Yes...you know...the one where Earl is pointing at the ten ball with his cue.
...I suspect it was to see if the ten went past the eleven.
The two ball didn't have place to go.
Should Earl be ejected given the "evidence"
- Thread starter Kid Dynomite
- Start date
Yes...you know...the one where Earl is pointing at the ten ball with his cue.
...I suspect it was to see if the ten went past the eleven.
The two ball didn't have place to go.
I did watch the video. He (Earl) turned to the crowd and said. Efren would play the carom walked up to the table and called the two. It was pretty simple/.
Bert
Stop trolling.
I agree 100%
SHADDUP ABOUT IT ALREADY!
Earl WON...GAME OVER.
This was no world championship. Have you ever seen a World Championship of ANY kind where there wasn't a designated referee paying attention and watching what was going on?
Do boxers win World titles with no referee in the ring?
Do NBA championships have refs?
How about NFL championships?
This was nothing more than a pool tournament to drum up a little money for people without jobs.
Earl WON...GAME OVER.
This was no world championship. Have you ever seen a World Championship of ANY kind where there wasn't a designated referee paying attention and watching what was going on?
Do boxers win World titles with no referee in the ring?
Do NBA championships have refs?
How about NFL championships?
This was nothing more than a pool tournament to drum up a little money for people without jobs.
Last edited:
Should Earl be ejected given the "evidence"
A few things.
Some of the posters who think the call should stand are not Americans (PT and I are Canadians, for example). Darren Appleton, on Facebook, said he thought the rule should be that the shooter is not penalized for such a mistake (although he felt the ref should have been consistent with the call made earlier because of the earlier ruling). Is that because Daz is an Earl fan? I doubt it.
The issue, as been repeatedly pointed out, is that the rules speak both of the shooter's clear intention and of calling a ball but do not say which one prevails. Some, like respected rules expert Bob Jewett, think the call prevails. Others think the clear intent prevails.
Still others have gone back and forth. For example, Dennis Walsh (who runs the Derby 14.1 event) said on Facebook that when Jayson asked him how he would rule he told Jayson he would have gone with intent, but then said on Facebook that he had spoken to Bob Jewett afterwards and been convinced that was the wrong call.
My point here is that there is a legitimate debate between intelligent people both about what the rule does mean and also about what the rule should mean (i.e. what the best rule is in such a situation).
Perhaps it would help if you (and others) tried to see both sides and give credit to those with opposing views, as opposed to assuming that everyone who disagrees with you is an idiot or biased.
IMHO, of course.
A few things.
Some of the posters who think the call should stand are not Americans (PT and I are Canadians, for example). Darren Appleton, on Facebook, said he thought the rule should be that the shooter is not penalized for such a mistake (although he felt the ref should have been consistent with the call made earlier because of the earlier ruling). Is that because Daz is an Earl fan? I doubt it.
The issue, as been repeatedly pointed out, is that the rules speak both of the shooter's clear intention and of calling a ball but do not say which one prevails. Some, like respected rules expert Bob Jewett, think the call prevails. Others think the clear intent prevails.
Still others have gone back and forth. For example, Dennis Walsh (who runs the Derby 14.1 event) said on Facebook that when Jayson asked him how he would rule he told Jayson he would have gone with intent, but then said on Facebook that he had spoken to Bob Jewett afterwards and been convinced that was the wrong call.
My point here is that there is a legitimate debate between intelligent people both about what the rule does mean and also about what the rule should mean (i.e. what the best rule is in such a situation).
Perhaps it would help if you (and others) tried to see both sides and give credit to those with opposing views, as opposed to assuming that everyone who disagrees with you is an idiot or biased.
IMHO, of course.
How about the point being, that Earl should be made to conduct himself as a professional, or he should find another profession. This is of course my opinion, and Earl is a great player, but...there is more to being a pro, than just your ability when you're actually at the table. Granted I do not want to see the "game" so sterilized, that it is stale, but expecting a certain level of conduct is absolutely appropriate, and I don't think Earl should be any exception.
regards.
j2
How about the point being, that Earl should be made to conduct himself as a professional, or he should find another profession. This is of course my opinion, and Earl is a great player, but...there is more to being a pro, than just your ability when you're actually at the table. Granted I do not want to see the "game" so sterilized, that it is stale, but expecting a certain level of conduct is absolutely appropriate, and I don't think Earl should be any exception.
regards.
j2
To me, not standing for the anthem in the NFL is worse than Earl's behavior. Should we eject all the players who don't stand?
OK, what the he$$, let's go with it.
FWIW, I did not say that Earl should have been ejected. I merely think his behavior is at times in poor taste, and people generally act that way, because they have been allowed to. JMO.
OK, what the he$$, let's go with it.
People don't stand "because they are allowed to".
Pool players need to quit being so "thin skinned"...man up!
If Earl gets in your face, get back in his. Tell him you'll kick his ass.
Uh, ok? :thumbup:
I've had people pull out guns during our gambling matches. Listening to Earl act a fool is nothing compared to having a gun pointed at you.
People complain about Earl's behavior all the time. I think it is probably easier to send Earl in a "tail spin" than it is to let him shark you. Start eating potato chips when he is shooting. Take forever to shoot. Ask for a re-rack on every rack. Chew gum and pop bubbles. Start talking to yourself when you walk around the table and look at Earl on every shot and ask, "ain't that right, Earl?"
You'll have him flipping out and breaking every shaft in his case before the second or third game.
Just act crazier than he does. Come in with a toilet seat strapped to your ass or something.
I see. I'm not much of a gambler. I don't get involved in "sharking," and the only time I would ever pull a gun on someone, is if I intended to use it. I do understand what you're saying, it's just not my scene. To each their own.
Well I guess this is about pool culture in USA vs pool culture in Europe. If Earl acted his usual self in any european tournament he would get an official warning from referee about 5 mins into the game. Then if Earl went on with being Earl he would lose a game, whole match or even be thrown out of the tournament for unsportmanlike conduct. So there would be no need for his opponent to get in sharking exchange with Earl.
Thats just the way it is, you may call Europeans thin-skinned and you may be actually right. We just prefer to stick to the rules as opposed to sharking others which may contribute to the fact that pool is viewed as a sport here (even if a small one) and treated as such by general public. On the other hand because of the same cultural difference US players in general are more resistent to sharking than Euro players. Take your pick which is better..
I looked at the video again and your are correct. He does talk about the carom but gestures towards the left foot pocket and calls the two.
Bert
He pointed to the pocket the 10 went in. He clearly meant 10. It wasn't a slop shot.
My question is this - was Shaw calling every shot?
In general no player was calling any shot during the tournament except "tricky" shots. There may have been one or two players occasionally calling obvious shots, like the two ball a diamond from the corner and straight in, which for some reason I find really annoying.