wtf???????
- Thread starter getsome01
- Start date
I guess the others have free reign to call people all the names they want to and suffer no consequences and others can't. It's called "selective enforcment".
While I didn't care for Mr. Dixon, it's overkill to wipe out the username & every post he ever made.
Even antisocial members can occasionally add to a discussion.
He'd been here for over 2 years. He probably said something worthwhile in that stretch.
Removing legitimate posts in addition to the offensive ones doesn't really enhance the forum.
On the topic of Danny's move...
The INTENT of the rule is obvious - is to make sure everyone acknowledges the situation,
so they can't claim ignorance later.
It's another one of those rules that only exists to prevent arguments.
Danny DID acknowledge his awareness that he's on 2, he chose to exploit a loophole
in the wording of the rule so he could foul 3 times and not suffer the penalty.
I have no idea why they specified "as he approaches the table" in the rulebook.
Presumably it was intentional and not just a case of someone padding the sentence for no reason.
Maybe so nobody could claim "they claim they warned me 2 hours ago, but I don't remember that."
It's funny how they wrote some rules that only exist to make the ref's job easier,
not to enhance the actual game... and the side effect is that these
"ref-helper" rules make the actual gameplay WORSE by allowing people to
lawyer their way out of fouls, or manufacture fouls out of thin air.
Even antisocial members can occasionally add to a discussion.
He'd been here for over 2 years. He probably said something worthwhile in that stretch.
Removing legitimate posts in addition to the offensive ones doesn't really enhance the forum.
On the topic of Danny's move...
The INTENT of the rule is obvious - is to make sure everyone acknowledges the situation,
so they can't claim ignorance later.
It's another one of those rules that only exists to prevent arguments.
Danny DID acknowledge his awareness that he's on 2, he chose to exploit a loophole
in the wording of the rule so he could foul 3 times and not suffer the penalty.
I have no idea why they specified "as he approaches the table" in the rulebook.
Presumably it was intentional and not just a case of someone padding the sentence for no reason.
Maybe so nobody could claim "they claim they warned me 2 hours ago, but I don't remember that."
It's funny how they wrote some rules that only exist to make the ref's job easier,
not to enhance the actual game... and the side effect is that these
"ref-helper" rules make the actual gameplay WORSE by allowing people to
lawyer their way out of fouls, or manufacture fouls out of thin air.
Let's just hope you and your negativity are next.
Bob did cross the line but he had some help there was people calling him names and Danny names and that's not right. To call someone a douche bag is pretty low shot at their character and that's seems to be ok but you see this all the time people insult and push someone to their breaking point and they say some real bad stuff and the one gets punished. And I'm not implying Bob didn't deserve it he crossed the line hard but others seem to be able to cross it and get back on the safe side. But that's just my opinion and I'm not a fan of insults slung online.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Exactly. Well written. Lawyering is exactly what I was thinking. Soon pros will be bringing personal attorneys to witness matches. Every shot taken, word spoken, second taken, and movement can be documented and scrutenized over against the rulebook to find loopholes to get their clients any undeserved advange they can get away with. That's the true spirit of pool right there right?
Last edited:
I don't normally bet on the side but if Jesus was playing I'd bet high.
Yeah, you are the one calling people douche bags, and I'm the negative one.
I understand people like you have a difficult time judging THEMSELVES, but please just look over your post history.
This is true but the other side only takes so much then it turns to an insult war.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The people who go overboard are the ones that can't understand that we are debating an opinion. There is no fact in question, it's a debate about individual perception.
I see it as arguing a rule in question and your side not liking how that rule plays out and thinking that the player should not have enforced that rule as it is written in today's rule book, with no other argument other then it was douchy and anyone who thinks he was right is also douchy and that's about it there is no sense arguing any more no one is going to change their minds, if it happens to you in a tournament the other player would be on 2 fouls and you will yell douchebag.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
None of this would be an issue if the rule were amended, as the WPBA did, to state that the opponent can tell the player he is on two fouls at any time prior to the player approaching the table.
Any player who is on two fouls and can't remember that because he's sitting in the chair for awhile, shouldn't be playing competitive pool.
Let's say you're the opponent of someone who is on 2 fouls and you're at the table shooting. You know you have only about a 10 second window to inform your opponent he is on two after your turn ends and as he is walking to the table. It is therefore on your mind while you are at the table shooting. It is unfair to put that on the player who has done nothing wrong. It's not too bad if you're in a safety battle where you take one shot and leave the table quickly, but if you're trying to run balls, good luck trying not to think about it.
Any player who is on two fouls and can't remember that because he's sitting in the chair for awhile, shouldn't be playing competitive pool.
Let's say you're the opponent of someone who is on 2 fouls and you're at the table shooting. You know you have only about a 10 second window to inform your opponent he is on two after your turn ends and as he is walking to the table. It is therefore on your mind while you are at the table shooting. It is unfair to put that on the player who has done nothing wrong. It's not too bad if you're in a safety battle where you take one shot and leave the table quickly, but if you're trying to run balls, good luck trying not to think about it.
Last edited:
Even with dealing with negative people like you that like to stir things up on here, it's still more positve than yours is. Looking over your history, I'm still wondering when you are going to add anything useful to the forums. Or are you here just to get a cheap thrill out of trying to push peoples buttons?
I just like talking to you.
All great points except tht I have never seen someone take 10 seconds to approach the table, and I've played with a wheelchair bound person before. I'd say it takes me two seconds to approach the table. Once I'm there, it's too late to inform me Of my foul situation.