SnookerFan wrote:What's Mark Allen on about on Twitter? Breaking off with the yellow?
Bucks knows. Reckons it's not a foul or something. I couldn't get my head around it, or Jan's answer, and I'm super bucking intelligent! :P
Hey, Dan-cat! I haven't posted in ages but of course, I have been lurking. Finally, a rules issue to catch my interest!
I had to figure out how to do that newfangled "Twitter" thing, but I think I understand what happened here. It sounds odd the way Mark put it, but he is correct, no foul. I can give you my personal experience of the much more common way that this circumstance plays out.
At a tournament that I was playing in and just spectating from a few feet off of the table, the first striker took cue ball in hand to take the opening breakoff. In placing White, he bumped the Brown with the back of his hand. Stood up, kind of a confused look....his opponent stepped forward toward the table, also looked kind of confused. So after leaving about a five second interval (in order to be clear in my own head that I am not somehow breaking any rules by giving advice to players) I said to the both of them, "Re-spot Brown. There is no foul." They both questioned me, of course. It is pretty easy really. The frame has not yet begun until White is touched by the tip of the cue of the first striker. If a frame has not yet begun, then obviously, a foul simply cannot be committed. Hence, Mark Allen's joke about taking the breakoff with the Yellow.....it would not in fact be a foul because the frame has not yet begun. It would simply require a reset. However, in all likelihood, if this ever did happen (breaking off with Yellow, maybe just to be funny and amuse the crowd), then the referee would almost certainly give warning to the "offending player" that repeated action will result in loss of frame due to ungentlemanly conduct. But there would NOT be a four point penalty for the action.
Mark Allen's initial question however was about an accidental touch of the cue ball with the tip while feathering. THAT is a foul then because with tip contact, the frame has begun so it is no different than any other foul where White does not contact a ball on. In fact, the referee, if there is one, should state, "Foul and a Miss". But of course, this situation also often leads to confusion because the new, incoming striker may believe that he is now entitled to Ball in Hand, which of course, he is not. He must play White where it has come to rest, even if it is outside the "D" (as would the original fouling striker, unless the Foul and a Miss option were (foolishly) indicated by the non-fouling player, in which case, THEN the fouling player would have Ball in Hand again).
It is actually just absolutely consistent with all of the rest of the Rules, which is why Jan Verhaas chose to copy and paste the relevant rule for the situation. Hope that all makes sense.