Once again Earl shows his lack of class, what a disgrace

[allen_jr]

I was there and saw it.

At the players meeting, Matt and Hopkins Sr. instructed all players to not question the referee's instructions at the table. Unfortunately, Scott Smith (referee) didn't see it. So, since Scott said it was not a foul, Earl complied, which later erupted into another dozen or more threads on AzBilliards with Earl's name in the headlines. :grin-square:

Cool, thanks! I guess I was there too

Do you remember where we were at? I have a hazy memory of that... I think at the time my dad was out in the van with Mitch (?) and they thought they saw it too... I even think my dad called it, and was then surprised that it was not called in the arena... but play continued because, as you stated, Scott didn't see it and Earl didn't admit it...

imo, a player should admit something like that in front of a live audience, especially when a room full of people (or at least half of them) see it. And especially when one claims to be such a "purist" of the game... It was obvious he knew, you could see him stall and think about it for a moment...

 

[Celtic]

AND Jason was talking about the earlier match. Reading comprehension is a good thing. Look into it.

Maybe you should go back and read it closer. Jason said he was in the audience for 3 matches, and that in that time Earl started off the tournaments in good spirits and that people in the audience are the ones that decided to be dicks and put him on edge, on edge for the rest of the event just in case you are not following still...

But nice thread though man, hope you get that secret wish of your that Earl reads it so you have that little seed all your own in his head that you are so hoping you succeed in planting. Nothing like having your own little part in his downfall eh Corvette, what a hobby.

 

[TX Poolnut]

Theres women who make a living doing that.

Your statement is worthless without links. :wink:

 

[corvette1340]

Maybe you should go back and read it closer. Jason said he was in the audience for 3 matches, and that in that time Earl started off the tournaments in good spirits and that people in the audience are the ones that decided to be dicks and put him on edge, on edge for the rest of the event just in case you are not following still...

But nice thread though man, hope you get that secret wish of your that Earl reads it so you have that little seed all your own in his head that you are so hoping you succeed in planting. Nothing like having your own little part in his downfall eh Corvette, what a hobby.

Like I said, reading comprehension is a wonderful thing, look into it. Did you read post #124 yest by Cornerman or are you just skimming for posts by me?

 

[corvette1340]

Vette,
Glad to see your fixated on my whereabouts. Sorry busy following the matches while I get some work done. Next time I will ask the Principle for a hall pass. If you figure I was wrong then sorry. Let's begin with the title to this thread.

Once again Earl shows his lack of class, what a disgrace...I as many others don't see his conduct at this event as a disgrace.

still waiting on examples of my past history of bashing Earl.

 

[greyghost]

still waiting on examples of my past history of bashing Earl.

you sound like my ex always wanting proof that you gotta spend all your time to find, when we know your M.O. is bashing people...other than your click here. I'm sure your not as open mouthed in public, like I said keyboard hero.

Im sure your a descent guy and all but you trash others constantly, and it gets old my friend...come down some time and lets see that Woof in action...see if you can stack up to a low key don't know nothing coonass...my bet says you can't and wont. Typical rail bird and critic, as far as i've seen.

 

[greyghost]

Originally Posted by Wedge
We will never grow the sport if we continue to have our past champions act like a bunch of cry babies!!! Lets have an Earl vs. Grady "I feel so sorry for myself because I am past my prime" challenge match!

How can you talk about pool in a negative light using two of its greatest contributers?

Past his prime, maybe grady for obvious reasons he's old as sam hill (no disrespect grady love ya and cherish what you and your wife did for me)
but i agree with dsearcy. Earl is a legend, tho he has his demons...put him playing SVB the golden boy in a race to 120 on the big tight table and see how he likes it, same goes for Johnny vs SVB. Earl is in a class by himself. You knock him because besides the arm wraps, weights and finger tape he would beat most of these supposedly great players in a realy long race. The guy is upset and verbal about some very valid things...tho his diplomacy could be better (much better) the man is 100% RIGHT IN HIS VEIWS ON THE CURRENT STATE OF THE SPORT, ITS SOFT AND ONLY BENEFITS THE WEAK A**ES , JUMP CUES ARE A JOKE AND SO IS THE SOFT BREAK.


MAYBE WE SHOULD LISTEN TO EARL AND CHANGE THE GAME BACK TO HOW IT WAS, NOT THIS BASTARDIZED GAME TODAY WITH THE SHORT RACES, JUMP CUES AND SOFT BREAKS, MAYE HE'S RIGHT BUT MANY CAN'T SEE IT FIVE FEET INFRONT THEIR FACES

 

[Pii]

It's the overcome part you're missing--- unless the meds are right--- that card's not in the deck, unfortunately. It's no different than a tick or a stutter - it's uncontrollable. It's like telling a chronically depressed person to just get over it and stop crying and be a man/woman and overcome it. They often can't help it no matter what (I know because I dated a girl like that... she cried for 6 months STRAIGHT--- no joke).

