cuetechasaurus said:
Earl's Foul
- Thread starter 647km2
- Start date
cuetechasaurus said:
It seems like there was a series of errors on the one shot. First Earl is kicking from a frozen ball with inside English and the ref is not in position to see the stroke, you would figure the ref would be in position to watch the stroke. Earl touches the object ball with his cue stick. Earl misses the kick badly but goes off another rail and hits the ball, almost makes it and ends up safe. Fortunately, Charlie ended up winning the game.
It may be true that the ref has to make the call. That would be the only justification for Earl's behavior. Even if this is the case I am suprised that Charlie's challenge was completely ignored, I guess they had a rule for that also.
i have this on tape, and i have witness'd this happen alot of times but personally the ref has the final call and if he didn't see it it didn't happen as it turned out in that match. As for him cheating yes it was wrong of him and it goes to show how good of a man Charlie was he didn't let it get to him and they both still shook hands.
Earl Strickland
THEN IT'S TIME SOMEBODY DOES...
Please notice that I'm not approving this foul... But Earl is in his right in this particular situation !
He just applies the rules of the game; The player at the table always has the advantage of the doubt when the ref does not call foul.
Now, I must really compliment Charlie to remain so composed and win the rack, but there is no justification for swearing at Earls decision to claim the right that the rules should be applied...
At this level of play, Earl has been in similar situations many times where his opponents did the same thing to him and than did not want to accept the foul called by the ref. That's very frustrating for Earl...
What you see here is just an example of one rare mistake from Earl. He's been such a great sport so many times, but suddenly nobody seems to recall that ???
I really have the impression that Earl is really judged on rare situations as these instead of his total pool carrier.
He has won over 100 national and international titles, is one of the very few to be able to shoot 10 racks of 8-ball or 9-ball on command. That's something only a handfull players can even out (Efren of course...)
I truely see him as being one of the very best players ever. He practices very hard (50+ hours a week...) takes the game very serious and has brought many new techniques to the game of pool. For instance;the controlled soft break, the simple play (just play as many stunn shots as possible and cut the extra crap), the glasses, fingercaps, he's perfected jumping with a full length cue...etc.
This is helping other upcoming players to perfect their own techniques.
The sad thing is that these new techniques are being forbidden one by one...
To me, Earl is a great sportsman who has to suffer many unjust situations but creates some on his own aswell. But when compairing Pool to Football, Soccer, Basketball or Hockey, the number of "intended fouls" is minimal.
In pool, everybody starts to blame the player, but when it happens in the other sports, everybody starts applauding the faulty players...
EARL... PLEASE GO ON MAKING ME WANT TO LOVE THE GAME MORE AND MORE EVERY DAY...
A true Earl "the Pearl" Strickland fan,
Tom Penrose
Sore_Aintya said:
THEN IT'S TIME SOMEBODY DOES...
Please notice that I'm not approving this foul... But Earl is in his right in this particular situation !
He just applies the rules of the game; The player at the table always has the advantage of the doubt when the ref does not call foul.
Now, I must really compliment Charlie to remain so composed and win the rack, but there is no justification for swearing at Earls decision to claim the right that the rules should be applied...
At this level of play, Earl has been in similar situations many times where his opponents did the same thing to him and than did not want to accept the foul called by the ref. That's very frustrating for Earl...
What you see here is just an example of one rare mistake from Earl. He's been such a great sport so many times, but suddenly nobody seems to recall that ???
I really have the impression that Earl is really judged on rare situations as these instead of his total pool carrier.
He has won over 100 national and international titles, is one of the very few to be able to shoot 10 racks of 8-ball or 9-ball on command. That's something only a handfull players can even out (Efren of course...)
I truely see him as being one of the very best players ever. He practices very hard (50+ hours a week...) takes the game very serious and has brought many new techniques to the game of pool. For instance;the controlled soft break, the simple play (just play as many stunn shots as possible and cut the extra crap), the glasses, fingercaps, he's perfected jumping with a full length cue...etc.
This is helping other upcoming players to perfect their own techniques.
The sad thing is that these new techniques are being forbidden one by one...
To me, Earl is a great sportsman who has to suffer many unjust situations but creates some on his own aswell. But when compairing Pool to Football, Soccer, Basketball or Hockey, the number of "intended fouls" is minimal.
In pool, everybody starts to blame the player, but when it happens in the other sports, everybody starts applauding the faulty players...
EARL... PLEASE GO ON MAKING ME WANT TO LOVE THE GAME MORE AND MORE EVERY DAY...
A true Earl "the Pearl" Strickland fan,
Tom Penrose
Penrose Cues said:THEN IT'S TIME SOMEBODY DOES...
Please notice that I'm not approving this foul... But Earl is in his right in this particular situation !
He just applies the rules of the game; The player at the table always has the advantage of the doubt when the ref does not call foul.
Now, I must really compliment Charlie to remain so composed and win the rack, but there is no justification for swearing at Earls decision to claim the right that the rules should be applied...
At this level of play, Earl has been in similar situations many times where his opponents did the same thing to him and than did not want to accept the foul called by the ref. That's very frustrating for Earl...
What you see here is just an example of one rare mistake from Earl. He's been such a great sport so many times, but suddenly nobody seems to recall that ???
I really have the impression that Earl is really judged on rare situations as these instead of his total pool carrier.
He has won over 100 national and international titles, is one of the very few to be able to shoot 10 racks of 8-ball or 9-ball on command. That's something only a handfull players can even out (Efren of course...)
I truely see him as being one of the very best players ever. He practices very hard (50+ hours a week...) takes the game very serious and has brought many new techniques to the game of pool. For instance;the controlled soft break, the simple play (just play as many stunn shots as possible and cut the extra crap), the glasses, fingercaps, he's perfected jumping with a full length cue...etc.
This is helping other upcoming players to perfect their own techniques.
The sad thing is that these new techniques are being forbidden one by one...
To me, Earl is a great sportsman who has to suffer many unjust situations but creates some on his own aswell. But when compairing Pool to Football, Soccer, Basketball or Hockey, the number of "intended fouls" is minimal.
In pool, everybody starts to blame the player, but when it happens in the other sports, everybody starts applauding the faulty players...
EARL... PLEASE GO ON MAKING ME WANT TO LOVE THE GAME MORE AND MORE EVERY DAY...
A true Earl "the Pearl" Strickland fan,
Tom Penrose
TAP TAP TAP
Penrose Cues said:THEN IT'S TIME SOMEBODY DOES...
Please notice that I'm not approving this foul... But Earl is in his right in this particular situation !
He just applies the rules of the game; The player at the table always has the advantage of the doubt when the ref does not call foul.
Now, I must really compliment Charlie to remain so composed and win the rack, but there is no justification for swearing at Earls decision to claim the right that the rules should be applied...
At this level of play, Earl has been in similar situations many times where his opponents did the same thing to him and than did not want to accept the foul called by the ref. That's very frustrating for Earl...
What you see here is just an example of one rare mistake from Earl. He's been such a great sport so many times, but suddenly nobody seems to recall that ???
I really have the impression that Earl is really judged on rare situations as these instead of his total pool carrier.
He has won over 100 national and international titles, is one of the very few to be able to shoot 10 racks of 8-ball or 9-ball on command. That's something only a handfull players can even out (Efren of course...)
I truely see him as being one of the very best players ever. He practices very hard (50+ hours a week...) takes the game very serious and has brought many new techniques to the game of pool. For instance;the controlled soft break, the simple play (just play as many stunn shots as possible and cut the extra crap), the glasses, fingercaps, he's perfected jumping with a full length cue...etc.
This is helping other upcoming players to perfect their own techniques.
The sad thing is that these new techniques are being forbidden one by one...
To me, Earl is a great sportsman who has to suffer many unjust situations but creates some on his own aswell. But when compairing Pool to Football, Soccer, Basketball or Hockey, the number of "intended fouls" is minimal.
In pool, everybody starts to blame the player, but when it happens in the other sports, everybody starts applauding the faulty players...
EARL... PLEASE GO ON MAKING ME WANT TO LOVE THE GAME MORE AND MORE EVERY DAY...
A true Earl "the Pearl" Strickland fan,
Tom Penrose
I agree with much of what you said, but for one thing: Earl has a huge amount of "rare" mistakes on his record
.What bothers me the most out of this, is that the telecast should never had allowed any of the players to be put in the position to make a "moral" choice. It is televised, just go to the tape and get the call correct. Matches that are taped by Accu-Stats can go to the the tape to get the call right. Why not use this technology when there's a lot of money riding on one shot in a made for TV event.
Earl looked like and #ss but he shouldn't have had the opportunity to do that to himself unless the production company wanted him to be the "bad" guy to help ratings. Who knows. I'm not a big fan of how Earl acts at the table, but I am a fan of his play.
Dave
Wow
Dude...I don't really think Earl should die of syphillis, that's just my colorful way of saying he's an a-hole. Also it's not just a game at that level and your ability to make the house payment could depend on calls like that.
Fleece3 said:
Dude...I don't really think Earl should die of syphillis, that's just my colorful way of saying he's an a-hole. Also it's not just a game at that level and your ability to make the house payment could depend on calls like that.
After Earl was inducted into the BCA Hall of Fame, Billiards Digest did a interview with him. Earl claims to be a purist who cares about the "integrity of the game." He knows his conduct isn't always good. It is hypocritical for him to say "I've always gone into a match with the intention of playing my best and giving my opponent the benefit of the doubt."
Earl certainly didn't give Charlie Williams the benefit of the doubt when Earl fouled and the referee didn't call it because he was in no position to see the foul. Earl only compounds his hypocrisy when he says "if the referee doesn't call it, then it's not a foul."
Earl certainly didn't give Charlie Williams the benefit of the doubt when Earl fouled and the referee didn't call it because he was in no position to see the foul. Earl only compounds his hypocrisy when he says "if the referee doesn't call it, then it's not a foul."
My only question is why didn't SS see the foul?
He only has one thing to do on that shot...WATCH & MAKE SURE THE 5 DOESN'T MOVE!!!
What a joke-- SS had 17 seconds to get into position to view the shot, and when he got there he positioned himself so he COULDN'T see the hit and then tried to look around Earl after the shot...LOL
That has got to be the worst I have ever seen on the ref's part.
Nice job Charlie, the $16.5 is that much sweeter.
I just saw Earl try to shark Efren in the Color of Money match, "are you gonna try that shot."
He needs to be hung by his thumbs.
What Earl does for the game... now I remember why sponsors stay away.
facets--
He only has one thing to do on that shot...WATCH & MAKE SURE THE 5 DOESN'T MOVE!!!
What a joke-- SS had 17 seconds to get into position to view the shot, and when he got there he positioned himself so he COULDN'T see the hit and then tried to look around Earl after the shot...LOL
That has got to be the worst I have ever seen on the ref's part.
Nice job Charlie, the $16.5 is that much sweeter.
I just saw Earl try to shark Efren in the Color of Money match, "are you gonna try that shot."
He needs to be hung by his thumbs.
What Earl does for the game... now I remember why sponsors stay away.
facets--
Beat to death
This topic has in my own opinion been beat to death. We all saw and know what happened. But i have to agree with what other people have said. Let me ask this question. This was for $16k or something to that effect. Would Charlie Williams have called the foul on himself? the answer is no and here is why i say that. As i have stated in other threads about this. Charlie Williams did the same exact thing to Ian Costello at classic billiards in Rochester NY. Charlie was shooting over a ball and accidently tapped the cue ball with the tip of his cue and just followed thru causing a double hit on the cue ball. C'mon, we have all done that at 1 time or another. But Charlie never called the foul on himself and Ian did not see it from his vantage point. later after Ian came back and beat Charlie, someone asked Charlie why he did not call the foul on himself, when atleast 5 people saw it, and he denied it ever happened. Well all i can say is that 5 people cannot be wrong. And no i am not bashing Charlie here. I gave that up years ago. But anyway. When shooting a shot for that much money and under those rules and circumstances. How many people can say that they would not do the same thing as Earl...remember. it was for 16 large..honestly, my self, i would have to think about it, but i would also hope that i would do the right thing and call the foul on myself. Earl is no saint. we all know that. But then again, how many of us on here are a saint...not me for darn sure...................mike
This topic has in my own opinion been beat to death. We all saw and know what happened. But i have to agree with what other people have said. Let me ask this question. This was for $16k or something to that effect. Would Charlie Williams have called the foul on himself? the answer is no and here is why i say that. As i have stated in other threads about this. Charlie Williams did the same exact thing to Ian Costello at classic billiards in Rochester NY. Charlie was shooting over a ball and accidently tapped the cue ball with the tip of his cue and just followed thru causing a double hit on the cue ball. C'mon, we have all done that at 1 time or another. But Charlie never called the foul on himself and Ian did not see it from his vantage point. later after Ian came back and beat Charlie, someone asked Charlie why he did not call the foul on himself, when atleast 5 people saw it, and he denied it ever happened. Well all i can say is that 5 people cannot be wrong. And no i am not bashing Charlie here. I gave that up years ago. But anyway. When shooting a shot for that much money and under those rules and circumstances. How many people can say that they would not do the same thing as Earl...remember. it was for 16 large..honestly, my self, i would have to think about it, but i would also hope that i would do the right thing and call the foul on myself. Earl is no saint. we all know that. But then again, how many of us on here are a saint...not me for darn sure...................mike
im sorry but if i had 16,500$$ riding on this one game, there is no way in hell i would call that on myself...... just my opinion, sorry if nobody likes it, its the truth. all pros make very little money considering that they are the best in the world and if i NEEDED the money i would never call that on myself.
There is always what we call Karma. If you are dishonest, everything will be taken away from you. Just like what happened to that game, Earl did not call the foul on him, so he lost the game. If he did call it and corrected the referee, it might come out different.
Let me start off by saying that I like Earl. I think that, overall, he is good for the game. He's entertaining and extremely talented. He is to pool what Phil Hellmuth is to poker.
But I do also have to point out that, in the recent Billiards Digest article about Earl, a big point made in the article is that Earl is always talking about preserving the integrity of the game. Such was his justification for being against the soft break and the jump cue. But for a guy who's talking about preserving the integrity of the game, it seems awful contradictory of him to do what he did to Charlie. I still like Earl, but this one is a little hard to swallow.
But I do also have to point out that, in the recent Billiards Digest article about Earl, a big point made in the article is that Earl is always talking about preserving the integrity of the game. Such was his justification for being against the soft break and the jump cue. But for a guy who's talking about preserving the integrity of the game, it seems awful contradictory of him to do what he did to Charlie. I still like Earl, but this one is a little hard to swallow.
cueball1950 said:
I've seen people NOT call the foul on themselves, with a whole lot less than $16,000 riding on it. I don't think I would have called it on myself. Or maybe I would have. I don't know, given the circumstances.
It's the referee's job to call fouls, not Earls. Why the heck would the referee be standing behind the shooter, with that much on the line. The zebra is who is to blame here, IMO.
We all know Earl... I wouldn't trust him to give me the correct time.
Earl was in the correct position, he was shooting! SS was useless where he was standing. How can you ref a shot when you are behind the player and can't see the contact... oops!
This really sucks for Charlie.
Oh wait, no it doesn't... it exposes Earl once again... and Charlie gets the money... CLASSIC!!!
Earl was in the correct position, he was shooting! SS was useless where he was standing. How can you ref a shot when you are behind the player and can't see the contact... oops!
This really sucks for Charlie.
Oh wait, no it doesn't... it exposes Earl once again... and Charlie gets the money... CLASSIC!!!
Attachments
Last edited:
H
hi-lighter
Guest
YIPPIE!!!!!!!!!!!!
Do you think DaytonaJoe would have called it on himself?
Do you think DaytonaJoe would have called it on himself?
pharaoh68
Banned
It seems like a helluva a lot of you think that what Earl did was justifiable and ok. You seem to think that if put in the same situation, you would do the same thing. And ya know what? Most of you are the same people who ***** that pool players make little or no money to begin with and that this game never seems to progress or gain mainstream popularity like poker and "sports".
To that, all I can say is, actions like this will forever be a blemish on the good name of this game. As it is, there is a long-standing, pre-conceived notion in the eyes of many that pool is a game for the lower-class. While in centuries past billiards may have been a gentleman's game, pool today is often depicted as a swindler's game played in seedy rooms amongst a surly crowd. And why? Because of instances when one of the very best in the game cheats in front of a television audience of hundreds of thousands.
Now I've never played for $16,000 but I've played for sums in excess of a thousand and I have called fouls on myself that my opponent didn't even see because winning by cheating is not winning at all. Had it been me, I would have been the first to pop up (before Charlie) and admit that I clipped the 5 ball. And all of you who answered that you would have done just what Earl did should never complain about poor payouts at tournaments and lack of exposure for the game because its all related. The game gets a degree of exposure and when it does, its shown in a bad light (frequently by Earl) who is one of the games ambassadors as he is one of the best. Other pros start fights. Some bark threats. The result? People are leary about hosting tourneys and airing them on tv.
To that, all I can say is, actions like this will forever be a blemish on the good name of this game. As it is, there is a long-standing, pre-conceived notion in the eyes of many that pool is a game for the lower-class. While in centuries past billiards may have been a gentleman's game, pool today is often depicted as a swindler's game played in seedy rooms amongst a surly crowd. And why? Because of instances when one of the very best in the game cheats in front of a television audience of hundreds of thousands.
Now I've never played for $16,000 but I've played for sums in excess of a thousand and I have called fouls on myself that my opponent didn't even see because winning by cheating is not winning at all. Had it been me, I would have been the first to pop up (before Charlie) and admit that I clipped the 5 ball. And all of you who answered that you would have done just what Earl did should never complain about poor payouts at tournaments and lack of exposure for the game because its all related. The game gets a degree of exposure and when it does, its shown in a bad light (frequently by Earl) who is one of the games ambassadors as he is one of the best. Other pros start fights. Some bark threats. The result? People are leary about hosting tourneys and airing them on tv.