Snooker on a cluster of red?

[LD50]

Sorry I don't understand Red potted and what on a colour (autocorrect has "f***s"), what word did you mean?

s/b fouls, sorry, some gummed keys on th keyboard.

[DeanH]

s/b fouls, sorry, some gummed keys on th keyboard.

gotcha

[vmax]

Sorry to beat this to death but this red cluster problem came up twice in my senior snooker league this season and there's nothing funnier than a bunch of us seniors almost in fisticuffs about it and trying to understand the rule in Section 2- Snookered, paragraph 17(c) "When Red is the ball on, if the cue-ball is obstructed from hitting different Reds by different balls not on, there is no effective snookering ball."

1) So to push the example to its limits for me to understand it, my opponent pots a red and f***s on a color. There are now 14 reds in their exact starting position (magically). The cue ball is, say, between the blue spot and the reds. There is no color ball between the cue and any part of the red pack. My understanding is there is no snooker because even though I cannot hit any one red on both sides because red balls in the row behind my target red prevent the cue ball from advancing enough to touch my target red at 90 degrees on at least one side. No snooker because there is no 'ball not on' obstructing the shot. I
understand 'a ball not on' to mean a color ball in this situation, because all the reds are always 'on' and so a red can't snooker a red?

You can't be snookered by a ball on, that's the middle and both ends of the argument.

In the miss rule however if you can hit a ball on directly (full ball) irrespective of not being able to hit both sides of it, you can lose the frame after three foul and miss calls by the referee while attempting to hit it indirectly or by attempting to hit another/other balls that are on.

Recently I was in a scenario where I potted a red, the cue ball double kissed a red on the side cushion and it ended up amongst the pack of reds, touching ball on both sides (reds) of the cue ball and the red that was double kissed came off the cushion to end up in the way of any escape route to a colour.
What I had to do then was play the cue ball towards the obstructing red without moving either touching ball red with enough pace to reach a colour as if the obstructing red wasn't there. To roll up to it and leave it safe wasn't an option, I had to play it with enough pace to reach a ball on even though it was impossible to do so.
My opponent said I could play a swerve shot to go around the obstructing red but I told him that a touching ball on both sides of the cue ball made this impossible without moving one of them as the cue ball always deflects to the opposite side of where the tip strikes it when playing with side so I had no choice but to play directly at the obstructing red.

This doesn't crop up very often but that's the rule if it does.

[LD50]

found it...
Here below is a great article by a long-term referee which is specifically about judging a Free Ball but to judge that it means judging whether a snooker exists.

https://www.thesnookerforum.co.uk/bo...f-you-have-one
The original images where lost due to server transfer some years ago, I have added them at the end of the thread.

Wow! That thread answers it and more! Thanks!