Rule Question

[sArnie]

The nearest ball is considered to be the snookering ball

Okay, how about this then................. 2 reds left.....


A player is left with a free ball - attempts a pot on the green which jaws and ends up snookering his opponent on one of the reds. However, the remaining red is also blocked by one of the colours. Your opponent claims a foul... is he/she correct?

Radio Eriwan says: That depends

According to Section 2 Rule 16 (i) "the [snookering] ball nearest to the cue-ball is considered to be the effective snookering ball". Thus, if the ball nominated as free ball is closer to (or lies in the same distance (ii) from) the cue-ball to the other colour, that completes the snooker, that is a foul.

[The Statman]

Okay, how about this then................. 2 reds left.....


A player is left with a free ball - attempts a pot on the green which jaws and ends up snookering his opponent on one of the reds. However, the remaining red is also blocked by one of the colours. Your opponent claims a foul... is he/she correct?

No. The green is not snookering the player on the other red, so it is not a foul.

If more than one red is snookered – each behind a different colour, then no single colour is considered to be the snookering ball.

[sArnie]

No. The green is not snookering the player on the other red, so it is not a foul.

If more than one red is snookered – each behind a different colour, then no single colour is considered to be the snookering ball.

Okay, how about this then................. 2 reds left.....


A player is left with a free ball - attempts a pot on the green which jaws and ends up snookering his opponent on one of the reds. However, the remaining red is also blocked by one of the colours. Your opponent claims a foul... is he/she correct?

I misunderstood that question: I read it so, that the 2nd red was also snookered by another colour but by the free ball as well. The rule I quoted only applies if different balls snooker someone on the same ball(s) on.

Only after reading your answer, statman, I realised that dantuck_7 must have meant, that one red was snookered by the former free ball only and the other red only by another colour and not also by the free ball. In that case your - as always - absolutely right: no foul.

[TheStranger]

Only after reading your answer, statman, I realised that dantuck_7 must have meant, that one red was snookered by the former free ball only and the other red only by another colour and not also by the free ball. In that case your - as always - absolutely right: no foul.

That's how I interpreted it too - it's similar to a more obvious scenario that doesn't involve a free ball, that is also tactically useful:

Two reds are left, one of them gets potted; the player then, instead of potting a color ball, sends the nominated color ball nearby to block the remaining red and force a snooker, in a situation that looks like this:

http://img213.imageshack.us/img213/9711/snooker1qf1.jpg

In the scenario that dantuck was referring to, the picture could apply to: imagine the pink as the free ball nominated, and the photo as the result of the shot that dantuck described.

[dantuck_7]

sArnie : Yes I did mean that the one of the colours snookering a red was the nominated free-ball and the other wasn't. See the attachment.

Thanks TS quite a useful rule to know - sure to cause some arguments when I try it out!

[The Statman]

Actually, in a recent tournament in which I was the resident referee and also a competitor, this very situation cropped up on the table alongside the one I was playing on.

There were two reds left, in separate parts of the table, and he had a free ball. By rolling up to the black he was snookering on one of the reds, while the brown was snookering the other in the opposite direction.

The two players discussed whether he was allowed to do this, and they did not agree. Eventually they asked me, and I said that as the referee on duty, I could not advise them as to the rule, but once the shot was finished I would confirm whether a foul shot had been played.

Quite a gathering watched with interest, and he completely mis-hit it, sending the cue-ball about a foot further than intended. I commented that the shot was foul because he nominated black but failed to hit it! (A foul 4, not 7, as the black had been nominated as a red.) He also left a free ball but the other player had an easy pot so the situation did not continue.

[TheStranger]

Dantuck_7: Something that I think muddies the discussion a bit, depending on how interpret it, but based on my post and sArnie's:

I read this at Snookergames's Q&A:

http://www.snookergames.co.uk/qanda10.html

Until 1934 snookering behind a free ball was a legitimate stroke. Playing softly
to roll the cue-ball up to touch the free ball was known as the "Crawl" stroke.

It's mentioned elsewhere in one of the other Q&A pages...BUT I think that, as noted earlier, this is only relevant when the free ball leaves the cue completely snookered for the remaining balls on, not if any other snookers are in place from other balls on the table.

My post here still refers to a legal situation in any case (because my original frame of reference was in a non-free ball situation, and as long as a free ball in a similar scenario is not snooking the next/only ball "on") unlike what is mentioned here:

http://www.snookergames.co.uk/qanda20.html

Only Brown, Blue, Pink, and Black left on the table, and I got a free ball after a foul
made by my opponent on the Brown. I decided to nominate the Pink as a free ball,
I didn't pot it, but the Pink came in front of the cue ball and blocked quarter of the
next ball 'on' the Brown. In other words my opponent can see only 3/4 of the Brown.

So in this case is it a foul or not and if a foul, why?
Does my opponent get a free ball? and how many points the foul supposed to be.

The example you give would be a foul stroke. Unless your opponent had a clear
shot to every part of the brown, it would count as being snookered.

So your opponent would be awarded a free ball and also gets four points for
the foul, the penalty being based on the value of the ball 'on' (the pink counted
as brown when you played it as the free ball).

When the free ball stops between the cue-ball and the ball 'on' it can be quite
obvious if it obstructs a clear shot being played. But the free ball can also
interfere even if it is slightly behind the ball 'on' as this diagram clearly shows.

http://www.snookergames.co.uk/freeball.gif

Your opponent would be unable to hit the extreme edge of the brown on that
side as contact with the free ball would have been made first.