Miss Rule

[Alan Cunningham]

At the last League meeting of the 8th November 2007 the same old question of the miss rule was raised with a suggestion that it MAY be considered in Div 1 next year. I feel that if this rule were to be implemented it would cause a lot of controversy being that the frame referee is usually provided by the home team and it would be his decision to call the miss and have the balls replaced. I think this would cause unrest if a similar incident were to occur in a subsequent frame by another player and the ref again has the say on the miss. With due respect to players in the NHSL - they are not professional snooker players - it would be unfair to bring in the miss rule. If a player were to deliberately play away and make no attempt to escape from a snooker then the frame ref surely has the power to warn him and replace the balls, if the player again makes no attempt then the ref should award the frame to the opponent..
When I was running the Notts Amateur we didnt play the miss rule BUT by the time the players were whittled down to the final - obviously 2 better players, I used to give them the option if they wanted to play the miss rule and this was usually accepted.
I think to fairly play the miss rule you need an independant ref, not connected with either side. ! !

[Mike Langdon]

I agree with you Alan that the miss rule is NOT workable in this league.  There is no way if i was the ref i would be comfortable constantly calling miss and i think the replacing of the balls is a big enough headache even for professional refs.  However i would like to see something in place and i feel that my suggestion of a double foul may be workable.  I think if the player getting out of a snooker fails to get the the cue ball within a foot radius of the object ball ( and by this i don't mean the cue ball must finish within a foot of the object ball, but the cue ball on route must pass the object ball within a foot) then the double foul rule could be called ie: playing at red = 8 point foul rather than 4, pink 12 points rather than six. Of course if the cue ball passes within a foot of object but still misses then the normal penalty would apply.  I would however suggest that the double foul rule would only be alive whilst there are reds on the table as the last thing we would want is this potential ruling to effectively win a frame for someone.  Personally from my experiences i don't think it would have to be called that much as a foot either side of the object ball is a huge target to aim at but it might just cut out the diguised roll up to the bottom or top cushion.  Yes it would need common sense from the referee ie: the only escape route is to play into the jaws of a pocket for instance, or the cue ball is surrounded by balls and there is no possible way out other than fouling then obviously it should not be called, but those sort of snookers are very rare.  I just feel this rule might reward a good snooker by helping you to stay in control of a safety exchange or give you a decent potting opportunity.  As it stands 4 points is little reward when faced with a tricky safety shot or pot because your clued up opponent has gained control by leaving the cue ball tight on the cusion or in the most awkward position available. 

Mike (Pegasus)

[Alan Cunningham]

Thanks for your reply and your input but I dont think your double points penalty would work. I still think it will be down to the ref to decide if no genuine attempt had been made, then he has the discretion to warn the player (that if he plays another similar shot he will forfeit the frame) and replace the balls (as best he can). Also, as per your last sentence, you have the option of making your opponent go again if he has genuinly failed to escape from a snooker and left you safe on the cushion.  It will be interesting to see what other feedbacks we get from OTHER readers of this forum debate.

[Mike Langdon]

I disagree, the very fact that there would be a guidline in place : ie within 1 foot, should help the referee rather than hinder him.  If a close call then the benefit of doubt would go to the player taking the shot - pretty simple really compared to the miss rule.  With regards to your other points i could never see a ref in our league or would want to, end a frame in that manner and let's be honest nobody would play the type of obvious miss i presume you're talking about anyway.  I'm talking more about the type of shot where a player should be getting a lot closer to the object ball than they do in order to gain an advantage from a difficult situation. And of course you have the choice to put your opponent back in but having played a decent snooker from which they have been a little clever by playing to miss, it seems like no reward to come back to the table with the choice of taking on a 3 in every 10 pot which if you do choose to put your opponent back in he might just get. 

Mike (Pegasus)

[Alan Cunningham]

I still cant see you 'missing by a foot' working, the ref would have to have a measure to see if the cue ball past within 1ft of the object ball and may even have to reach over other balls to measure it. As for the deliberate foul, I HAVE seen it played, the player was snookered on the reds and just rolled up to the back cushion and claimed he had miscued ! !.  We can BOTH keep pushing OUR views on this but will run out of ink before long so unless someone else comes along with some ideas it will be best left till the AGM, so lets call it a truce for time being.

[Mike Langdon]

fair enough...although i never did foresee a referee with a tape measure as that would be a tad anal. Just a rough visual judgement would be enough and if the ref was unsure then as mentioned the benefit of doubt would go to the player taking the shot. Your quite right though I'm sure the miss rule (or lack of one) will still be coming up at meetings for years to come.  :wink:

Mike Pegasus

[Steve Butler]

This is a very interesting debate and I was curious to see what a qualified referee thought about it.  I therefore asked Molly Newbold (visit her website here) to comment on the debate - I think her suggestion is excellent, read on......

