How would you rule in this situation?

[av84fun]

I can sight mine. because I have this extreme infatuation towards you and cant seem to get over it ! I'll come home imagining about you and probably have some wet dreams about you.


oh by the way, I'm just messing with yah !

Not a problem. Always useful to hone my already legendary debating skills!

(-;

 

[Cuebacca]

First, as I have stated, you and I would do the same thing by calling fouls on ourselves...possibly for different reasons but the end result would be the same.

But I object to the assumption that "sportsmanship" requires anything other than adherence to the rules of the sport being played. There is NO RULE requiring self-called fouls.

If someone doesn't call a foul on themselves, I would not necessarily label that an act of unsportsmanlike conduct, or poor sportsmanship. If it were, then catching someone in the act would have some sort of special consequences appropriate for unsportsmanlike conduct. Not calling the foul on oneself, I could concede that that's neutral sportsmanship in cases where the opponent had an equal opportunity to detect the foul as the shooter did.

However, if someone does call a foul on himself, that is an act of good sportsmanship. Plain and simple. If you fail to exhibit an act of good sportsmanship, is it necessarily poor sportsmanship? No, not necessarily. But I disagree if you say that calling a foul on yourself is not good sportsmanship.

If your sensibilities lead you to think there should be such a rule, then you should write the BCA and the WPA and express your views.

If I felt that having a written rule stating that players are supposed to call fouls on themselves would actually make more people do that, then I would consider writing to the WPA. The problem is, there's not really any practical punishment for failing to do it. So, IMO, if someone got caught in not calling a foul on himself, all he has to do is say, "oh, I didn't realize I fouled, sorry".

I don't think you a written rule is necessary to know that it's good sportsmanship to call fouls on yourself. If I tapped the cueball, the punishment is ball in hand. If my opponent isn't getting ball in hand, then the rules aren't playing out the way they are written. I then tell him it's ball in hand, so that the rules play out the way they are written. The only reason, IMO, why we should have to call a ref over is for shots where the shooter and the opponent might genuinely disagree on whether or not there was a foul.

But by attempting to impose a PERSONAL definition that sportsmanship in in pool requires self-called fouls, you are at the same time condemning virtually every other competitor in almost all other sports as being unsportsmanlike which is a gross abuse of logic and is quite insulting to revered sports champions.

Hey now, I am only exhibiting a minor abuse of logic at the worst. And I think the revered sports champions will get over it.

Seriously though, Jim, I don't think you are comparing apples to apples here. You cannot make a fair comparison between a self-refereed pool match with option to call over a tournament director who in many cases is just volunteering or is being paid a small fee, with a wealthy sport like American football, which has well-paid professional referees. If you want to talk of pool matches with well-paid, well-trained refs, then I won't argue with you, but this isn't what I'm talking about.

As I have asked others, what sports can you name that require self-called fouls and since you cannot name many, why do you think that pool players should be held to a higher standard of sportsmanship than the players in nearly all other major and minor sports?

Even in straight pool where INTENTIONAL fouls are commonplace, can you cite from your own personal knowledge, any instance where, after an intentional foul, if that player's score was not reduced by 1 point, that the player voluntarily announced that fact and saw to it that the score was corrected?

And please note that the WSRs re: 14.1 also provide that if play continues after a foul, it is deemed not to have occurred and therefore, no point could be properly be deducted for an intentional foul if a subsequent shot took place.

Bottom line, if you don't like the rules...which is your right...I suiggest that you work to get the rules changed and think it is unfortunate to condemn others for being poor sportsmen who obey the rules...as they are...to the letter and behave in no less a sportsmanlike fashion the virtually all other sportsmen.

Respectfully,
Jim

Well, both sides could write to the rules committee, not just me. I mean, where in the rules does it say something to the effect of, "a player should not feel responsible to call a foul on himself. If you foul, you should act like you didn't do anything unless and until your opponent calls you on it."?

Cheers,
Cuebacca

 

[BRKNRUN]

I know that this is picking on only 1 part, but Golf is sport and penalties are "self imposed" in many cases.

Although Pool is not Golf (or any other sport for that matter) it does lend itself to situations that players need to "self impose" penalties.

Loss of game is one of them.....(if your opponent is distracted)

All I know for sure is that I would never play Golf for money against the origonal poster of this thread.......I unfortunatley have played Golf against people like him...it is funny....they NEVER lose a ball... They always seem to find it...and wouldn't you know...it is a perfect lie as well.....

 

[av84fun]

As far as my self imposed moral standards, I just want to be the type of man that my father and mother are proud to call "son", the type of man my kids would be proud to call "father", the type of man my wife would be proud to call "husband" and the type of man that some would be proud to call "friend".

