Post a reply

Snookered on a colour behind pack.

Postby rocketfan

If a player pots a red and is snookered on a colour, and then
touches a red with his hand before shot is made
with for instace blue nominated, what happens next ?
Does he have to try for blue again ?

Re: Snookered on a colour behind pack.

Postby Roland

Ronnie had just failed to hit a colour and been called a miss and put back when this happened

Re: Snookered on a colour behind pack.

Postby Roland

I though it answered the question you asked but maybe you asked a simpler one in which case it's just a foul and the opponent gets the points of ball on in your example 5 points unless he touches the pink or black like Ronnie did. No miss, either next player plays from where the balls end up or puts the opponent back in from the same position.

Re: Snookered on a colour behind pack.

Postby rocketfan

Sorry. You did answer my question the first time.
There were some discussions after the rocket/higgins
episode to change the rule. Has any changes been done ?

Re: Snookered on a colour behind pack.

Postby acesinc

Hi guys, I am new to your forum and have been going through a lot of the old threads and I have found quite a few that seem to be left dangling with unanswered queries. I tend to be a stickler for details and very much consider myself a "rules guy". I know that most would find reading the rule book cover to cover akin to watching paint dry, but I have done just that quite a few times now. So when a question like this is out there, I am compelled to leap into action.

The rule in question has been revised as a direct result of the referenced situation with Ronnie and John Higgins. The most recent rule regarding this, Section 3. Rule 14., now states:
"........
(e) After the cue-ball has been replaced under this Rule, and the striker fouls any ball, including the cue-ball while preparing to play a stroke, a miss will not be called if a stroke has not been played. In this case the appropriate penalty will be imposed. The next player may then elect to play himself or ask the offender to play again from the position left or the original position. If being asked to play again, the ball on shall be the same as prior to the last stroke made, namely:
(i) any Red, where Red was the ball on;
(ii) the color on, where all Reds were off the table; or
(iii) a color of the striker's choice, where the ball on was a color after a Red had been potted;
If the above situation arises during a sequence of miss calls as described under paragraph (d), any warning concerning the possible awarding of the frame to his opponent shall remain in effect."

_________________
I have emboldened the particularly relevant passages. So what this is saying is that if a "foul and a miss" sequence has begun, then the returning, fouling striker commits some other type of penalty, such as moving any ball or anything else really, then it will not be CALLED as a "foul and a miss"(just called as a "foul"), but that is essentially how it is treated...exactly the same as if it was "foul and a miss" with the balls put back and all if that is what the incoming striker wants. It is just a technical nuance....it can only be a "foul and a miss" if a stroke is played so this is how it is handled if a foul is committed before the stroke is actually played.

So to put this in perspective to the original post, what the proper ruling is depends on if a "foul and a miss" sequence has yet begun. Re-reading the original post, I will assume that no "foul and a miss" has yet occurred so the situation is simply a straightforward foul like any other, that is, "foul, five away" (because of the blue involved) and the incoming striker has choice to play or pass back the shot at hand (meaning that putting the fouling striker back in now puts him on red, not colour).

If the original poster's situation had already had at least one "foul and a miss" called, the situation is modified slightly in that the incoming striker would then have three possible options: 1. play the shot at hand (on red as the balls lie) 2. put the fouling striker back in for the shot at hand (on red as the balls lie) or 3. put the fouling striker back in with balls replaced and still striking colour. Note that if the incoming striker chooses option 3., then the returning fouling striker is NOT obliged to play at the same colour; he can nominate any other colour as the "ball on" so in your case, he does not necessarily have to remain on blue.

To qualify myself for this information, I am a Yank living in the USA who fell in love with the game of snooker when I lived in North Yorks for three years in the mid-80's. I have taken a basic referee training course though I am not a certified referee. I fell away from snooker for a lot of years due to lack of an information link, but the age of the Internet allows me the pleasure of following this great pastime again. Having just found your forum, one of the things I love is the apparent honesty and integrity of the contributors. To look at the "American" snooker forums (which in reality have mostly Canadian contributors), you find that every other contributor seems to run a century every other time they pick up a cue. And if they don't, it is obviously because they got a kick or whatever some such nonsense. It is good to find people who seem to understand the real game of snooker, not just an internet facade.

Re: Snookered on a colour behind pack.

Postby Dan-cat

Acesinc, you are a stickler: love it! Thanks for all the info. So it's still played as if it's a continuation of the current 'miss' situation, but it's not called a miss. Just a foul. Gotcha.

