|
Foul Snooker?
|
| Chuckie |
Posted on 27-10-2009 21:45
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 114
Joined: 08.10.07
|
In my game last night this situation came up...
Please take note that all placements of balls in the above image are rough approximations from personal memory.
Reds (my opponent) had just fouled. Yellows (me) asked if it was a foul snooker (assuming a response of ?Yes!?). Because the cushion prevented the cue ball from hitting the extreme edge, they stated that the ?new? extreme edge is the contact point I have highlighted in pink. I tried to argue that cushions are invisible when determining foul snookers and the extreme edge is in fact the contact point highlighted in blue.
The cue ball could clearly hit the pink contact point full in the face. The red on the cushion obstructed the highlighted in blue?s path. Should yellows (me) have had a foul snooker?
After both teams debated I had resigned to the fact that yellows (me) would not get a foul snooker. Albeit eventually, yellows (me) did go on to win this frame.
Peace,
Charles Burrows.
Taking my shots looking cool, my self-esteem?s growing tall.
Losing eyes this game is cruel. I do my thing playing pool.
|
| |
|
|
| sailor |
Posted on 27-10-2009 21:59
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 120
Joined: 19.02.08
|
Charles,
firstly, unlucky to the Small Potatoes last night on losing 6-4 to us - i thought your team took your chances well from the many we didnt take, so glad it didnt go to 5-5. Good luck for the rest of the season to you and the rest of your team
On the above, table you have described is fairly close to what it was although the area in question was much closer the pocket and it was your ball in question over the pocket..and yes took a while to go through, but you could see both edges of your ball to hit with the white through the cushion, albeit only by a whisker. Both ref's agreed this was the case, after checking lines with a spare cue ball. If anyone has anything to clarify this please can they post, so that if something similar occurs in the future we can use as reference
Again, unlucky last night...David |
| |
|
|
| Spud |
Posted on 27-10-2009 22:30
|
Home From Home
Posts: 468
Joined: 02.10.07
|
Link to the EPA site, and a section all about snookers, complete with diagrams.
It's the best explanation I've come across, so worth printing out and keeping hold of.
http://www.epa.org.uk/snookers.php
|
| |
|
|
| Shaggy |
Posted on 27-10-2009 22:52
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 888
Joined: 02.10.07
|
If pink and blue are a straight line extension, then the only question is whether the red closest to the object ball is prevention the hitting of the yellow. In your picture it doesnt with the naked eye look to be a foul snooker, nonetheless in your disclaimer you did indicate that it wasn;t 100% accurate.
House!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
| |
|
|
| Chuckie |
Posted on 27-10-2009 23:29
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 114
Joined: 08.10.07
|
I was very proud with my team?s performances last night and I too wish you and the Jolly ?A? best of luck for the rest of the season. When I shook my opponents hand at the end, I did get the impression he thought I was trying to cheat.
Thanks for the link Spud. I will suggest to my secretary that she keeps a printed copy of those diagrams in her team?s folder.
And David, if I remember rightly, the spare cue ball was put on the cushion right where I illustrated. I have no doubts that I could hit that particular point.
Shaggy, it was quite close for the naked eye to see at the time. I would have liked the spare cue ball placed on top of the cushion instead of where it was actually put? It was a slightly different angle, which was heading closer to the red.
Well-played to the Jolly ?A? last night?
Many regards,
Charles Burrows.
Taking my shots looking cool, my self-esteem?s growing tall.
Losing eyes this game is cruel. I do my thing playing pool.
|
| |
|
|
| Nature Boy |
Posted on 28-10-2009 00:30
|
Home From Home
Posts: 338
Joined: 24.03.08
|
Maybe we should invest in Hawk-Eye, like they have in Snooker and Tennis!! NOT! lol |
| |
|
|
| RasFas |
Posted on 28-10-2009 20:36
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 166
Joined: 05.10.07
|
If I understand this correctly, the question here is whether it is a foul snooker when the opponent's ball is obstructing the finest possible cut, and such a cut is already impossible due to the cushion. It does seem a bit silly to claim obstruction for a shot you couldn't play anyway. But the rules say that in this situation the cushion is "deemed not to exist", which then leaves the red as the only obstruction so, yes, it is a foul snooker.
