Jasmin Suspended

[tucson9ball]

30 Days!!!!

First they let Elbowby slide on roughing up the competition, now they punish Jasmin for trying to break the glass ceiling of women's pool, if you will. It's a little bassackwards, I say.

And how do you explain this:

This suspension concerns the tournament in Florida which starts tomorrow and the first event in the new season.

[...]

The current decision is not yet legal, since Jasmin Ouschan used her right to appeal.

A final decision should be available in the next 30 days.​

Sooooo, are there 30 days left until tomorrow?

I will watch for the Florida event... so I can remove it from my DVR recording schedule. If anyone more eloquent than I wants to organize a letter to the WPBA, I will gladly sign and boycott the viewing of those two tournaments. In MHO, this is BS. :duck:

So......if Jasmin wins her appeal do we have to reschedule the Florida tournament this weekend? Even if she wins the appeal she can't get points from the tournament. Somebody really dropped the ball on this subject in my opinion.

 

[Johnnyt]

So......if Jasmin wins her appeal do we have to reschedule the Florida tournament this weekend? Even if she wins the appeal she can't get points from the tournament. Somebody really dropped the ball on this subject in my opinion.

If she wins the appeal they should avg out the points and money for all the tournaments she entered with the WPBA this year and give her that. Johnnyt

 

[sjm]

Assuming JO broke the rule and missed a WPBA event because the WPBA contract says she should attend all WPBA events... the punishment is to

Not play in TWO events? isn't this a bit confusing?

So she miss one event.. fine her. Don't punish the next two events... that is just plain idiotic IMO.

You have misread the situation, Tom. It is not a breach of the WPBA contract to miss a WPBA event. Action has been taken against Jasmin because she played in a non-WPBA event for which she did not have a waiver, and that's in breach of the WPBA rules.

The real penalties for missing one or more WPBA events are a) potential loss of one's WPBA touring pro status, and b) a decline in ranking, which results in less advantageous seeding and a harder path to high finishes in WPBA events. Each of these penalties reduces earnings prospects.

My guess is that the appeal is intended to reduce, not eliminate, the penalty.

 

[Bob Jewett]

... Action has been taken against Jasmin because she played in a non-WPBA event for which she did not have a waiver, and that's in breach of the WPBA rules. ...

Um, well, maybe, but if the WPBA does not recognize a WPA World Championship as fundamentally having priority over WPBA events, then the WPBA should not expect to be recognized in any way by the WPA or it's affiliated confederations or federations. Of course such a situation would be a disaster, so we all should hope that it doesn't happen.

 

[chevybob20]

Now I can save $30.00 on the PPV this week...

TAP, TAP, TAP

 

[Tom In Cincy]

Where ever you get your information please share,

In Jasmin's own words

"The Austrian Jasmin Ouschan, Winner of the WPBA Tour stop in North Carolina, was suspended for two tournaments by the WPBA Board (Women?s Professional Billiard Association). This suspension concerns the tournament in Florida which starts tomorrow and the first event in the new season. The reason for this suspension is, due to WPBA Boards statement, Jasmin Ouschans participation in the 10 Ball World Championship in Manila which was on the same date as the WPBA event in Oregon."

She didn't play in a scheduled event and will is suspended for two tournaments, One this weekend and the 1st event of the new season.

Which part did I misread?

You have misread the situation, Tom. It is not a breach of the WPBA contract to miss a WPBA event. Action has been taken against Jasmin because she played in a non-WPBA event for which she did not have a waiver, and that's in breach of the WPBA rules.

The real penalties for missing one or more WPBA events are a) potential loss of one's WPBA touring pro status, and b) a decline in ranking, which results in less advantageous seeding and a harder path to high finishes in WPBA events. Each of these penalties reduces earnings prospects.

My guess is that the appeal is intended to reduce, not eliminate, the penalty.

 

[sjm]

Um, well, maybe, but if the WPBA does not recognize a WPA World Championship as fundamentally having priority over WPBA events, then the WPBA should not expect to be recognized in any way by the WPA or it's affiliated confederations or federations. Of course such a situation would be a disaster, so we all should hope that it doesn't happen.

Sorry, Bob, but we're not on the same page here.

