The non striker's ball and the red are in baulk and are touching. The striker in hand, attempts to hit the balls, misses, and his ball runs into a pocket. (Diagram BQR July,1994. P11.) What is the referee's decision? I put this to a number of players including some qualified referees and they either got it wrong or were unsure. All the professional referees I asked knew the answer - but this was to be expected. Of those people who have written, all would have made the wrong decision.
The decision should be that the red ball only is spotted and the player plays from hand. The relevant rule is to be found in the Rules of Billiards, Section 3. The Game. Rule 11.Balls Touching.
"When the striker's ball remains touching another ball, red shall be placed on the spot, the non-striker's ball if on the table, shall be placed on the centre spot, and the striker shall play from hand."
The answer lies in the wording, "if on the table" in the situation outlined, the non-striker's ball is not on the table and therefore would not be spotted. And so, if you are ever faced with a double baulk and the object balls are touching, I suppose that the thing to do is run a coup. Otherwise if an attempt is made to hit the balls and this fails then the other chap would be able to have both red and object white re-spotted.
Whilst on the question of rules, there seems to be a certain inconsistency that ought to be corrected. A player may ask the referee whether a ball is in baulk or whether it is playable, and he may ask before he plays his next stroke. (It was not always so) However, if a player is about to pot the red, and is uncertain as whether or not the red ball will spot, the referee may not give a decision until after the player has made his stroke. This is inconsistent. It would clearly be better if the referee could give the information to the player in both of the above instances, or in neither of them. Readers' opinions welcomed.