Dear Steve,

Thank you for your email, sorry for the delay in reply.

I was not sure if you wanted me to reply to the email or post a reply on the web site.

I think to a fair extent the Foul and a Miss rule should always be used but using certain conditions for different circumstances for all players. I refereed at my local club?s Summer League, this event was a mixed ability league but the Foul and a Miss rule was used. What happened at this Summer League, was that Foul and a Miss could be called for the first two attempts, but then if the player failed to make contact with the ?ball on? on the third attempt then Foul and a Miss would not be called (as long as the stroke was played to the best ability of the player). I think having the Foul and a Miss rule made the league matches fairer and more eventful.

I referee a Junior league on a Saturday, this does not use the Foul and a Miss which I feel it should, I believe that this prepares players for the future.

The problem on the posting is the tendency for a bias decision and this should never happen under any circumstances

I hope I have answered your question, feel free to contact me any time 

Kind Regards,

Molly Newbold
Class 3 Snooker Referee

[Alan Cunningham]

Molly comments seem fair enough and I suppose from a qualified independant ref would seem a reasonable solution. BUT, us not being of her standard, it would be a nightmare having to call miss, foul AND having to replace the balls perhaps twice.
ALSO she mentions the favourite word 'bias',  'home' referees could always have this thrown at them and I think in our standard of snooker we shouldn't be putting our referees under this pressure.

[Robert Wright]

Hi! Alan. Bob Wright from the Nottingham & Notts Institutes Association. I Know i shouldn't comment on the rules of the Nazareth house league but i'd just like to say that we also don't use the miss rule as i none of our referees are 'professional' (we use the home team as referee) and therefore are not competent enough to apply this rule. If there were a complete disregard from a player to attempt to get out of a snooker then the frame would be awarded to the opponent. I also when, we reach the finals of the singles, ask the players if they want me to apply this rule. If they say no then i don't. This also applies to The Bulwell & district Snooker League where i am also league secretary.

[Steve Butler]

I Know i shouldn't comment on the rules of the Nazareth house league

You're most welcome to comment on anything you like on this forum Bob 

[Alan Cunningham]

I agree totally with what Bob is saying, we cant really apply this miss rule in our league BUT in the finals of a competition where there is an independant referee then the miss rule could be offered to both players but its always going to be a dodgy subject - a miss is a miss ! !

[Steve Butler]

Whilst on the subject of referees Alan, do you have a referee qualification?  I've been meaning to ask you for a while seeing as you own a pair of white gloves.

[Alan Cunningham]

Do you want an HONEST confession on a Voluntary Statement form to that answer.  The answer is a big, fat, unfortunate NO.  I made enquiries with the local and national snooker organisations AND with Paul DAVIS, Don CHAPMAN and Pete TROUT and I was told that I was really too old ! ! to be considered to be an official ref - I dont see why not, cos you can take various examination/tests no matter what your age ! !.
By the way, now that I'm a 'blue ball' can I have a photo - I'm Mr Anonymous ! !

[Alan Cunningham]

'At last' Sensibility rules.  Wednesday 16th Jan 2008, SAGA Masters, Steven LEE v Graham DOTT. Referee Airon ?  WILLIAMS. -   Frame of 10 of 11.  LEE pots penultimate red and plays off the brown leaving the white tucked up against the black between the black and the top cushion. The final red is tucked up behind yellow in the 'D', from top of table, only 1/4 of ball visible. DOTT plays off top cushion, both side cushions but misses the object ball by some distance. WILLIAMS calls foul and 'a miss', the white is replaced. DOTT adjusts angle and plays same shot before clipping yellow and then hitting the red. Refs decision - Foul but NO 'miss'.  He obviously used his discretion taking into consideration the difficulty of the snooker and the genuine attempt to get out of it.  Well Done Mr WILLIAMS.  LEE eventually went on to win the frame

[Mike Langdon]

I agree totally with what Bob is saying, we cant really apply this miss rule in our league BUT in the finals of a competition where there is an independant referee then the miss rule could be offered to both players but its always going to be a dodgy subject - a miss is a miss ! !

Should i ever be lucky enough to captain a team in a final and was offered a chance to play the miss rule with an independent ref i would probably decline the offer.  I think playing the miss rule takes time and experience to adjust to, and if players are not use to it which very few of us are it would probably spoil what is the leagues showcase event.

Mike (Pegasus)