Post a reply

Touching ball

Postby gninnur karona

If the touching ball is a red and the player is next obliged to hit red they can freely play away from the red and no foul is committed if the cue ball strikes another red or any colour (although that act may subsequently result in a foul being committed). I understand that.

However.

The rules state "If the cue-ball is touching one or more colours after a Red (or a free ball nominated as a Red) has been potted, the referee shall also ask the striker to DECLARE which colour they are on." They also state "If requested by the referee, the striker must declare which ball they are on."

The touching ball cannot be legally hit so presumably cannot be nominated. If the player has an available colour that they wish to pot or play safe off fine but what happens if the player is snookered on all other colours? And why can't the player just play away from the touching ball without touching any other ball as they can when the touching ball is red?

Re: Touching ball

Postby SnookerEd25

I’m pretty sure they can. You can ‘nominate’ the colour you are touching, surely? :chin:

That’s the way I’ve been playing the game for thirty+ years!

If I am wrong, I’m prepared to stand and be corrected by a greater man (or woman) than I (or at least one with a better understanding of the rules…)

Re: Touching ball

Postby chengdufan

If you are on a colour and you are touching one, you can nominate the colour you are touching as the ball on. Similar to a red, you then play away from that ball.

Re: Touching ball

Postby SnookerEd25

chengdufan wrote:If you are on a colour and you are touching one, you can nominate the colour you are touching as the ball on. Similar to a red, you then play away from that ball.


:phew:

Re: Touching ball

Postby acesinc

gninnur karona wrote:If the touching ball is a red and the player is next obliged to hit red they can freely play away from the red and no foul is committed if the cue ball strikes another red or any colour (although that act may subsequently result in a foul being committed). I understand that.

However.

The rules state "If the cue-ball is touching one or more colours after a Red (or a free ball nominated as a Red) has been potted, the referee shall also ask the striker to DECLARE which colour they are on." They also state "If requested by the referee, the striker must declare which ball they are on."

The touching ball cannot be legally hit so presumably cannot be nominated. If the player has an available colour that they wish to pot or play safe off fine but what happens if the player is snookered on all other colours? And why can't the player just play away from the touching ball without touching any other ball as they can when the touching ball is red?


The bolded passage..... Whaaat? [insert meme of a dumbfounded Moe Szyslak]

Clearly, this is the source of your confusion.

"And why can't the player just play away from the touching ball without touching any other ball as they can when the touching ball is red?"

They can. As you should now understand from your replies thus far.

I like to use a sort of science analogy when explaining Touching Ball--Schrodinger's cat. A Touching Ball situation is a "quantum state" of both having been contacted by and/or not been contacted by the cue ball. Like the proverbial cat must be considered to be both alive and dead until the box is opened, the Touching Ball must be considered either already contacted or not depending upon the decision of the striker.

Example......Touching Ball Red, player decides to play away and try to lay a snooker, directing the White behind one of the Baulk colours. Contact with Red is already made so no additional contact with Red is necessary. BUT........Ball On is Red and the White happens to be touching a colour, say Blue for this example. Contact with Blue is NOT considered to have already been made; it would be an automatic Foul, Five Away if contact is already made before the striker even plays a stroke. To this day, I still cringe when Red is Ball On and my opponent declares, "Touching Blue" when he steps to the table. Um,.....no. White happens to be touching the Blue ball, but it is not a Touching Ball, per the Rules because White did not come to rest touching a ball that is On or could be On. This happens regularly though I have tried to explain many times. I don't try to explain anymore, I just cringe.

So now if we take your more complicated scenario after a Red is potted and the Ball On or could be On is any nominated colour and the White happens to come to rest in a state touching two colours, let's say Blue and Green. Schrodinger's cat is exactly the reason why the Rules require that the striker MUST declare verbally which of the colours he is On for that stroke. The White can be considered to be both touching and not touching both the Blue and the Green and striker is free to declare either or neither and may declare an entirely different colour if he so chooses. It MUST be a verbal declaration because until then, like the cat, no one (other than the striker) can know whether the White is "Touching" the Blue, the Green, or neither. If the White happens to be touching the Blue and the Green, and the Black is perched near the jaws of a pocket, and the striker lines up his cue stick pointing toward the Black, how we can possibly know if the Ball On is the Green or the Blue (the intent is to roll White off a cushion behind the Black for a very difficult snooker), or if the Ball On is Black and a pot is being attempted? We cannot possibly know unless the striker declares. Therefore, the Rules REQUIRE verbal declaration in such a case.