Since when has the WPA cared a lick about female participation in its premier, male dominated, world championship events? Perhaps Jasmin's recent success in the World 14.1 Championships and the World Ten Ball Championships will cause them to reconsider their position, but I doubt they care much abut this issue.

The WPBA players themselves are the authors of the WPBA Player Contract that bars participation in non-WPBA torunaments without waiver. If the WPBA Board and/or its players wish to have modifications made to the WPBA Player contract to permit participation in all WPA World Championship events without waiver, such changes can be proposed and considered democratically by the WPBA membership. I leave the matter in the capable hands of the WPBA Board and its membership.

 

[9 ball]

This whole situation reminds me of what happened in the world of darts 15 years ago when 16 top players broke away to play in their own tournaments because the organisation they were with refused to promote the game further with more tournaments because the 2 they had on tv was enough because they created enough exposure on their own, the 16 players took the British Darts Organisation to court of restraint of trade an won.

What jasmine is going through is a restraint of trade and she should be allowed to play in which ever enents she chooses whether they are a world event or not, but lest we forget 2 things:

1. She competed at the 2007 world pool masters and nothing was said i.e no ban was handed down and that is a WPA recognised event.

2. The WPBA may be the organisation in which the women play but they are not the governing body the WPA is and as it was a WPA sanctioned event she participated in then it should be up to them and not the wpba whether a ban should be handed down to Ms Ouschan.

 

[juegabillar]

I'm with Bob on this one.

Sorry, Bob, but we're not on the same page here.

Since when has the WPA cared a lick about female participation in its premier, male dominated, world championship events? Perhaps Jasmin's recent success in the World 14.1 Championships and the World Ten Ball Championships will cause them to reconsider their position, but I doubt they care much abut this issue.

The WPBA players themselves are the authors of the WPBA Player Contract that bars participation in non-WPBA torunaments without waiver. If the WPBA Board and/or its players wish to have modifications made to the WPBA Player contract to permit participation in all WPA World Championship events without waiver, such changes can be proposed and considered democratically by the WPBA membership. I leave the matter in the capable hands of the WPBA Board and its membership.

I'm with Bob Jewit on this one. I cannot understand the WPBA position on banning Jasmin from the next two events. One which is the Final event and the other the beginning of next year's.

According to Jasmin's own words.....

"Of course I am surprised about the decision and disappointed but I also have to understand the WPBA who wants to protect their tour. But I made my decision in time and announced it according to their rules. As a sportswoman I stand up to my decision that I chose to play in a World Championship, which was sanctioned by the World Pool Association (WPA) the only institution in our sport which has also the WPBA as a member. I think it was the right decision since a World Championship is one of the highest event in sport. That these two events were conflicting is not my fault but now I am the one who has to pay for it.?

The WPA is the World Governing Body of Pool. I would say it has precedent over the WPBA's event. Jasmin has said she announced it according to the rules. The WPBA is saying that their events are above all other events.

OK. so lets say that Jasmin made a mistake and played without written authorization from WPBA. Shouldn't they consider that Jasmin was a true representative of the WPBA at the World Event?; and that her presence enhanced the WPBA organization for the World to see?

Jasmin already knew that by playing in the World Event she was risking some points in the WPBA ranking. She problably thought she could place good in the last WPBA event and still maintain a good ranking. Plus in the new season, she had a good opportunity to start up there with the elite WPBA players, and who knows, maybe obtain the number 1 ranking.

The 2 event suspension, quashes her chances at this year's ranking, and next years ranking. This must have been taken into consideration by the WPBA Board. They should have known how it affected Jasmin, this year and the next.

Now the big question here is:

Could it be possible that there was a "conflict of interest" with the WPBA decision or was it a true, unbiased, un-prejudicial, justified decision?

Right now, it seems that there is an "appearance of a conflict of interest" although we only know one side of the story.

We would have to know, whom is on the Board, and what is the current ranking of those on the board, plus, we would have to figure out how the suspension benefits those on the board, the other players, and how it affects Jasmin. In my opinion, someone on the board had to ask themselves some of these questions before making the decision. In addition, the decision has been "sugar coated" with giving Jasmin an opportunity to appeal the decision, but the fact is that she is not playing this weekend.

