If you foul, but your opponent doesn't see it, should you call it on yourself?

Look at Snooker. They call fouls on themselves all of the time. They play the sport with honor. If a player even thinks he fouled, he calls it. The ref seeing it does not come into play.

I remember seeing a foul shot by Earl Stirckland that was blatant. The opponent was either Alex Pagalyan or Charlie Williams, I think. Earl hit the cue ball and somehow it came back off a rail and hit his stick right on the tip. He knew damn well he fouled, but because the ref didn't see it, he walked away from the table like it didn't happen. The opponent saw the foul and confronted Earl about it. Earl denied it to his face.

I lost all respect for Earl that day.

If you foul and don't call it, you are a cheater.

The rules don't say it is a foul if you are caught.
The rules say that it is a foul for you to touch the cue ball during your shot, except to actually shoot the ball.
If you are playing foul on all balls, it is a foul if you touch any ball. Not if you get caught.
 
Last edited:
Hendry wrote: "If you foul and don't call it, you are a cheater."

Thank you for your "opinion".

Do you have any qualifications, notable degrees or paperwork which might support the fact that you know this to be true for everyone?

Or is this just a truth for you?
 
Last edited:
ChrisBanks said:
The Holy Rollers are smart business men. By preaching to everyone to call their own fouls, they create an atmosphere where their opponents will automatically call their own fouls.

This only serves to help the Holy Roller.
Click to expand...

I like how we now resort to disparaging names for people who call fouls, like there's something wrong with them for simply playing by the rules.

Ok, I'll make up my own term for people who don't call fouls on themselves.
"Cheating Sleazebags".

Now let me go ahead and fix your post.

ChrisBanks said:
The Cheating Sleazebags are smart business men. By preaching to everyone to not call their own fouls, they create an atmosphere where it's ok for them to commit fouls, as long as it's hidden from view.

This only serves to help the Cheating Sleazebag.
Click to expand...
 
rrick33 said:
Hendry wrote: "If you foul and don't call it, you are a cheater."

Thank you for your "opinion".

Do you have any qualifications, notable degrees or paperwork which might support the fact that you know this to be true for everyone?

Or is this just a truth for you?
Click to expand...


With those statements, you show you are not way out in left field, you are in the bleachers. Opinions are what we were asked for.

If you foul, regardless of how it happened, you fouled. A foul is the end of your turn.

If you can't understand basic sportsmanship, you need to quit playing.
 
Sometimes it seems a bit confrontational to call a foul on certain opponents and i prefer my opponent to be honest and best player wins with a handshake when its over. Some guys get mad if you call a foul on them even when its obvious.
 
RG1 said:
Sometimes it seems a bit confrontational to call a foul on certain opponents and i prefer my opponent to be honest and best player wins with a handshake when its over. Some guys get mad if you call a foul on them even when its obvious.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't it be to your advantage of they were mad while they are playing?
 
Eddie May said:
Running a stop sign can possibly not effect much of anything
Accidently fouling can possibly not effect much of anything

Running a stop sign could possibly END SOMEONES LIFE causing a large effect
Not calling a foul could possibly change the course of an entire game or even and entire match have a large effect.

One is considered not a big deal, the other is considered a clear a blatant cheat and somehow disgraces the game of pool... Why does blowing a stop sign not disgust all other people that drive...
Click to expand...

When you blow a stop sign, it's a victimless crime unless you hit someone.Then it IS considered a big deal, and it is considered disgraceful, and I will turn myself in for it (even if I had a chance to get away with it).

If I roll it but thankfully nobody was hit, then I don't feel bad about it and don't turn myself in... because nobody was directly affected.

But in pool, you don't have a 'victimless foul'. There's always another human being who is affected by your actions.

Fouling and not calling it isn't the equivalent of a 'california roll'. It's the equivalent of banging into someone's car in the parking lot and then driving away as soon as you realize they didn't see it.
 
CreeDo said:
Fouling and not calling it isn't the equivalent of a 'california roll'. It's the equivalent of banging into someone's car in the parking lot and then driving away as soon as you realize they didn't see it.
Click to expand...

