Question On Stalemate Rule

[pearce]

Can the referee call a stalemate and restart the game without the agreement of the players after a certain number of shots with neither player trying to pot a ball. If so, is there an exact number of shots and must the referee give a warning.

[ADR147]

pool or snooker

[pearce]

Stalemate Rule

Sorry - Snooker Of Course

[ADR147]

both players must agree.

[pearce]

Pearce

question to ADR147 - We've had a situation with the black over a side pocket and a cluster of reds in front with one player well ahead. After 15 shots each without either player attempting to pot a ball, the referee warned both players that after five shots each with no attempt to pot, he would call a stalemate. The player ahead then belted into the reds potting the black. Are you saying the referee can't do what he did.

[Robert602]

both players must agree.

Is that right

I've seen the referee give a 'three shots each' warning to resolve a particular situation, that's usually enough but after that he'd surely be able to force the rerack if necessary.

There's that situation Willie Thorne mentions frequently - when the referee forced a rerack even when Willie had a huge lead in the frame.

[ADR147]

i am not sure - i think if one player believes he can gain he can continue to play - for example if you had a 50 point lead you would not want a re-rack and it would be criminal to enforce one!

[The Statman]

These days it is often the case that the players will look to each other and suggest a re-rack – the referee would of course be stupid to insist otherwise if he can see agreement with both players.

However, the referee CAN take the matter into his own hands. The rules only state that he should advise the players that he will restart the frame if the situation is not resolved in a certain length of time (measured in shots each).

Typically it might be 3 each or 5 each, but it is up to the referee to assess the situation on the table.

In one frame in the late 80s, a red had landed right over the pocket, with the cue-ball nestling into the opposite side of the pack. Neither player was interested in risking going for the pot off a cushion, and the re-rack occurred after just over 2 minutes' play. In the 1981 final, Steve Davis and Doug Mountjoy had got to the final blue, which was next to the pocket but with pink or black in the way, and with one point's difference in the scores the frame was re-racked 41 minutes after they had started it.

[ADR147]

i have trouble with the idea that you could be 50 points up and have a re-rack forced on you?

[The Statman]

i have trouble with the idea that you could be 50 points up and have a re-rack forced on you?

It is a bit harsh sounding.

However, remember that the Rule makes no mention of the word "re-rack"; there is no such term. The relevant Rule is entitled Stalemate.

When you look at it in that light, a Stalemate is just that – a position where neither player is able and/or willing to resolve some situation on the table. The Rules can hardly do anything but start the frame again. It is tough if you do find yourself 50 points in front it is most unfortunate, but the prerogative is yours to resolve the situation.

[ADR147]

umm - i would just lose my cool and smash them but i doubt a pro player would!

[steedee]

What happens if you deliberatly fouled? say potting the problem ball whilst leaving the reds safe?

[bongo]

What happens if you deliberatly fouled? say potting the problem ball whilst leaving the reds safe?

Some would consider it ungentleman conduct. I call it a professional foul, you fouled but you still have the advantage! There was a situation like that in the World Championships with John Parrott, some say he was going to do this, some that and we will never know really.

[The Statman]

Some would consider it ungentleman conduct. I call it a professional foul, you fouled but you still have the advantage! There was a situation like that in the World Championships with John Parrott, some say he was going to do this, some that and we will never know really.

Yes, however, the removal of the offending ball is likely to resolve the actual Stalemate situation to the potential benefit of both players.

In the case where a red goes over the pocket, and the cue-ball nestles in the other side of the pack, then regardless of the difference in scores it is likely that neither player will be willing to risk resolving the situation. When it is another ball, say, over the pocket with reds immediately behind, it would be difficult to see how someone could deliberately knock in the colour and also guarantee leaving the reds in a safe position. If you have a reasonable lead it is still likely to be to your opponent's advantage that a group of reds become slightly dislodged, even if none is immediately pottable.

[JohnBray]

John Williams puplished a book roughly 10 or more years ago (foreword by Steve Davis) with the up-to-date longer version of the rules and detailed explanations of how each rule should be interpreted including straightforward and also some very odd and obscure scenarios that have or could happen. I have a copy somewhere at home (picked it up at a stll in Goffs - Irish Masters final 1999 where Hendry came back from 4-8 down to win 9-8 vs Lee, before winning the World C'ship a few weeks later). Green coloured paperback, worth trying to pick up a copy to solve thorny questions..