I would just like to see our sport to be seen in a little better light.
Are you not tired of hearing "Oh, so your a pool hustler/shark" most every time you tell someone that you play. Those terms are generally used to describe a person who is devious and deceitful see here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hustling

If you tell someone that you play any other sport at a highly completive level, you are not immediately labeled to be a person who is probably a cheater. Well maybe poker.

I have never heard
"I play AAA baseball."
"Oh, so your a baseball shark."

Jimbo

I am not imposing my morals on the other person, but I am judging them based on my morals.

Judge not...lest ye be judged.

There is not a rule that requires self-calling shots, never said there was. I say that it is immoral for the same reason some say it is ok, it is just the way I was raised.

I don't know of anyone who stated that not calling self-fouls is ok because that is the way they were raised. I was raised to believe that you are supposed to play by the rules.

No sport requires self-called fouls. I don't care if pool players are held to a higher standard, I just hold myself to a higher standard.

Not true. You are judging others for what you consider immoral conduct. And in doing so, you heap praise on your parents for raising you right while at the same time implying that those who disagree with YOUR VERSION of morality were not raised right.

You have admitted that there are no self-called fouls in other sports and therefore, applying your standards, you suggest that all participants in major sports are immoral.

And since those sports are loved and viewed with great interest by the vast majority of the American public, you suggest that about everyone in America condones immorality.

Being "holier than thou" is a troublesome characteristic in my personal opinion.

The reason that you and I BOTH would call a foul on ourselves is telling. I do so because I personally choose to win...if I win...based SOLELY on having outplayed the opponent.

You call fouls on yourself on "moral" grounds.

Whatever.

Jim

 

[av84fun]

I know that this is picking on only 1 part, but Golf is sport and penalties are "self imposed" in many cases.

Although Pool is not Golf (or any other sport for that matter) it does lend itself to situations that players need to "self impose" penalties.

Loss of game is one of them.....(if your opponent is distracted)

All I know for sure is that I would never play Golf for money against the origonal poster of this thread.......I unfortunatley have played Golf against people like him...it is funny....they NEVER lose a ball... They always seem to find it...and wouldn't you know...it is a perfect lie as well.....

He can speak for himself but I think that is an utterly unfair position.

You said it yourself. Golf is golf and pool is pool. In golf, it is often impossible to perform the DUTY imposed upon pool players to monitor the opponent's play in the absence of a ref.

You have NO IDEA whether he would call fouls on himself in GOLF. Why don't you ask him if he would or wouldn't before you LEAP to judgment?

Jim

 

[jbullerjr]

Judge not...lest ye be judged.I am judged as are we all, based on the way we live our lives.




I don't know of anyone who stated that not calling self-fouls is ok because that is the way they were raised. I was raised to believe that you are supposed to play by the rules.So as long as there is no direct violation of the written rule, it is never wrong?



Not true. You are judging others for what you consider immoral conduct. And in doing so, you heap praise on your parents for raising you right while at the same time implying that those who disagree with YOUR VERSION of morality were not raised right.I am sorry, I should not have stated it that way. Some people have low moral standards regardless of how they were raised.

You have admitted that there are no self-called fouls in other sports and therefore, applying your standards, you suggest that all participants in major sports are immoral.

And since those sports are loved and viewed with great interest by the vast majority of the American public, you suggest that about everyone in America condones immorality.If "the majority of the American public choses to love and view with great interest" sports where a certain amount of rule bending is acceptable, I believe we are teaching future generations a very poor lesson.

Being "holier than thou" is a troublesome characteristic in my personal opinion.It is not my intent to come off this way.

The reason that you and I BOTH would call a foul on ourselves is telling. I do so because I personally choose to win...if I win...based SOLELY on having outplayed the opponent.

You call fouls on yourself on "moral" grounds.I disagree, it is not a rule that you have to self-call fouls. Since you play strictly by the rules, would you call the foul on your self?
And I have stated earlier, I only want to win because I out played my opponent, not because he missed a foul I committed.

Whatever.

Jim

Also, I addressed why I think it would help pools image to be held to higher standards. What are your thoughts on what I posted?

Jimbo

 

[poolfire]

i think

I was playing league last night (unsanctioned VNEA) and a guy on our team scratched on the 8 (rules say it's a loss). His opponent walked up, took BIH and missed leaving my teammate a short, straight shot on the 8 which he made.

Then the opponent realized what had happened, and tried to say that he won..blah blah blah. But my teammate argued that since he kept shooting, it wasn't a loss.

We called the league director, he decided in our favor which kinda suprised me. The opponent was furious, but he and I have history so I thought it was quite entertaining.