Well said. TAP TAP TAP
 
CreeDo said:
When you blow a stop sign, it's a victimless crime unless you hit someone.Then it IS considered a big deal, and it is considered disgraceful, and I will turn myself in for it (even if I had a chance to get away with it).

If I roll it but thankfully nobody was hit, then I don't feel bad about it and don't turn myself in... because nobody was directly affected.

But in pool, you don't have a 'victimless foul'. There's always another human being who is affected by your actions.

Fouling and not calling it isn't the equivalent of a 'california roll'. It's the equivalent of banging into someone's car in the parking lot and then driving away as soon as you realize they didn't see it.
Click to expand...

Wait, in your stop sign example, aren't you equally guilty whether you hit someone or not?

For the two acts are equal. The fact that another car happened to cross is not under your control, so how could the two cases differ?
 
When I play pool i prefer the out come be determined by who was the best player during the match and I don't want to put some guy on tilt or have him put me on tilt. I have never tried to get an advantage or wanted one on someone playing pool other than maybe using quality equipment and always trying to learn and play better.
 
krupa said:
I have never bought into the "everyone is doing it so it's ok for me to" mentality so just saying "they do it in other sports" is not a good reason for me.




I was reading the WPA rules last night and I couldn't find an explicit rule that stated who had to acknowledge the fouls.


Hypothetically, I have a price but it's impossibly large. Realistically, there is no situation that I would be in that I would be financially motivated to not self-report.

My only comment on your comment is that it is not a "I do it because everyone else does it" sort of matter. In most pro sports, there just simply is no RULE requiring self-called fouls. As I've said...in boxing you CAN...and had better...punch the other guy in the nose because the RULES permit it.

In other sports, you CANNOT because the RULES forbid it.

ALL I am saying is that you CANNOT CHEAT...by definition...unless you are breaking a RULE. In ref'd matches ONLY the ref can declare that a foul has taken place and impose a penalty.

As you agree, there is no EXPLICIT rule in pool requiring the intervention into the ref's authority by self-calling a foul...so, why should there be such an obligation in a non-ref'd game?

I GET IT that MANY players...you and me included...who would self call fouls unless a GIVEN sum of money was at stake.

My ONLY point is that doing so is a personal choice but one which CANNOT result from an unwillingness to "cheat" because there is no RULE to be violated if we don't self-call and therefore, no "cheating."

Rather, it's just a personal lifestyle choice which I ADMIRE but would not impose on anyone else. In FACT, a player could come up to me after a match and ADMIT that he had fouled but never mentioned it and I would say..."OK with me. My bad that I didn't notice it."(-:



I guess I still get to be a saint; I don't gamble. :)
Click to expand...

You sould like a VERY good man sir. GOOD ON YOU!

(-:

EagleMan
 
Patrick Johnson said:
You need to "study" whether or not to cheat? Didn't you have parents?

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

OK...let me just ask you a couple of questions.

1. Do you think it is POSSIBLE to cheat in a game/sport if no RULE was broken?

2. What EXPLICIT RULE can you cite imposing an obligation on a player to self-call a foul?

3. If you reduce the matter to a non-ruled based issue of "ethcis/morality"...which is FINE with me...let me just ask if you would pull up in a gambling match against a player who was OBVVIOUSLY not capable of beating you...unless you drop dead and therefore forfeit the match?

Would it be "moral/ethical" to just take the poor guy's money...even though no RULE would be broken by continuing the match.

Let me just inject that I FOR ONE would pull up and say..."Hey pal...you need to practice a LOT more before gambling with me."

BUT I HASTEN TO ADD that I wouldn't in my DREAMS impose that same standard on ANYONE else. It would just be my personal preference. But I certainly would not accuse anyone of "cheating" for continuing the match.

(-:

EagleMan
 
Patrick Johnson said:
I don't believe this is true. Can you show a rule or regulation that says so?

pj
chgo
Click to expand...

I believe it is implied in the rules. Could I call a foul on my opponent in a refereed match? No. And so my opponent can not call a foul on himself either.

The power of enforcing the rules lies with the referee.

You're not winning this one pj
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top