TSB - Miss rule canvasing by The WPBSA

[Sean Newman]

There's no reason to put a limit on it. Simply the player has 'missed' has the option to continue trying to hit the object ball or at any point offer 'ball in hand'.
This would work I'm sure. I'll give you an example, recently in league play I was snookered on the last red when 34 in front (35 on). Most of the balls including the red were in very safe positions. The most I could realistically leave was a red and a pink but the snooker was hard and the ref had the 'must hit' philosophy. I ended up giving 52 points away for just one snooker when the balls were safe...totally crazy.
The rule was introduced to stop the striker gaining an advantage by missing. I think 52 points away in this situation is absurd. This is a situation where the rule has changed the game for the worse.
Also amauteur players have a different philosophy. Even if I had escaped the snooker and left an easy red and pink to follow, why should my opponent pot them for 7 points when he can put me back 13 times for 52?
I regularly come across this now playing in the league. Players play for 'misses'. They would struggle to make a 24 break when the balls are over the pockets but now they can put you back 6 times with no danger. It's just not right.

[Chen]

The main problems I see with the miss rule are,

1. A lot of referees don't know what positions are easy to escape from and what positions are difficult to escape from, or are afraid to call it honestly.

2. A lot of players tend to take advantage of this situation even though they know their opponent has made a good attempt.

3. Nobody much wants to see someone give away 20 or 30 points when it is obvious to most people watching that the player was doing their best. I've seen this many times in the womens IBSF.

What if it was changed to something along these lines, all failed attempts to hit a ball on are called a foul and miss, with the normal exception if snookers are required before or as a result of the shot, as well as any impossible snookers to escape from, as in cue ball surrounded by balls not on.

However add a new rule that whenever your opponent asks to have the balls replaced, the offending player, if he thinks he made a good attempt, can ask his opponent to try and do better.

If he does better he can play the next shot from where they finish or ask his opponent to play next shot.

If he does not get any closer, the other player has the same options.

This would still allow a player to keep playing out of a snooker the safest way a number of times, if this worked the miss rule would be applied more honestly by the players themselves.

Obviously more details needed. Any thoughts?

[The Statman]

How about - after three misses, the oncoming player can have the balls replaced OR the penalty points for the shot - but not both!

[Chen]

That would still not cover the situation where the player made 3 good attempts. Innocent until proven guilty.

[The Statman]

Well ok - not after three misses, just whenever!

[thinsy]

How about - after three misses, the oncoming player can have the balls replaced OR the penalty points for the shot - but not both!

Personally, I think the rule is fine for the Pro-game. And doesn't need changing!

I think it's harder to judge in the amateur game because you tend to have a lesser qualified referee judging a lesser talented player!! This causes huge problems on many occasions!!

However, this is the best alternative I've heared so far (could maybe stretch it to 5 misses). Most snooker escapes would be achieved by pro's within 5 attempts therefore would not alter the pro-game drastically!!

The amateur game would benefit from stopping the greedy players, who like to win a frame because of one safety shot, from succeeding!!

And, of course, if the player feels he can play from the position left to lay another snooker he can do so and begin to gain more points from there!

[thinsy]

That would still not cover the situation where the player made 3 good attempts. Innocent until proven guilty.

One thing that always gets ignored is:

Just because a player gets close to a ball he is ATTEMPTING to hit doesn't mean he has made his best attempt!!!

I would not consider getting close to a 4 cusion escape snooker acceptable when there is an easy 1 cusion escape on!!!

[Chen]

Well ok - not after three misses, just whenever!

This would keep it nice and simple, which I like.

But I can see a snookered player making 10 attempts from a very difficult position, while his opponent waits for the safe on ball to be disturbed.

Good that no points a given away but may be time consuming.

[brazil70]

My opinion is that snooker should have exactly the same rules at all levels whether at the crucible or a friendly knock about at the local club, with no grey areas. The problem with the miss is that in local league it is often a matter of opinion whether miss or not, and many do not play the rule at all, in our league it is enforced strictly. I believe that as in original post experiment perhaps in one or two tournaments at least delete miss except for when a full ball on is seen, unless snookers required by either player. The 7 point suggestion for all fouls was to make it a little less beneficial to miss, and the deliberate foul is simply a tactical option, which players would rarely use as 7 pts away, but it is same for all and would put an interesting tactical edge on frames. I am sure that after numerous frames any anomalis would become apparent. I hope some professionals and the powers that be read these forums for ideas, but then what is our opinions worth.

Original Source: http://www.thesnookerforum.com/board...#ixzz1Hv4lMC00
TSF - TheSnookerForum.com

[wildJONESEYE]

My opinion is that snooker should have exactly the same rules at all levels whether at the crucible or a friendly knock about at the local club, with no grey areas. The problem with the miss is that in local league it is often a matter of opinion whether miss or not, and many do not play the rule at all, in our league it is enforced strictly. I believe that as in original post experiment perhaps in one or two tournaments at least delete miss except for when a full ball on is seen, unless snookers required by either player. The 7 point suggestion for all fouls was to make it a little less beneficial to miss, and the deliberate foul is simply a tactical option, which players would rarely use as 7 pts away, but it is same for all and would put an interesting tactical edge on frames. I am sure that after numerous frames any anomalis would become apparent. I hope some professionals and the powers that be read these forums for ideas, but then what is our opinions worth.

Original Source: http://www.thesnookerforum.com/board...#ixzz1Hv4lMC00
TSF - TheSnookerForum.com

mate this 7 point foul would mean no player would atempt to hit the ball on and leave the table with a 7 point away and the table safe but not in a snooker incase of free ball situation.

these are pro players it would make life very easy for them.

[FOXMULDER]

The main problem is: the referee's are supposed to use discretion but they almost-never do so. They just call everything a "miss".

I'm sure some form of video technology exists to measure how close the cue ball comes to the object ball. All they would need to do then is set a threshold of - say - 3mm, and use the software to see how close the cue ball came. There could be no arguments.

[FOXMULDER]

Also, there should be no such thing as a subjective rule.

If one referee calls a shot a miss that another referee wouldn't, that is fundamentally unfair. If two players play a similar shot in two different matches, one may be penalised and the other not.

Every rule should be objective and undebatable.

[brazil70]

Hi So be it, would be no worse than rule before the miss was implemented in early nineties, it would be very interesting how thing would develop.