All Biased opinions of the players aside, I'm not sure how I would rule this. My thoughts are that the opponent should know the rules and it's his loss if he doesn't.


What do you guys think?

if you want to be a Asshole that wants to win no matter what, then you did the right thing. If you can't play by the rules, then dont play. You knew that it was a loss, you should have told him regardless. Have some integrity

 

[kobyp]

No, I'm through discussing this topic. It would be more productive talking to a brick wall.

 

[jbullerjr]

By the way, this is a fun debate Jim. Ready to swap sides.

Jimbo

 

[av84fun]

If someone doesn't call a foul on themselves, I would not necessarily label that an act of unsportsmanlike conduct, or poor sportsmanship. If it were, then catching someone in the act would have some sort of special consequences appropriate for unsportsmanlike conduct. Not calling the foul on oneself, I could concede that that's neutral sportsmanship in cases where the opponent had an equal opportunity to detect the foul as the shooter did.

However, if someone does call a foul on himself, that is an act of good sportsmanship. Plain and simple. If you fail to exhibit an act of good sportsmanship, is it necessarily poor sportsmanship? No, not necessarily. But I disagree if you say that calling a foul on yourself is not good sportsmanship.

Please don't disagree with positions that I have not taken! (-:


If I felt that having a written rule stating that players are supposed to call fouls on themselves would actually make more people do that, then I would consider writing to the WPA. The problem is, there's not really any practical punishment for failing to do it. So, IMO, if someone got caught in not calling a foul on himself, all he has to do is say, "oh, I didn't realize I fouled, sorry".

Well AT LEAST having such a rule would justify complaining about a failure to self-call. As it is now, there is a debate on both sides of the issue which suggests a shortcoming in the rules.

I don't think you a written rule is necessary to know that it's good sportsmanship to call fouls on yourself. If I tapped the cueball, the punishment is ball in hand. If my opponent isn't getting ball in hand, then the rules aren't playing out the way they are written. I then tell him it's ball in hand, so that the rules play out the way they are written. The only reason, IMO, why we should have to call a ref over is for shots where the shooter and the opponent might genuinely disagree on whether or not there was a foul.



Hey now, I am only exhibiting a minor abuse of logic at the worst. And I think the revered sports champions will get over it.

Seriously though, Jim, I don't think you are comparing apples to apples here. You cannot make a fair comparison between a self-refereed pool match with option to call over a tournament director who in many cases is just volunteering or is being paid a small fee, with a wealthy sport like American football, which has well-paid professional referees. If you want to talk of pool matches with well-paid, well-trained refs, then I won't argue with you, but this isn't what I'm talking about.

The wealth of the sport and the professionalism of the refs isn't the issue. The issue is whether a player is required by RULE to self-call fouls and whether a failure to do so is immoral or unsportsmanlike.

Clearly, it is NOT a rule violation so that leaves us with the sportsmanship issue and that is where the slope gets VERY slippery. Sportsmanship is a loosely defined term in the first place and has WIDELY varying standards from one sport to the other.

Where is the sportsman line drawn in Ultimate Fighting...not sticking your finger 3 inches into the opponent's eyeball?

So, we look to all other sports to discern what the AGGREGATE thinking is. So, we are not comparing apples to apples but apples compared to ALL OTHER FRUIT in the basket. And that is the RIGHT thing to do.

The AGGREGATE shows very clearly that not self-calling fouls is perfectly sportsmanlike. Therefore, making it unsportsmanlike in pool DEMANDS A REASON why pool should be held to a higher standard than the aggregate and so far, no one has offered any cogent reason for such a higher standard.

The RULES empower a player to call a foul on his opponent but do not provide for self-calling of fouls.

Please explain to me how someone could be in full complaince with the rules and still be unsportsmanlike.


Well, both sides could write to the rules committee, not just me. I mean, where in the rules does it say something to the effect of, "a player should not feel responsible to call a foul on himself. If you foul, you should act like you didn't do anything unless and until your opponent calls you on it."?

Cheers,Cuebacca

C'mon. Now you are arguing for the sake of arguing.

Jim

 

[av84fun]

By the way, this is a fun debate Jim. Ready to swap sides.

Jimbo

Sure...how's this...The WSR's prohibit unsportsmanlike conduct. While it lists SOME examples of what that means, the wording of that section does not suggest that the list is all-inclusive and it leaves punishment for such conduct primarily in the discretion of event officials.

Knowingly fouling and remaining silent can, in the judgment of any given official, be deemed unsportsmanlike and a penalty can be imposed by the official if he/she chooses.

How am I doin'??

