Free Ball Foul with Multiple Reds?

[DeanH]

OK, I understand this yes, but wasn't there a time when you could place the cue ball in the D after a foul left the cue ball angled in the jaws of a pocket ?

Yes there WAS a rule for this to happen if angled, came into the rules before 1921 but was removed between 1991 and 1995!
I know you are no spring-chicken anymore (like most of us now) but I did not think you were that old! LOL

You read this part wrong Dean. I know what the rules state and what they mean but think they're wrong and should be changed to 'when playing from hand if a ball on can be struck on both edges from different positions in the D then it is not considered a snooker and no free ball can be awarded'
This happened to me once when the last red was just below the blue (on its spot) and was clearly pottable into either top corner pocket from both sides of the D yet the other edge couldn't be struck from either side so my opponent was awarded a free ball and rolled the yellow into the middle off its spot, potted a simple pink over the opposite middle to pot the last red and leave me needing snookers. Semi final of the league scratch singles so I was a bit miffed as it cost me the match, maybe the in off was the shot that cost me but I wouldn't have even thought about a free ball as the red could be potted into either corner pocket and could be struck on both edges from either side of the D. I queried the decision and the rule was pointed out to me and I accepted it 😖

Just my opinion and I'm sure there will be many who disagree and would maybe give their reasons why.

Sounds like I did read your scenario right...(just not replied very well ) I disagree with your conclusion and sorry about your game
I don't think two different positions should be used to define a snooker

[vmax]

Yes there WAS a rule for this to happen if angled, came into the rules before 1921 but was removed between 1991 and 1995!
I know you are no spring-chicken anymore (like most of us now) but I did not think you were that old! LOL
Sounds like I did read your scenario right...(just not replied very well ) I disagree with your conclusion and sorry about your game
I don't think two different positions should be used to define a snooker

I started playing snooker in 1982 so that rule was in place then, don't know why it was removed as it seemed a decent option that I myself used and was used against me. There are of course certain scenarios where such a rule is very benificial eg: a ball on in the D or over a baulk pocket pocket but that would be true of most rules.
Do you have a reason to disagree with the two different positions in the D scenario because to me me it's patently obvious that if a ball on can be struck on both extreme edges then it's not a snooker as defined by the rules in that respect disregarding the fact that the cue ball can be moved or not. The rules you quoted from 'ball in hand' do not state 'any single position' they state 'any position' so to me it's open to debate and needs to be worded so that there is no doubt.

Also can a free ball be given if the cue ball comes to rest a millimetre away from the only ball on after a foul ? because to me obviously both extreme edges cannot be struck from that close to the ball on.

[DeanH]

I started playing snooker in 1982 so that rule was in place then, don't know why it was removed as it seemed a decent option that I myself used and was used against me. There are of course certain scenarios where such a rule is very benificial eg: a ball on in the D or over a baulk pocket pocket but that would be true of most rules.

I started playing mid-70s but was not too interested in the rules, I probably played this rule but can not remember it specifically - or maybe my memory is going…. Oh, where was I? where am I?
I have come across this scenario over the years and many players who do think you can be snookered by the cushion in the jaws of the pocket - and they are very much younger than us and very doubtful if they know of the old rule
Who knows why they changed it them, probably never know - I have reached out to a Referee contact who was around at that time… you never know
Possibly the same time the snookered rule changed to say cue ball can only be snookered by other balls.

Do you have a reason to disagree with the two different positions in the D scenario because to me me it's patently obvious that if a ball on can be struck on both extreme edges then it's not a snooker as defined by the rules in that respect disregarding the fact that the cue ball can be moved or not. The rules you quoted from 'ball in hand' do not state 'any single position' they state 'any position' so to me it's open to debate and needs to be worded so that there is no doubt.

"Sec 2.17 Snookered
The cue ball is snookered when a direct stroke in a straight line to every ball on is wholly or partially obstructed by a ball or balls not on. If one or more balls on can be hit at both extreme edges free of obstruction by any ball not on, the cue ball is not snookered....(a) If in hand, the cue ball is snookered if it is obstructed as described above from all possible positions on or within the lines of the “D”. ..."

My reasoning of not agreeing with the "two different positions, one edge each position" idea:
Normal play - when considering if the cue ball is snookered or not, the cue ball is only considered from its position (ONE position) and that consideration is that whether both extreme edges can be hit or not by a direct stroke from the cue ball's one position. From ONE position, BOTH edges hit.
In-hand, the referee must consider from anywhere in the "D" (as they don’t know where the player may wish to place the cue ball) the cue ball is snookered or not and therefore from all possible positions in the "D" as in the above paragraph the same consideration is made from each possible position that BOTH extreme edges can be hit or not.

Also can a free ball be given if the cue ball comes to rest a millimetre away from the only ball on after a foul ? because to me obviously both extreme edges cannot be struck from that close to the ball on.

Possibly yes BUT not because of what you say here.
"Extreme edges" means the outer-most point of contact the Cue Ball can physically hit the ball on by a direct stroke. It does not mean the points across the centre of the ball on (i.e. the diameter perpendicular to the direct line to the cue ball).
As the distance between the two ball reduces, the points of "extreme edges" move round the ball on towards the cue ball.
See attachment 3 bottom image which shows the extreme edges on the Red at close quarters. You can see the position of the points of extreme edges are different as to those in the top image.