...and the points go to... Charlie and the Spuds! |
| |
|
|
| longshanks |
Posted on 28-10-2009 20:46
|
Must Get Out More
Posts: 709
Joined: 07.10.07
|
I thought Sailor said that both refs agreed he could see both sides if cushions were deemed to be invisible. |
| |
|
|
| sailor |
Posted on 28-10-2009 21:04
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 120
Joined: 19.02.08
|
Yep, Both refs agreed - after opinions were duly considered from the players at the table, the referees themeselves and the secretaries
As i said, it was an extremley tight call, but from where the white was it was decided you could miss the offending ball thought to be in the way, only just, to a clear route, through the cushion, to the finest cut needed on the right hand side of the ball requiring to be hit by the left hand side of the white. This seems to tally with the link Sean sent out. (thanks for that) Didnt help the shot in question was over the long diagonal on the table and Charles was having to attempt the shot cueing over balls which made it very difficult to judge angles for all. At no point did our player think that any cheating or gamesmanship was going on, it was just one of those incidents in a game that occassionally happen that take time to clarify.
Again, good luck to the FSP for the remainder of the season - hopefully wont happen in our League Cup Group game later in the season |
| |
|
|
| Bink286 |
Posted on 17-08-2010 17:43
|
Getting The Hang Of It
Posts: 38
Joined: 22.06.08
|
RasFas wrote:
If I understand this correctly, the question here is whether it is a foul snooker when the opponent's ball is obstructing the finest possible cut, and such a cut is already impossible due to the cushion. It does seem a bit silly to claim obstruction for a shot you couldn't play anyway. But the rules say that in this situation the cushion is "deemed not to exist", which then leaves the red as the only obstruction so, yes, it is a foul snooker.
...and the points go to... Charlie and the Spuds!
The cushion is 'deemed not to exist' rule. Does anyone know if this applies solely for the purposes of determining a 'Foul Snooker' situation, or does it equally apply when determining a 'full ball' totally snookered situation? |
| |
|
|
| Chuckie |
Posted on 17-08-2010 22:33
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 114
Joined: 08.10.07
|
Bink286 wrote:
The cushion is 'deemed not to exist' rule. Does anyone know if this applies solely for the purposes of determining a 'Foul Snooker' situation, or does it equally apply when determining a 'full ball' totally snookered situation?
World Rules wrote:
i. Definition: A player is in a Total Snooker when it is impossible to play any part of any of the player's own Colour by way of a "straight line" shot. Leaving an opponent in a Total Snooker is not a foul.
ii. If a player believes that a Total Snooker exists, the player may ask the referee for a ruling.
iii. If the referee rules that a Total Snooker exists, the player's obligations under the "Legal Shot" rule are relaxed as follows:- The player need only cause the Cue Ball's initial contact to be with a ball "On". The requirement to pot a ball and / or cause a ball to strike a cushion is waived.
Which means: Cushions/Jaws do exist when determining ?Total Snookers.?
Taking my shots looking cool, my self-esteem?s growing tall.
Losing eyes this game is cruel. I do my thing playing pool.
|
| |
|
|
| Cyber The Crucifier |
Posted on 17-08-2010 22:38
|
Home From Home
Posts: 284
Joined: 13.12.07
|
Chaz from your diagram to me it looks like a foul snooker
cushion doesnt come into play and it looks like u cant clip the finest edge on the yellow by cushion just my thought |
| |
|
|
| Chuckie |
Posted on 17-08-2010 23:11
|
Quite The Regular
Posts: 114
Joined: 08.10.07
|
chaos wrote:
Chaz from your diagram to me it looks like a foul snooker
cushion doesnt come into play and it looks like u cant clip the finest edge on the yellow by cushion just my thought
I carefully drew that picture to indicate ?Foul Snooker? since back then I knew I was right and today I still know. But all that is old news now.
Are you still playing for the Bloodhounds?
Taking my shots looking cool, my self-esteem?s growing tall.
Losing eyes this game is cruel. I do my thing playing pool.
|
| |
|
|
| andye |
Posted on 18-08-2010 00:10
|
Home From Home
Posts: 394
Joined: 02.10.07
|
Nature Boy wrote:
Maybe we should invest in Hawk-Eye, like they have in Snooker and Tennis!! NOT! lol
they don't actually use it in snooker cos it isn't accurate enough... ! |
| |
|