(-:

 

[jbullerjr]

Therefore, making it unsportsmanlike in pool DEMANDS A REASON why pool should be held to a higher standard than the aggregate and so far, no one has offered any cogent reason for such a higher standard. Jim

Jim, I offered up an opinion why it might help our sport to hold ourselves to higher standards. What do you think?

jimbo

 

[jbullerjr]

Sure...how's this...The WSR's prohibit unsportsmanlike conduct. While it lists SOME examples of what that means, the wording of that section does not suggest that the list is all-inclusive and it leaves punishment for such conduct primarily in the discretion of event officials.

Knowingly fouling and remaining silent can, in the judgment of any given official, be deemed unsportsmanlike and a penalty can be imposed by the official if he/she chooses.

How am I doin'??

(-:

Jim,
What organization uses the WSR rule set.

Jimbo

 

[Cuebacca]

Please explain to me how someone could be in full complaince with the rules and still be unsportsmanlike.

I already went over that in my last post. You said,

Please don't disagree with positions that I have not taken! (-:

So we agree. Failure to be sportsmanlike in a certain situation does not necessarily make you unsportsmanlike. I don't want to elaborate because I'd be beating a dead horse.

we are not comparing apples to apples but apples compared to ALL OTHER FRUIT in the basket. And that is the RIGHT thing to do.

No, the right thing to do is make a fair comparison. The analogy of amateur pool to professional football, baseball, basketball, etc., only goes so far. There is no dedicated, well-paid, well-trained referee in amateur pool.

C'mon. Now you are arguing for the sake of arguing.

Jim

Speak for yourself, sir.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

...where in the rules does it say something to the effect of, "a player should not feel responsible to call a foul on himself. If you foul, you should act like you didn't do anything unless and until your opponent calls you on it."

Of course the rules don't say this or anything like it - all these "literal interpretation" arguments are just grasping at loopholes. The rules don't say you must call fouls on yourself, but that doesn't relieve the shooter of the moral obligation to do so, it simply gives the opponent the right to do so if the shooter innocently overlooks the foul (or is morally challenged).

pj
chgo

 

[Cuebacca]

Sure...how's this...The WSR's prohibit unsportsmanlike conduct. While it lists SOME examples of what that means, the wording of that section does not suggest that the list is all-inclusive and it leaves punishment for such conduct primarily in the discretion of event officials.

Knowingly fouling and remaining silent can, in the judgment of any given official, be deemed unsportsmanlike and a penalty can be imposed by the official if he/she chooses.

How am I doin'??

(-:

Pretty good post right there.

 

[Cuebacca]

Of course the rules don't say this or anything like it - all these "literal interpretation" arguments are just grasping at loopholes.

pj
chgo

This deserves some taps. (TAP TAP TAP! ) There is such a thing as the "spirit of the law".

I do agree, though, that loopholes should be closed when they are discovered.

Can anyone here state with authority what the writers of the rules intended? I don't think av84fun has such authority, nor do I. Bob J. certainly does, and maybe a very small handful of other posters on this board.

 

[mbvl]

And besides, what if the opponent has been a total JERK during the match. Sharked you repeatedly. Said every great shot you made was lucky etc. Does YOUR version of sportsmanship require shaking that person's hand??? GIMME A BREAK!

Jim

I think you are finally beginning to see the light. Your opponent did not do anything that was against the rules, but he was a "total jerk". Think about that and you will begin to understand where sportsmanship comes in. Calling fouls on yourself is one of the things you could do to avoid being a total jerk.

Mark

 

[RunoutalloverU]

I think you are finally beginning to see the light. Your opponent did not do anything that was against the rules, but he was a "total jerk". Think about that and you will begin to understand where sportsmanship comes in. Calling fouls on yourself is one of the things you could do to avoid being a total jerk.

Mark

Not doing something (calling fouls on yourself) and proactively doing something to distract, be obnoxious, or otherwise act inappropriately are two different things. This distinction should not be overlooked.

 

[Patrick Johnson]

mbvl:
I think you are finally beginning to see the light. Your opponent did not do anything that was against the rules, but he was a "total jerk". Think about that and you will begin to understand where sportsmanship comes in. Calling fouls on yourself is one of the things you could do to avoid being a total jerk.

RunoutalloverU:
Not doing something (calling fouls on yourself) and proactively doing something to distract, be obnoxious, or otherwise act inappropriately are two different things. This distinction should not be overlooked.

This is grasping at straws. There's no real distinction - they're both skirting the spirit and intent of the rules to gain an unearned advantage.

Personally, I get no satisfaction from winning by either means and don't want to play somebody who does.

pj
chgo