Ok I agree generally that there should be fouls on all balls. The reason I do is because is just eliminates all discussion on the topic. If you touch a ball its a foul period, end of problem. If you don't have that then you have lots of weird things that can come into play. Like I touched the ball and now it is potentially in a way of a run out for my opponent if I missed, and then I missed and he said I did it on purpose ( welll you get the idea how long these arguments and nuances could go on). However calling fouls on yourself is another matter entirely. Now I understand different sports have different cultures. What I mean is that certain things are ok in one sport that are not ok in another. I.e. can you imagine derek jeter after making a great play doing a celebration dance? Or the fact that basketball players are made to be street thugs if they fight, but in hockey it is just part of the game. Ok so with that perspective in mind. (And as much as I despise Earl Strickland) I think his skins match vs. Williams is an interesting case in point. Because strickland was vilified for not calling the foul on himself because scott smith (does anyone else think he looks like a 70's porn star?) didnt see it. But why should Earl call a foul on himself. In every other professional sport we applaud out athletes for getting away with a foul, taking a flop( in basketball), selling a tag (in baseball), or getting away with a hold (in football). So why in the heck shouldnt pool players be afforded the same chance to get away with a mistake that the "ref" didn't see. Oh and dont give me that because pool is a gentlemans game, or because pool is held to a higher standard. Because when (in Earls case) 20k is on the line all is fair in love and sports.
Last edited:
