You tell the person who committed the foul.
Loree Jon Snooze.............
- Thread starter garczar
- Start date
You tell the person who committed the foul.
I gotta agree with Jamie on this one. I have no idea what JB was thinking, nor does anyone else. We've all been there where we missed a bad hit or a no rail.
No need to shoot her for this.
Only she knows what she was thinking at that moment.
Give her a break.
No need to shoot her for this.
Only she knows what she was thinking at that moment.
Give her a break.
I have to agree with Fran here. I've been in such a spot more than once. If there is a dispute on a shot that I witnessed, I will first stand by and see if they can resolve it themselves. If not, they might ask me if I saw the shot in question. Only then will I offer my opinion and only if both players agree to abide by what I say.
A lot of people feel that you don't have an obligation to call a foul on yourself and that it's not considered cheating if you know you fouled and you don't say anything.
The answer is: It depends on whether or not there is a referee presiding over the match.
If there is no ref, it is understood that both players must act as referees. There's nothing that states you must only referee your opponent and not yourself. Both players must referee both their opponent and them self.
However, if a match is refereed, then it is entirely up to the ref to see a hit and make the call. The players don't have an obligation to make a call on themselves. They can question a ref's call, but they aren't obligated to ref themselves or their opponents.
The answer is: It depends on whether or not there is a referee presiding over the match.
If there is no ref, it is understood that both players must act as referees. There's nothing that states you must only referee your opponent and not yourself. Both players must referee both their opponent and them self.
However, if a match is refereed, then it is entirely up to the ref to see a hit and make the call. The players don't have an obligation to make a call on themselves. They can question a ref's call, but they aren't obligated to ref themselves or their opponents.
I disagree with this completely. Both players should do their best to see that all rules are applied all the time. Failing to call a foul on yourself is unethical in my view whether there is a ref or not.
There was no ref so let's just say Jennifer is a bad referee then when it matters most, to say the least, and she clearly must be one of those people you mentioned in your first sentence also. That's too bad. She doesn't miss a thing when it comes to checkin the rack tho.. She made a couple of good shots to "win"at any rate but still.. Ive never liked 1 miss BIH anyway and it was more exciting for me to see the couple good shots on the end to"win" instead of a BIH out. And also, why have to drive a ball to a rail after a good hit anyway? It surely would take this behavior out of play and make for different outcomes where you have to make shots Canwin
Last edited:
Bob, my experience is that it depends more on the individual player and their level of integrity. Some will always call fouls on themselves and others will never call a foul on themselves. In fact, in the latter case, players like this will often argue fouls called against them by their opponent as well. That is the reality of professional pool in this country. Bottom line - No ref, good luck on getting the right call on a close hit if you are playing a player who wants to win at all costs.
Do you recommend as a general course of action that a player clearly states "foul" whenever he or she commits one?
An analogue to Rule 1 in golf seems like something that should be added to the official rule book. By comparison this is quite weak sauce:
When there's a ref presiding over the match if you know you fouled and the ref misses it and you don't call it on yourself ---- Unethical, maybe. Illegal, no. That's the distinction I was pointing out as opposed to a match when there's no ref presiding, and by the rules, you must referee yourself and your opponent.
The rules have to be logically consistent. Like for example: When a ref is presiding over a match and you think the ref is wrong in calling a foul on you, you can dispute it, but in the end, the ref's word is what stands, even if the ref is wrong and you're right. If you don't have the right to change a ref's bad decision against you, then you shouldn't be obligated to call a foul on yourself in place of a presiding ref who may have missed it. That wouldn't be logically consistent, and it would tip the rules to being unfair towards the players.
If you're going to give the power to make the calls to the ref, then you have to be consistent about it.
However, if the ref makes enough mistakes like that, that person won't be a ref for much longer.
Last edited:
I would tend to agree with Bob. If I know that I fouled without a doubt, I'm telling my opponent. My integrity is worth more than a pool match. YMMV
Fran, the chain of command in such situations is that a player can appeal to the tournament director if they feel the referee made an incorrect call or is wrong in their interpretation of the rules. The TD's decision would then be final. In the case of a ref's call on a close hit there is no appeal available, unless the match is being recorded and it can be replayed for the TD or head referee to watch. We have used this last option in the Mosconi Cup and World 9-Ball Championship before.
Sounds to me like you're using a vague statement to support a specific interpretation of that statement, then using the lack of a specific statement to invalidate another possible interpretation.
Furthermore, is that exact statement even in the rules used in that tournament?
If both players were required to hold equal responsibility on each and every shot, the rules would be more specific, assuming that "both players must act as referees" is even in the rules.
Rules that say "it's up to the players to referee" or anything vague like that are simply stating a fact, that in the absence of a referee, all fouls will be determined by both of the players. It does not make any other assertion as to what the responsibility is for each player.
Absent any clear cut rule, why should Jennifer have to go out of her way to call a foul that was obvious to everyone in the room? There isn't an injustice when someone chooses not to take ball in hand because they weren't paying attention enough to realize they had ball in hand. If you scratch and then put the cue ball back on the table, are you responsible for making sure your opponent follows through with taking ball in hand?
Since the foul benefits no one but the player receiving ball in hand, they should have some responsibility for paying attention enough to at least ask if it was a foul or not. Players shouldn't be trying to disguise a foul or lie, but when it's obvious or close, the other player needs to claim their right to ball in hand if there are no clear rules saying you have to call fouls on yourself.
I don't play professionally and rely on the game for income or anything like that, so I make sure my opponent knows about any fouls I commit, because it isn't that serious. If I were in Jennifer's shoes, in a professional tournament, I would have done the same thing she did. There is no excuse for Loree Jon to not have seen the foul. Someone at her level should be punished for the lapse in judgement or attentiveness in her own match.
Last edited:
ethics don't really enter in to it
When there is a referee, the referee calls the shots. Like in all sports you figure that you will get the gold mine sometimes and sometimes you will get the shaft.
I remember Earl not calling a blatant foul on himself a referee didn't see. Likewise, video of Keith disputing a referee's call playing Efren. Words to the effect, "I don't think it was a foul but I am going to take it."
In local competition I have seen several people DQ'ed over the years for questioning a referee's call. The funny thing, they were questioning the call that was to their benefit.
It isn't ethical or unethical to expect an official to do their job.
Because there is a basic conflict between sitting in your chair and calling the other person's fouls I think common sense dictates a player calls their own fouls. When players blatantly foul and don't call it on themselves I am done sitting while they shoot. If I am functioning as a referee I am going to act like one if it mean getting directly over the shot. I asked a tournament director to watch a shot once and they got directly over the shot. I was playing them at the time!
Hu
When there is a referee, the referee calls the shots. Like in all sports you figure that you will get the gold mine sometimes and sometimes you will get the shaft.
I remember Earl not calling a blatant foul on himself a referee didn't see. Likewise, video of Keith disputing a referee's call playing Efren. Words to the effect, "I don't think it was a foul but I am going to take it."
In local competition I have seen several people DQ'ed over the years for questioning a referee's call. The funny thing, they were questioning the call that was to their benefit.
It isn't ethical or unethical to expect an official to do their job.
Because there is a basic conflict between sitting in your chair and calling the other person's fouls I think common sense dictates a player calls their own fouls. When players blatantly foul and don't call it on themselves I am done sitting while they shoot. If I am functioning as a referee I am going to act like one if it mean getting directly over the shot. I asked a tournament director to watch a shot once and they got directly over the shot. I was playing them at the time!
Hu
Yes, of course. But my point is that the player does not have the authority to change a ref's call. The end result is still not up to the player. Yet, why should that same player be allowed to overturn a ref's call by calling a foul on himself? And to make matters worse for that player, when he doesn't, he's considered unethical or a cheater.
Remember: This is only when a ref is presiding over the match, not when there is no ref. Then it's a different story.
Last edited:
The 'I watch you and you watch me' idea doesn't work in a non refereed match because that would require an opponent to stand at the table at all times with the shooter, as a ref would do --- Not just for an occasional close shot.
Don't know why all the hate on checking the rack. Watch the game prior to last, where Barretta is racking. She is equally critical of herself.
The topic of whether a player has an obligation to call fouls on himself has been debated many times on AzB. Some people feel the answer is "no," because they can't find any explicit statement to that effect in the rules. Others feel differently. I feel the current WPA (world-standardized) rules, though lacking explicit language requiring self-reporting, still require it in order for the given rules to operate properly. I have written on that subject several times in the past.
But adding explicit language to the rules could help. A few years ago, Joe Tucker actually did that, for his American Rotation game:
I am not aware of any problems caused by this in Joe's events.
But adding explicit language to the rules could help. A few years ago, Joe Tucker actually did that, for his American Rotation game:
- Honor and integrity, "own fouls"
- A player is obligated to call his or her "own fouls," even if the referee or opponent (player who was not shooting) failed to see or call the foul. It is not acceptable to "get by."
When a referee (a designated third person) calls a foul, and the opponent (player who was not shooting) believes that a foul did not occur, then the player who was not shooting may "override" the referee and call "no foul." Because the referee's ruling is subject to this "override," the referee is prohibited from touching the balls after calling a foul.
- A player is obligated to call his or her "own fouls," even if the referee or opponent (player who was not shooting) failed to see or call the foul. It is not acceptable to "get by."
I am not aware of any problems caused by this in Joe's events.