Miss Rule In Snooker

[kenny1234]

I am aware of the rule whereby three misses and your out applies. However, would there be an exception to the rule in the following situation:-
A player pots a red and ends up almost in the middle of the other reds. The only colour he can hit is the black, but that would mean leaving a red on for his opponent. He elects yellow and fails twice meaning that if he fails a third time he would lose the frame (because he can see the black full ball). He therefore attempts the black using spiders etc because it is awkward to get at.---He miscues and therefore fails to hit the black. Any miss cue is frowned upon and therefore a miss is usually called.---Would the player lose the frame in this situation?

[davebro]

Without reading chapter and verse the miss rule is entirely at the discretion of the referee. It would be up to the ref to decide if there had been a genuine attempt to hit the black and take into account if the miss had left the opponent in an adverse position. I suppose if he decided to call a miss then the frame would be forfeit.

[grumpy01]

Also a miss cannot be called if the player who fouls is at the snookers required stage.E.G.45 points behind with only 40 on the table.

[ToraToraTora]

there is no 3 miss rule any more.
In the situation you describe he would be put back as many times as it took for the opponent to decide he wants to play the position. When the points given away equal enough that he cannot win the frame + enough to make sure, the opponent will then take the position and smack up the reds knowing that even with a clearance he cannot win.

[ToraToraTora]

for "he would be put back" - read - "he would be put back in"

[THECORBYLOON]

"there is no 3 miss rule any more." Do you have a link to that?

[ToraToraTora]

Can't find it but I'm sure I've heard the commentators say that they just keep going racking up foul points etc. I've definitely seen players having more than three attempts.

[vulcan42]

the rule is still there.

[aelmpvw]

they have to keep taking the shot if they're snookered

[jim360]

The "three miss rules" is specifically when the "ball on" is visible. If the player is snookered, ie unable to see a "ball on" directly, then they still have to hit in three attempts in order to avoid losing a frame (although this only applies if the referee has warned them; if the player receives no warning then they can indeed have as many attempts as they like).

See, eg, rule 3.14(d)(ii)

https://wpbsa.com/wp-content/uploads/WPBSA-Official-Rules-of-the-Games-of-Snooker-and-Billiards-2020.pdf

[davebro]

//there is no 3 miss rule any more//

Yes there is.

I think if they can see a "legal" ball full on but choose not to play it & then miss with their chosen shot 3 times then the frame will be forfeit.

If you were aiming to hit a red ultra thin to avoid leaving your opponent "on" and you missed it 3 times you would lose. Players do get warned regularly - "Miss again & you lose".

[ToraToraTora]

ok I see, could have sworn I heard one of the commentators talking about it going, even when the ball on is hittable. Ok I'll watch more closely when the next snooker is on the TV.

[THECORBYLOON]

Rule 14e states,

"After all balls have been replaced under this Rule, and the
striker fouls any ball, including the cue-ball, a MISS will not be called if a stroke has not been played. In this case the appropriate penalty will be imposed."

I read that to mean that the mis-cue would not be a miss. The rule goes on to state,

"The non-offender may then elect to play themselves from the position left, or request the offender to play again from the position left or the original position, in which latter case all balls shall be
replaced and the ball on shall be the same as it was prior to the last stroke made, namely:
(i) any Red, where Red was the ball on;
(ii) the colour on, where all Reds were off the table; or
(iii) a colour of the striker’s choice, where the ball on was a colour after a Red, or a free ball nominated as a
Red had been potted.
If the above situation arises during a sequence of FOUL
AND A MISS calls as described under paragraph (d) above, any Warning concerning the possible awarding of the frame to their opponent shall only remain in effect when all balls have been replaced to their original position prior to the infringement."

That means if the player is asked to play from where the balls ended up, he has another three attempts if appropriate.

[davebro]

"After all balls have been replaced under this Rule, and the
striker fouls any ball, including the cue-ball, a MISS will not be called if a stroke has not been played. In this case the appropriate penalty will be imposed.""

A mis-cue would count as a stroke I think. The above would apply if e.g. the player touched a ball with his sleeve .

[THECORBYLOON]

With the cue ball being in amongst the reds and the spider being used, I took the example to mean one of the other balls had been struck by the cue or the spider so that would be a foul and not a miss but I might have mis-understood the example.

[New Judge]

//I read that to mean that the mis-cue would not be a miss.//

That is correct. No "miss" can be called unless a stroke is played.

There was an occasion in 2009. Ronnie O'Sullivan was snookered and played three times at the yellow and three at the brown and missed the lot. A miss was called on all occasions and Ronnie's opponent (John Higgins) had the balls replaced. On his seventh attempt Ronnie accidently fouled the Black with his hand. A seven point penalty was awarded but no miss was called. The referee (Jan Verhaas) explained his decision in the post-match roundup saying that he could not call a miss as no stroke had been played. A similar situation should prevail in the event of a miscue.

http://snookerscene.blogspot.com/2009/12/oh-what-night.html

[New Judge]

The above, of course, was not a miscue. But for a miss to be called the shot must be deliberate (i.e. the player deliberately misses). I don't think a miscue could be seen as deliberate. Yes I know, a player could deliberately miscue or otherwise commit a foul to avoid having a miss called. But snooker is a "gentlemen's" game, and is not frequented by cheats (Stephen Lee excepted). :-)

[THECORBYLOON]

It hinges on a stroke being made and I think that if the cue ball were hit by the cue, that would be a stroke and a miss would be called if the ball that is "on" were not hit.

[Ellipsis]

Haven't re-read any of the rules, but from memory a miss is totally at the discretion of the referee thinking a ball was hittable by a competent player. Some snookers are literally impossible to escape. For example, consider the score at 0-0, a cue ball on the cushion with the pink almost adjacent on one side also on the cushion, the black almost adjacent on the other side also on the cushion, and the blue almost adjacent and sandwiching the cue ball between it and the cushion, with 15 reds still on the table, and therefore the next ball to be hit being a red. I do not believe that misses would be called until snookers were required, in those circumstances. I don't think any misses would be called.

[Everhelpful]

I thought a miss couldn't be called if Snookers were required.

[THECORBYLOON]

If the cue ball were trapped and impossible to hit the ball on, the player would need to make an attempt still and hit the cue ball with enough force for it to reach the ball on but for the other balls in the road.