Post a reply

Is it possible to continue a break after a foul?

Postby Ander

Imagine this situation:

I pot the first red but I snooker myself. I nominate black and miss. My opponent puts me back. I repeat the shot and pot the black.

Would I be then on a break of 8 and a possible 147 or on a break of 7 and a possible 146 (frame score 147-7).

Re: Is it possible to continue a break after a foul?

Postby acesinc

Wildey wrote:Yea you would be on a 147 because the miss is the same shot no matter how often you play it.

Sorry, Wildey, I have to respectfully disagree. I have not seen or personally been involved in this situation, but the proper ruling in such case can be quite clearly inferred from the way that the rules are written.

I always have a copy of the official rules at hand so I will copy and paste the relevant passages exactly as they are written. They come simply from Section 2. Definitions:

5. Striker and Turn
The person about to play or in play is the striker and remains so until the
final stroke, or foul, of his turn is complete and the referee is satisfied that
he has finally left the table. If a non-striker comes to the table, out of turn,
he shall be considered as the striker for any foul he may commit before
leaving the table. When the referee is satisfied that the above conditions
have been met, the incoming striker’s turn begins. His turn and his right
to play another stroke ends when:

(a) he fails to score from a stroke; or
(b) he commits a foul; or
(c) he requests the opponent to play again after his opponent has
committed a foul.

I have emboldened the important parts in reference to this circumstance. Also, then, we need to understand the precise definition of a "break", so also from Section 2. Definitions:

8. Break
A break is a number of pots in successive strokes made in any one turn
by a player during a frame. ..."

So what all of this means is that in the OP's scenario, there are actually three turns at the table, and two breaks made: 1) Player A's first turn is a break of 1 and foul, 7 away, 2) it is now Player B's turn, during which he decides to defer back to Player A with the balls in their original position, and 3) Player A now plays a NEW turn, perhaps oddly as we see it, with his opening stroke on a colour and he chooses Black (note that he need not choose the same colour as the original nomination; he may nominate a different colour than he had for the foul stroke if desired). Therefore, strictly according to the Rules of Snooker, after potting Black, the OP would be on a break of 7 with a possible 146 on.

Re: Is it possible to continue a break after a foul?

Postby Andre147

Wildey wrote:Yea you would be on a 147 because the miss is the same shot no matter how often you play it.

As aesenic correctly pointed out already, the break wouldnt continue, so for instance you would pot the first red of the frame, snooker yourself on all the colours, and then declare black as your object ball. Striker misses it, break ends on 1 point, but the non striker asks for cue ball to be put back in again in the original position with the same options for colours. He nomimates black again, pots it, the referee will score him 7 points. This is the type of situation where you can get a break above 147 without a free ball.

Re: Is it possible to continue a break after a foul?

Postby Wildey

but its the same shot not a different shot if balls are placed back to the point they were in.

its not a case of play again after a foul its played again after balls have been replaced to the original place hence same shot.

it seems to me this rule is very inconsistent.

Re: Is it possible to continue a break after a foul?

Postby acesinc

Wildey wrote:...

it seems to me this rule is very inconsistent.

Au contraire, the Rules would be hard pressed to make themselves any more concise in this case. I know that the Rules are written with tedious precision making for difficult reading and it may seem like a team of lawyers is required to decipher the language. I am not a lawyer, and not particularly fond of the profession (What do you call a bus full of lawyers going over a cliff with one empty seat? A damn shame.), but I am fascinated by the minutiae of detail written into the Rules to insure clarity. This is why you will find phrases such as "Causing a ball to be potted is known as potting" in the rule book. (Yes, that really is in there.)

Anytime a referee makes an interpretation of the Rules as written which does not seem to be a reflection of the spirit of the Rules as a whole, the precise wording will be revisited and adjusted as required. A famous example of this occurred a few years back in a match between Ronnie O'Sullivan and John Higgins. O'Sullivan was in a particularly nasty "foul and a miss" situation and ultimately committed an ancillary foul touching a ball with his sleeve I believe so the referee, correctly interpreted the Rules as then written so that the new foul trumped the FAAM sequence getting Ronnie out of a real pickle. That is why the precise, tedious language is required.

But getting away from the precise, tedious language, just think about it logically. A "break" is an unbroken series of successful potting strokes. If you have one or more unsuccessful strokes, due to "foul and a miss", you obviously do not have a series of successful potting strokes. To have a break with one or more fouls and misses sandwiched in between potting strokes would be analogous to an oxymoron. In a similar vein, say a player runs a 147 in one frame, then takes the break off shot in the next frame and happens to pot a red ball. Is the break continued so that he is now on a break of 148? Of course not. A break is defined as what a break is defined as; and that is basically an unbroken series of successful potting strokes within a single frame.

For Andre, I think you need to run through your maths again. The stated situation only gives a possible break of 146.
Last edited by acesinc on 21 Jun 2015, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Is it possible to continue a break after a foul?

Postby TheSaviour

Seems that Mehta just broke down on a maximum 147 effort having 88 and he potted a red to make it 89. But then he shook hands with Guodong, so there was a some sort of foul there. Perhaps it´s just me, but I can´t see a flaw. When it comes with the rules. A foul is a foul.