The only thing that could happen is that she be given the opportunity to participate in the start of the next season, and maybe, just maybe, Jasmin will believe that "some justice" has been served.

 

[sjm]

Where ever you get your information please share,

In Jasmin's own words

"The Austrian Jasmin Ouschan, Winner of the WPBA Tour stop in North Carolina, was suspended for two tournaments by the WPBA Board (Women?s Professional Billiard Association). This suspension concerns the tournament in Florida which starts tomorrow and the first event in the new season. The reason for this suspension is, due to WPBA Boards statement, Jasmin Ouschans participation in the 10 Ball World Championship in Manila which was on the same date as the WPBA event in Oregon."

She didn't play in a scheduled event and will is suspended for two tournaments, One this weekend and the 1st event of the new season.

Which part did I misread?

With due respect, Tom, I have very intricate knowledge of the WPBA Contract
that the players sign and am very scholarly in the matter of WPBA policies. The infraction was participating in the WTBC without a waiver. The severity of the infraction is increased by the fact that it coincided with a WPBA event, and I'm sure this is why the penalty imposed was so severe.

 

[Tom In Cincy]

According to Jasmin's own words, she followed the rules for the waiver.
Jasmin also quoted the WPBA;

Quoted from her statement;
"The reason for this suspension is, due to WPBA Boards statement, Jasmin Ouschans participation in the 10 Ball World Championship in Manila which was on the same date as the WPBA event in Oregon."

So Jasmin didn't get the waiver and then played in an event that conflicted with a WPBA event.. Thus the severe penalty.

She missed one WPBA event, got suspended from 2 other events. Wow.. that really make sense. If the WPBA is concerned about their players committing to play in the 8 yearly events why the 2 event suspention? Does the WPBA really think this makes them a STRONG Board? Sending out a STONG message? Or is this for the Sponsers to know that the WPBA means business?

I still must be missing something here, please be kind enough to let us all know my short commings for this unfortunate insidence.

With due respect, Tom, I have very intricate knowledge of the WPBA Contract that the players sign and am very scholarly in the matter of WPBA policies. The infraction was participating in the WTBC without a waiver. The severity of the infraction is increased by the fact that it coincided with a WPBA event, and I'm sure this is why the penalty imposed was so severe.

 

[JB Cases]

Um, well, maybe, but if the WPBA does not recognize a WPA World Championship as fundamentally having priority over WPBA events, then the WPBA should not expect to be recognized in any way by the WPA or it's affiliated confederations or federations. Of course such a situation would be a disaster, so we all should hope that it doesn't happen.

I don't see a WPA sanctioned World Championship as having a higher priority. Was the WPBA granted slots in the WTBC? Were more players invited?

If the WPA wants international tournaments that it sanctions to have the highest priority then it should work that out with it's members. Why didn't the WPA resolve the scheduling conflict so that more top women could have played in both events with no conflict?

The WPA and the WPBA are two fundamentally different groups however. The WPA is an governing body for the game of pool without any real power. The WPBA is professional organisation with a lot of power of the course of most women professional pool player's careers.

I am sure that the WPBA recognizes the prestige of a "World Championship" title. However part of the WPA mandate is to resolve scheduling conflicts and they should do that on behalf of the body that represents the majority of professional women pool players in the world, the WPBA.

 

[TXsouthpaw]

If she did inform them as she said in her statement. Then the wpba is wrong for the suspension, especially since theyre suspending her for a tourney NEXT season. Thus making it hard for her to move up in the standings. They never did anything to sarah ellerbow for her inicdent but they penalize jasmine probably the tours biggest draw. Doesnt make any sense. I guess they just enforce the rules they want to enforce.

 

[JB Cases]

I'm with Bob Jewit on this one. I cannot understand the WPBA position on banning Jasmin from the next two events. One which is the Final event and the other the beginning of next year's.

According to Jasmin's own words.....

"Of course I am surprised about the decision and disappointed but I also have to understand the WPBA who wants to protect their tour. But I made my decision in time and announced it according to their rules. As a sportswoman I stand up to my decision that I chose to play in a World Championship, which was sanctioned by the World Pool Association (WPA) the only institution in our sport which has also the WPBA as a member. I think it was the right decision since a World Championship is one of the highest event in sport. That these two events were conflicting is not my fault but now I am the one who has to pay for it.?