Where in North Yorkshire did you live? I'm a Yorkshire boy myself. I grew up in a tiny village called Ripley just a few miles north of Harrogate.

Re: Snookered on a colour behind pack.

Postby acesinc

Yes, just a foul but penalty awarded the same as "foul and a miss". Why, you may ask, not just call it a "foul and a miss" and be done with it? Why must a stroke be played to be a "...miss"? The answer goes to the award of frame for missing three consecutive strokes when central, full ball contact is available. There are a couple of well known examples of this, such as Dechawat Poomjaeng in the 2013 World Championship:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0T83p5rXNA

So for instance, in that video, say that Poomjaeng accidentally brushed the blue ball with his cue somewhere around the 2:30 mark (after two "fouls and misses" already). This COULDN'T be "foul and a miss" because if it was, it would be the third FAAM with central, full ball contact and so end of frame. Instead, IF he had brushed the blue then, it would be "foul", five more points away, the incoming player also has option to put things back as they were (with blue obstructing cueing), and the referee's warning of a third miss resulting in loss of frame would remain in effect. Without that change in the rule, it would have been just like Ronnie touching the black to end the "foul and a miss" sequence so obviously the rule change was needed to prevent players from squirreling themselves out of difficult situations like this. (For the record, I don't think Ronnie's intent was nefarious...I believe it was an accident and he reflexively called the foul on himself and the ref made his best interpretation of the rule at the time.)

As for North Yorks, I lived out by the RAF base with all the golf balls. I'm sure you know it. I drove to Ripley many times; I think I even bought one of my cues from a sports shop there. I learned all about the game at the (then) Hammerain Snooker and Bowls Club. At some point, it changed over to the Harrogate Snooker Club and I think it is something totally else today, with maybe a table or two on site. Back in the day, they had twenty tables installed, beautiful sight.

Re: Snookered on a colour behind pack.

Postby Roland

I drive through Ripley all the time and played for Manhattan for a couple of seasons (formerly Hammerain), and I have family who live close to "The Base" i.e. Menwith Hill. Small world.

And thanks for the interest in clarifying any rules related comments you see which are incorrect. It seems that this rule was brought in after the above scenario involving Ronnie because it was seen by millions on tv at the time, and referees by their very nature would have had meetings about it after the match.

Re: Snookered on a colour behind pack.

Postby acesinc

Ahhh, the old neighbourhood....if you knew of the Hammerain, perhaps you also knew Gladstone's pub in Harrogate? Can't possibly still be there. One full sized and one three quarter sized; 50 p. for 15 minutes of light. Many a pub lunch, great pies, especially seafood. And more pints of bitter than I can possibly recall.

Tip one for me...

Re: Snookered on a colour behind pack.

Postby Dan-cat

What a lovely synchronicity. I played in the A team for the Hammerain club, what was by that time called the Harrogate Leisure Center. It must have been around 1991/92. I did a paper round and saved up for a John Parris cue... £300 of ash heaven, I was immediately better. I played for a working men's club straight from school and I was beating everyone so I tried out for a place at Harrogate Leisure Center. I beat the hot player on the team so they put me straight in the A team. I was making 40 breaks regularly. I've never said this before but... halcyon days.

Bill Werbinuik was resident! He sat at the bar and looked over the match table. I never saw him play.

I took up snooker again 8 months ago after a 20 year break. I love it. It's yoga for the mind. I know all the shots but lack consistency.
Last edited by Dan-cat on 29 Oct 2014, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Snookered on a colour behind pack.

Postby acesinc

In that case, tip a pint (or six) for Big Bill, RIP. I never met him; he arrived after I had come home. Younger's Scotch Bitter was my preferred brew. Perhaps your bird pulled a few pints for me at Gladstones, though by the sound of it, she was probably not quite of age at my time.

I remember when they installed that table you reference in the Hammerain barroom, about '86 or '87. Before that, there were eighteen tables upstairs in a six-by-three grid, and the private matchroom...premium, I only played it once or twice. The barroom table I had my highest break ever for my time in England. Not overly impressive, a three red clearance 48--a blue, a black, a pink and all colours off spots. It is burned in my brain because every shot was perfect; it could have been on telly. I had to get another beer and sit down for a spell afterward.

I also had about a twenty year layoff but I am getting about six or eight hours a week now for the last four years. I am a much better player now than when I was a kid despite the failing eyes and the aching back. The 30's and 40's come fairly regularly now (they were just barely occasional then), and I have even cracked the half century a handful of times.

Good times. Halcyon days.....I like that.