the answer is 'NO'. I did not see the incident. However, if the referee was in any doubt, he simply has to ask. If the player doesn't respond and pots a colour, even if it's the black, he'll be penalised 7 points (Section, rule 12(b).

[Bruce]

I agree. If there is no possible ambiguity about which colour the player is aiming at when he actually plays the shot, that colour has in effect been nominated, albeit not verbally. The fact that he had previously nominated a different colour verbally doesn't alter the situation.

[pink_ball]

I recall an incident like the hypothetical one you described, not many years ago O' Sullivan pots the red but snookers himself and cant see the black. The referee asks which color he intends to play, Ronnie says ironically, "Black". Then he plays a safety on a low color green or yellow i think. The ref. gave no foul.

[Billy]

I agree. If there is no possible ambiguity about which colour the player is aiming at when he actually plays the shot, that colour has in effect been nominated, albeit not verbally. The fact that he had previously nominated a different colour verbally doesn't alter the situation.

Well I have to confess that surprises me. I'd have thought a renomination (which he did) would have been necessary in this instance.

Thanks for the answers, all of you.