The WPA is the World Governing Body of Pool. I would say it has precedent over the WPBA's event. Jasmin has said she announced it according to the rules. The WPBA is saying that their events are above all other events.

OK. so lets say that Jasmin made a mistake and played without written authorization from WPBA. Shouldn't they consider that Jasmin was a true representative of the WPBA at the World Event?; and that her presence enhanced the WPBA organization for the World to see?

Jasmin already knew that by playing in the World Event she was risking some points in the WPBA ranking. She problably thought she could place good in the last WPBA event and still maintain a good ranking. Plus in the new season, she had a good opportunity to start up there with the elite WPBA players, and who knows, maybe obtain the number 1 ranking.

The 2 event suspension, quashes her chances at this year's ranking, and next years ranking. This must have been taken into consideration by the WPBA Board. They should have known how it affected Jasmin, this year and the next.

Now the big question here is:

Could it be possible that there was a "conflict of interest" with the WPBA decision or was it a true, unbiased, un-prejudicial, justified decision?

Right now, it seems that there is an "appearance of a conflict of interest" although we only know one side of the story.

We would have to know, whom is on the Board, and what is the current ranking of those on the board, plus, we would have to figure out how the suspension benefits those on the board, the other players, and how it affects Jasmin. In my opinion, someone on the board had to ask themselves some of these questions before making the decision. In addition, the decision has been "sugar coated" with giving Jasmin an opportunity to appeal the decision, but the fact is that she is not playing this weekend.

The only thing that could happen is that she be given the opportunity to participate in the start of the next season, and maybe, just maybe, Jasmin will believe that "some justice" has been served.

I can agree with most of what you wrote here. The points I disagree with are outlined in my response to Bob.

A player who deliberately shorts herself on a WPBA points earning opportunity in order to play in an event where she is an underdog and a long shot to win it is punishing herself enough.

The punishment certainly does not fit the crime here.

 

[sjm]

I'm with Bob Jewit on this one. I cannot understand the WPBA position on banning Jasmin from the next two events. One which is the Final event and the other the beginning of next year's.

According to Jasmin's own words.....

"Of course I am surprised about the decision and disappointed but I also have to understand the WPBA who wants to protect their tour. But I made my decision in time and announced it according to their rules. As a sportswoman I stand up to my decision that I chose to play in a World Championship, which was sanctioned by the World Pool Association (WPA) the only institution in our sport which has also the WPBA as a member. I think it was the right decision since a World Championship is one of the highest event in sport. That these two events were conflicting is not my fault but now I am the one who has to pay for it.?

The WPA is the World Governing Body of Pool. I would say it has precedent over the WPBA's event. Jasmin has said she announced it according to the rules. The WPBA is saying that their events are above all other events.

OK. so lets say that Jasmin made a mistake and played without written authorization from WPBA. Shouldn't they consider that Jasmin was a true representative of the WPBA at the World Event?; and that her presence enhanced the WPBA organization for the World to see?

Jasmin already knew that by playing in the World Event she was risking some points in the WPBA ranking. She problably thought she could place good in the last WPBA event and still maintain a good ranking. Plus in the new season, she had a good opportunity to start up there with the elite WPBA players, and who knows, maybe obtain the number 1 ranking.

The 2 event suspension, quashes her chances at this year's ranking, and next years ranking. This must have been taken into consideration by the WPBA Board. They should have known how it affected Jasmin, this year and the next.

Now the big question here is:

Could it be possible that there was a "conflict of interest" with the WPBA decision or was it a true, unbiased, un-prejudicial, justified decision?

Right now, it seems that there is an "appearance of a conflict of interest" although we only know one side of the story.

We would have to know, whom is on the Board, and what is the current ranking of those on the board, plus, we would have to figure out how the suspension benefits those on the board, the other players, and how it affects Jasmin. In my opinion, someone on the board had to ask themselves some of these questions before making the decision. In addition, the decision has been "sugar coated" with giving Jasmin an opportunity to appeal the decision, but the fact is that she is not playing this weekend.

The only thing that could happen is that she be given the opportunity to participate in the start of the next season, and maybe, just maybe, Jasmin will believe that "some justice" has been served.

