Rules Question

[reverse_side]

Not researched this yet or asked anyone else, but - what do you think a ref would do if a player was called a touching ball and even though the player struck the white away from it, it moved?

There's only 1 time this could happen, but it's still a possibility a Ref needs to know what to do either beforehand or know the rules inside out to make a correct judement on the spot.

To briefly explain how this can happen.... if the white nestles onto a ball sitting on the nap occupied by a colour's spot that has an indentation (caused by excessive banging when respotting a colour), then if the colour or red on the spot is in effect leaning on the white, then when this support is removed, it would naturally fall into the hole but look like the white had moved it when in fact it was simply holding it up?

What do people think?

(I suppose another time it could happen is if the white's touching a ball hovering on the edge of the pocket and the vibration of the shot makes it fall backwards, but then you'd think the red would simply be replaced without foul if the Ref was sure they'd not touched it)

[stoichen]

I reckon it would be a legal shot as the player has played away from the touching ball and no push shot has been made. The ball has moved through no fault of the player (which, without checking, I'm sure is allowed for in the rules) . As you say though, it would require some keen judgement from the referee, especially if the opponent disputes it.

[stoichen]

Ok, here's one for you. This one is theoretically possible but I couldn't ever see it happening.

A shot goes horribly wrong, the D ends up packed with balls and the white goes in-off.

There is nowhere in the D where the white can be legally placed because all the other balls are taking up the space.

Where does the white ball go?

[Sonny]

That's easy - there is no way you can fit all the balls in the D where you can't place the white.

As for the main question - no foul

[Sonny]

Here's another rules question and it's something that happened to me (it didn't matter because I'd already won the frame):

I went for the black aiming to get position on a red over the middle pocket high side. I missed the black and turned away in disgust keeping my arm and cue still on the table. The cue ball hit my cue and stopped dead thereby giving a 7 point penalty, but I inadvertantly stopped my opponent from being on the red and thus had an advantage.

If this is legal (i.e. the balls are played from where they come to rest), then forgetting sportsmanship and all that it seems like a good tactic to employ if you're ever in trouble! Most frames would give you the opportunity to do this if you think about it - miss pot, white is rolling towards good position, put hand out and stop white rolling, hey presto loss of 7 points max but not a frame loser.

[stoichen]

"That's easy - there is no way you can fit all the balls in the D where you can't place the white."

Oh yeah, almost but just not quite. Thought of that one late last night, oh well.

Would stopping the white on purpose not be considered a concession of frame? I suppose you could pretend it was an accident and then it would be up to the referee to decide whether it really was an accident.

[Sonny]

All that happens there is the ref says "do you concede?" and you say "no".

I remember one of the very first matches I ever watched having Patsy Fagin miss hitting the green when getting out of a snooker - he kept feathering the cue (stood up) and the white came back down the table and he hit it again, this time hitting the green. The ref who didnt know what the hell to do asked if he conceded - he said no. He went on to win the frame and match 10-9 (WC 1st round 1982 I think) amid much controvesy.

Funny how some things stick with you for years, and other more useful pieces of information just vanish from the memory.

[reverse_side]

Stoich's, your poser sounds like a Quiz show tie-breaker; how many snooker balls could you fit in the D of a full-size table? (A tip for newbies... to save time and wear of your table's cloth, gather the reds together on the back cushion and shape them with your forearms into a triangle, then pop the triangle over to position them... as an aside, if you get ALL the balls bar the white, and do the same.... it'll stilll make a triangle, just a bigger one)

As for the Rule Book, it says, " (f) If the referee is satisfied that any movement of a touching ball at the moment of strinking was not caused by the striker, he will not call a foul" under section 8.Touching Ball.
As the player making the shot IS causing the touching ball to move, it should be called a foul based on this rule, but it'd be like being blamed for someone falling off a cliff because they tried to push someone else over the edge but they moved away at the last second. Or being called a foul for a footballer falling over because they moved out of the way just as they were about to be illegally barged...... and why not, antoher example, being accused of murder for moving out of the way of a sniper who was aiming for you but hits someone else.

There's another section (worded in awkward English), entitled, "15. Ball Moved by Other than Strkier", gravity should be mentioned as a culprit but it only talks about anything apart from the Striker or their Partner making balls move; and then to have them replaced or positioned where they would have landed if they were moving.
Another question might be whether a player can use his cue to measure distances if they'd learnt some techniques of working out angles, e.g. the infamous mirror technique.

Wouldn't encourage employing too many intentional fouls - unless it was a grand a frame... but in that case, make sure you've got a few spare patellas!... and I don't mean an abundance of Spanish influenced rice dishes. The Ref would probably default a player who wilfully shows unsportsmanlike conduct like that.

The worst I've done is to be stuck in a horrible snooker that missing didn't entice my opponent to play again after 3 attempts and misses by myself. the red was stuck with 3 colours around it and a very narrow aperture to slink inbetween; in the end I looked as though I was attempting a severe swerve onto the cushion to come at it from behind, but really I was planning on smashing the first colour from the front very hard and saying, "oops". So I did and saved myself 20 points, he was being an arrogant tw*t so I didn't mind having a lash - won the frame too.

Has anyone else cheated or been less than honest?