Re: Touching ball

Postby acesinc

Happy to help, GK. You may have noticed from previous posts that the Rules is one of my greatest topics of interest. Looking back at the previous posts of this thread, I think another clarifying statement may be helpful.

The second section of the Rules of Snooker is "Definitions". Snooker has some unique terminology required, and it also uses some previously existing terminology but may give it a modified definition for use regarding Snooker. (Here, I must apologize to any non-native English speakers; myself, I only speak American English (though as you see, I often try to incorporate the Queen's English when writing here. I have no idea how the Rules of Snooker have been translated into any other language so I can only speak from my own ignorant, selfish viewpoint.) Touching Ball is a perfect example of a modified term like this. Notice that I capitalize: Touching Ball. That is because, in regards to Snooker, this phrase has a very specific meaning. Balls on the snooker table may come to rest touching each other, but that does NOT necessarily mean that there is a Touching Ball situation. I don't think I need to explain this any further than I already have.

But I make that point in order to segue to this: In Snooker, the terms Nominate and Declare have very specific meanings and so those words should be used appropriately. They are related terms but they are NOT synonymous. Just like in geometry, a square is a rectangle, but a rectangle is not necessarily a square, well, a Declaration is a Nomination, but a Nomination is not necessarily a Declaration.

The difference between the two is straightforward enough. A Declaration is verbal and audible; a Nomination is not necessarily verbal/audible (though it may be). Professionally, when a Declaration is made by a player, the response from the Referee will always be to repeat the Declaration. This is to avoid mistakes. If a player tends to mumble quietly, or if words may have some similar sounds.....BL-ack/BL-ue or brow-NN/gree-NN....especially given that players and referees now come from all over the world and consequently, there are many different dialects in the way people speak, then it is understandable that when a player makes a Declaration, the referee may possibly not hear it correctly. Therefore, the referee will repeat the Declaration loudly and clearly. At that point, it is up to the player to listen to the referee and verify that he or she has correctly repeated the Declaration to avoid a potential foul.

A Nomination on the other hand can be anything that the Referee perceives to be the player's intent for a stroke. This normally just means simple body language.....the way a player lines up to a stroke. If a player is pointing in the general direction of two or more colours, he SHOULD Declare his colour. But he actually still is not necessarily required by the Rules to Declare in this circumstance. In fact, GK, you have already covered both circumstances in which the player is bound by the Rules to Declare the Ball On: certain Touching Ball situations, or if the Referee requests. Hypothetical situation: Let's say striker pots Red, the Yellow and Green are side by side and either can easily be potted into a corner pocket to continue the break. The striker crouches, points toward Yellow/Green and pots Yellow. The Referee will re-spot Yellow and call the score. BUT..........same situation, this time, the striker points toward Yellow/Green and.........miscues. The White goes squibbing off to the side somewhere. The Referee will call "Foul, seven away". Since the striker did not Declare the Ball On, it could only be inferred from body language and subsequent actions. Potting the Yellow directly clearly showed the Yellow to be the Nominated Ball On. But the miscue was ambiguous; there is no way to infer the intention. It would not exactly be prudent to accept a player's post facto "declaration". Why seven away? Since the Referee can have no idea which Ball was On, the penalty awarded must be the maximum. For all we know, maybe the striker was playing for a complicated three cushion snooker to leave White hidden behind the Black. We don't know. He didn't Declare.

Sorry for the sleep inducing post. I meant to keep this one short, but alas, I couldn't control myself.

Re: Touching ball

Postby SnookerEd25

Good stuff as always Aces <ok>

Thanks for the clarification, glad to know I haven’t been Mis-playing the game all these years :chuckle: