Hatch Takes down Robles 9-6 but wait.... There's more...
- Thread starter RunoutJJ
- Start date
BigBrother
Registered
It has always given me great pleasure to say that i know Tony Robles.
Match play with Tony is a Good Time....
RunoutJJ,
I don't think the lack of posts means people don't care about sportsmanship and classy players with integrity. I think it's simply that conversations where all have the same opinion don't tend to last long. The longer threads generally have opposing opinions, or have de-railed. Do we need 18 pages of "I agree" or "Way to go Tony"?
Sometimes people read threads, agree with the concept, and move on. Unless they have something to add due to a personal connection with Tony, they'll usually die within a couple pages. Same as congratulating a winner of a big tourney.
Just my thoughts.
Untrustworthy people don't trust anybody.
Dennis Hatch would have done the same for Tony.
I really get what your saying 100%.There will be pages and pages on debating
the honor system and moral ethics and when someone clearly does the right
thing,not much is said.
I'm really beginning to think that this site is about guys playing devils advocate
to stir debate.When something is so clear cut as this is,there is no arguement
or drama,which I guess is less entertaining for the guys that want to debate.
Good for Tony for being a truly honest and ethical pool player.Wow does that sound
weird!:wink:
Tony Robles.........!!!
Tony Robles is ''The True Ambassador of Pool''......!!!!
Alan Ende........
Tony Robles is ''The True Ambassador of Pool''......!!!!
Alan Ende........
I took some heat because I was part of the group that said I wouldn't call a foul on myself. I won't deny it when you call it and I fouled... But it's your job to pay attention to the game. On the other side I would NEVER take a called foul when I know there wasn't any. Even if I was unsure I would still give ball in hand to my opponent before excepting an undeserving ball in hand. good job tony!
I'm in agreement with you, and will probably catch some flak as well. To me, calling a foul on yourself is not a black/white discussion, although it probably should be.
If I get down on the cueball and accidentally touch it, I'll tell my opponent and give him ball in hand. If I have to kick at a ball and make a hit, but something doesn't touch a rail after contact, I may or may not point it out. A lot of my attitude has to do more with who my opponent is.
I also wouldn't take BIH if the ref was CLEARLY wrong. If it was an interpretation type shot, that's another story.
Gunga Din
First: Tony Robles is everything everyone has said about him; the epitome of class.
I don't want to change the dynamics of this thread because Tony deserves all of the praise showered on him, but if I am reading this correctly, Tony didn't see the shot because the referee was in the way of the shot as far as Tony was concerned. It appears that Tony simply took Dennis Hatch at his word that it was a legal shot and then said "no foul".
That is a bit more than simply seeing a referee call a foul and disagreeing with it. It means that you are taking your opponent's word that the shot was not a foul, over a referee.
I wish Tony would come on here and confirm that he did not see the shot or that he did indeed see the shot.
I have to be honest, I don't think I would override the call that a referee made if I did not see the shot.
If Tony didn't see the shot I'm going to call Tony, "Gunga Din" from now on. For those of you who have never read the poem by Rudyard Kipling you can read it by clicking here. The poem has overt racial prejudices mixed with self-reflection. But the bottom line is the soldier in the poem concedes, laments and praises Gunga Din, a lowly water-carrier for the troops, a slave by all practical standards (although this isn't specifically stated) in spite of being treated like a slave, that in reality, Gunga Din is a better man than the soldier, and the says so by saying, "You're a better man than I am, Gunga Din!" It might even be where the term, "carry the water" came from.
To get the whole meaning you need to read the poem.
JoeyA
First: Tony Robles is everything everyone has said about him; the epitome of class.
I don't want to change the dynamics of this thread because Tony deserves all of the praise showered on him, but if I am reading this correctly, Tony didn't see the shot because the referee was in the way of the shot as far as Tony was concerned. It appears that Tony simply took Dennis Hatch at his word that it was a legal shot and then said "no foul".
That is a bit more than simply seeing a referee call a foul and disagreeing with it. It means that you are taking your opponent's word that the shot was not a foul, over a referee.
I wish Tony would come on here and confirm that he did not see the shot or that he did indeed see the shot.
I have to be honest, I don't think I would override the call that a referee made if I did not see the shot.
If Tony didn't see the shot I'm going to call Tony, "Gunga Din" from now on. For those of you who have never read the poem by Rudyard Kipling you can read it by clicking here. The poem has overt racial prejudices mixed with self-reflection. But the bottom line is the soldier in the poem concedes, laments and praises Gunga Din, a lowly water-carrier for the troops, a slave by all practical standards (although this isn't specifically stated) in spite of being treated like a slave, that in reality, Gunga Din is a better man than the soldier, and the says so by saying, "You're a better man than I am, Gunga Din!" It might even be where the term, "carry the water" came from.
To get the whole meaning you need to read the poem.
JoeyA