Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Free ball after an in off

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Free ball after an in off

    Having a brain f**t on the rules at the moment.

    Player pots the second to last red and goes in off with the last red behind the pink.

    From the left hand side of the D you can hit the left and side of the red and from the right hand side of the D you can hit the right hand side of the red but you cannot hit both of the red from either position.

    I was told that the rules had changed so don't know if this is a free ball or not now?

    Any suggestions as cannot find this in the rules.......
    Snooker Crazy - Cues and Equipment Sales Website
    Snooker Crazy - Facebook Page
    Snooker Crazy - You Tube Channel

  • #2
    free ball,,

    Comment


    • #3
      Free ball after an in off

      As said, a free ball option.
      The free ball aspect of the rules have not changed for many years.

      Also, if there is anywhere in the D where both sides of the ball on can be hit, there is no free ball option; regardless of where the player places the cue ball.
      Up the TSF!

      Comment


      • #4
        As Dean said, and despite thye rumours which are rife, the Ffree ball rule has NOT changed in any way.

        You have a freee ball after a foul if from any one position you can't srike both finest edges of an object ball. If in hand, then you only have a free ball if the cue ball can't be placed anywhere in the D to be able to hit both extreme edges of an object ball.
        Duplicate of banned account deleted

        Comment


        • #5
          That leads me to an interrogation I got the other day. take the same situation as above but this time the only remaining red is tight on the right cushion. Strictly speaking, I can't hit both edges of the ball even if I have a clear view as the cushion prevents me to do so. Free ball or not?
          Ton Praram III Series 1 | 58" 18.4oz 9.4mm | ash shaft + 4 splices of Brazilian Rosewood | Grand Cue medium tips

          Comment


          • #6
            no free ball.
            cushions do not come into affect; the "extreme edges" does not mean 180 degree across the object ball, but the edges you can hit with the cue ball from where the cue ball is located.
            say the cue ball is very close to the object ball, you can not hit the 180 deg edges of the object ball BUT you can hit the extreme edges of the object ball from where the cue ball is.

            here a thread which has superb explanations of the free ball scenarios.
            http://www.thesnookerforum.co.uk/boa...f-you-have-one

            in your cushion scenario, the extreme edge you can hit is the edge not hidden by the cushion. it is not the 180 deg from the other extreme edge, so if nothing is in the way, then no free ball, as you can hit the two extreme edges
            Last edited by DeanH; 22nd November 2015, 12:33 PM.
            Up the TSF!

            Comment


            • #7
              Alright, how about this one. Cueball is tucked into a jaw such that the player does not have a direct line to object ball and has to use a cushion. Does the 3 misses and frame is over apply here? Or since he can't hit directly does he have to keep trying?

              I know this was changed in the early 90's I think as we used to be able to place the cueball in the 'D'.
              Terry Davidson
              IBSF Master Coach & Examiner

              Comment


              • #8
                hi TD
                please look at the linked thread, they go into the Jawed scenario.

                but essentially, the three miss wont apply as you do not have "full ball line of sight" to the ball on, so no 3-miss rule.

                The "jawed rule" was removed some time after the 80s (not sure of when exactly). There is no longer any option to move the cue ball.
                Last edited by DeanH; 22nd November 2015, 12:37 PM.
                Up the TSF!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by DeanH View Post
                  hi TD
                  please look at the linked thread, they go into the Jawed scenario.

                  but essentially, the three miss wont apply as you do not have "full ball line of sight" to the ball on, so no 3-miss rule.

                  The "jawed rule" was removed some time after the 80s (not sure of when exactly). There is no longer any option to move the cue ball.
                  I agree with this but I thought it might be good to let everyone know as this scenario came up with me one night when I got a phone call from Montreal regarding a jawed ball and they didn't have a referee there to make the call and they weren't sure of the correct call.
                  Terry Davidson
                  IBSF Master Coach & Examiner

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    ah, cool

                    yep this came up at another table down my club some months ago, one chap saying there is a Jawed rule, etc and he pointed at the big posters of the rules; he was then stumped that the jawed rule was not there.
                    We had only recently changed them to the new rules; the old ones being from 1983.
                    Up the TSF!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Doesn't it say somewhere that the fittings of the table are not classed as an obstruction ?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by DeanH View Post
                        As said, a free ball option.
                        The free ball aspect of the rules have not changed for many years.

                        Also, if there is anywhere in the D where both sides of the ball on can be hit, there is no free ball option; regardless of where the player places the cue ball.
                        Can't disagree with that, it is what I thought.

                        Trouble is, when you hear of changes you need clarification so thanks for all the replies.
                        Snooker Crazy - Cues and Equipment Sales Website
                        Snooker Crazy - Facebook Page
                        Snooker Crazy - You Tube Channel

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Terry, It must have been one of those 500 dollar games in Montreal. I guess there always as to be a final word and a unhappy camper. Lol
                          I try hard, play hard and dont always succeed, at first.!!!!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by sharkster63 View Post
                            Terry, It must have been one of those 500 dollar games in Montreal. I guess there always as to be a final word and a unhappy camper. Lol
                            I think it was a tournament at the 147 Club (and I also think I might have called it wrong which is what prompted me to ask Jim Jack)
                            Terry Davidson
                            IBSF Master Coach & Examiner

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X