Your statement "lets say that Jasmin made a mistake and played without written authorization from WPBA" is a wild stab in the dark. All WPBA players, especially the elite who frequently consider participation in non-WPBA events, know the letter of WPBA rules and know that they are barred from the kind of participation that took place here unless they get a waiver. Jasmin advising the WPBA of her intention to play in this event, despite denial of a waiver by the WPBA, is courteous and professional, but does not mitigate the fact that the denied waiver would be ignored in this instance, a clear and an intentional breach of WPBA rules here.

I have enormous respect for Jasmin and greatly admire her choice to pursue her dream of winning a WPA open world championship event, and if and when it happens, it will be a great moment in the history of women's pool. Nonetheless, the suggestion that loss of ranking is a sufficient penalty for missing a WPBA event when a rule has been broken would suggest that there is no difference between the player that skips a WPBA event to attend the funeral of a loved one and the player that misses it while breaching the WPBA Players Contract, as each would incur the same penalty.

After all is said and done, Jasmin's statement "I made my decision in time and announced it according to their rules" is inherently problemmatic. As a signee to the WPBA Contract, a contract written by the players for the players, whether she could play in that event was not her decision at all, but the decision of the WPBA organization, which defines such participation as inappropriate, and though empowered to do so, opted not to make an exception in this case by granting a waiver.

The debate should be about the future, and I suspect we have similar views as far as how WPBA policy should be revised to deal with situations like this one.

JBCases hits the nail on the head in his post:

I don't see a WPA sanctioned World Championship as having a higher priority. Was the WPBA granted slots in the WTBC? Were more players invited?

If the WPA wants international tournaments that it sanctions to have the highest priority then it should work that out with it's members. Why didn't the WPA resolve the scheduling conflict so that more top women could have played in both events with no conflict?

The WPA and the WPBA are two fundamentally different groups however. The WPA is an governing body for the game of pool without any real power. The WPBA is professional organisation with a lot of power of the course of most women professional pool player's careers.

I am sure that the WPBA recognizes the prestige of a "World Championship" title. However part of the WPA mandate is to resolve scheduling conflicts and they should do that on behalf of the body that represents the majority of professional women pool players in the world, the WPBA.

Bingo! This is the essence of the argument.

 

[mnorwood]

This had to be done for the integrity of the WPBA tour. She broke the rules so she got spanked for it. Letting it slide would open the door to allow anyone to skip an event.

Since we're not on the board, we don't know how this all went down, but based on the decision I'm guessing she petitioned, was declined, skipped the tournament anyway and is now upset that she got grounded.

The integrity of the tour????:scratchhead: If you have to coerce your players into an exclusive deal then your tour has no integrity. If your tour was sound to begin with the players would have no incentive to step away from it. Monopolys are illegal, PGA golfers don't have to worry about this kind of crappy rule. This sport needs an enema.

 

[Williebetmore]

When two of this forum's finest posters, both of them good friends of mine, raise a matter as important as the IPT's initial conflict with the WPBA schedule, I can't help but dig into the subject.




........
In other words, Jay and Williebetmore, you make very valid points. No doubt, the WPBA Board will have to debate the matter at length.

sjm,
I many not have stated another concerning question; which was if certain of the board members had wanted to play in the World 10 Ball along with Jasmine; would the waivers have been granted (since such waivers were given to board members for the IPT). Just a question which need not be answered; but which many already suspect would be answered in the affirmative.

 

[sjm]

sjm,
I many not have stated another concerning question; which was if certain of the board members had wanted to play in the World 10 Ball along with Jasmine; would the waivers have been granted (since such waivers were given to board members for the IPT). Just a question which need not be answered; but which many already suspect would be answered in the affirmative.

My very strong opinion is that waivers would not have been granted to anyone. By the way, most of those who received IPT waivers were not WPBA Board members at the time.

 

[jay helfert]

My very strong opinion is that waivers would not have been granted to anyone. By the way, most of those who received IPT waivers were not WPBA Board members at the time.

So that means that some were. I love you Stu!

 

[ribdoner]

So that means that some were. I love you Stu!

obamaesq

(not to be confused with obamaesq )