I'm sure he's on meds-- he's said so on camera before. This often takes years and years to get right (if it ever gets right). Some people can pop a pill and it stabilizes them or they have to take a cocktail of pills to get it right and there are hundreds of options.

So, in my opinion, it's a handicap. It's no different than SVB being deaf or Putnam with his diabetes. It's something he has to deal with (and something we as fans should grow more sensitive to). It really isn't any different than calling a deaf person a retard because they can't speak clearly. His actions are bad- but he doesn't "WANT" to be that way.

I don't wanna get cornered into this thread as a blind Earl defender... I'm just saying people are under the assumption he can control his actions and that he's a child for acting out. He can't and he's not. That's all I'm saying.

Tap Tap Tap
Good explanation and so true. But apparently a lot of people DON'T GET IT!

 

[allen_jr]

So everyone in here would call a foul on themselves in a major tournament? What if you push the cue ball on a soft shot , would you call it? I've done it before. I've seen guys do it. Its very subtle. I can't call it, cuz we'll be getting in an arguement. In earls case with charlie, I think he has the right to leave it all up to the referee. Just like in the movie when tom cruise gets soft on a guy and ends up getting his a$$ handed to him by the same guy he was nice to. I'm not saying charlie wouldn't call the foul on himself. He seems like the type of guy that would, but if he dosen't it should still be ok under the rules of the game.

I would like to think so, yes. Although I know it doesn't happen. It's all about honor I suppose, some have it, some don't.

In this case especially, the match was close, the audience saw it, Charlie saw it, earl knew it, and it was on tape. Scotty was at an angle that caused him to miss it unfortunately.

So, if someone considers themselves to be a "purist" and all about the game, you would expect them to have the personal honor to admit a foul.

It's not about being soft, its just about playing fair. Should a jump cue be illegal, but pretending you didn't foul is OK?

 

[Rick S.]

I would like to think so, yes. Although I know it doesn't happen. It's all about honor I suppose, some have it, some don't.

In this case especially, the match was close, the audience saw it, Charlie saw it, earl knew it, and it was on tape. Scotty was at an angle that caused him to miss it unfortunately.

So, if someone considers themselves to be a "purist" and all about the game, you would expect them to have the personal honor to admit a foul.

It's not about being soft, its just about playing fair. Should a jump cue be illegal, but pretending you didn't foul is OK?

It was Scott's responsibility to watch and call it as he sees it.

Will a football receiver who catches a ball and runs down the sidelines (but steps out along the way, unseen by Ref) go tell the Ref he stepped out after he scores?

Will a basketball player go back and tell the Ref his foot was on the line, on the three pointer he just made?

Will a baseball payer tell the Ump that the throw beat him to the bag??


Have you ever seen ANY of the above scenarios? Hell no...and you won't ever see them.

Why should pool be different? Are you saying NONE of the other sports have players who are 'purist's' or have 'personal honor'? Apparently so....

 

[Nick B]

Vette,
I'll keep it simple. What he said. Thx Ghost for saving me the typing.

you sound like my ex always wanting proof that you gotta spend all your time to find, when we know your M.O. is bashing people...other than your click here. I'm sure your not as open mouthed in public, like I said keyboard hero.

Im sure your a descent guy and all but you trash others constantly, and it gets old my friend...come down some time and lets see that Woof in action...see if you can stack up to a low key don't know nothing coonass...my bet says you can't and wont. Typical rail bird and critic, as far as i've seen.

 

[corvette1340]

Vette,
I'll keep it simple. What he said. Thx Ghost for saving me the typing.

still waiting for one of you detectives to substantiate your claims that I have a history of bashing Earl. Surely in the 10-12 hours that you made the claim you can come up with some hard evidence. Then again, that would make too much sense.

Better just keep on skimming threads and making unsupported claims.

 

[DogsPlayingPool]

It was Scott's responsibility to watch and call it as he sees it.

Will a football receiver who catches a ball and runs down the sidelines (but steps out along the way, unseen by Ref) go tell the Ref he stepped out after he scores?

Will a basketball player go back and tell the Ref his foot was on the line, on the three pointer he just made?

Will a baseball payer tell the Ump that the throw beat him to the bag??


Have you ever seen ANY of the above scenarios? Hell no...and you won't ever see them.

Why should pool be different? Are you saying NONE of the other sports have players who are 'purist's' or have 'personal honor'? Apparently so....

I don't agree with your analogies. All the sports you mention are games that by nature are highly officiated with referees required to make calls on every pitch, hike or dribble. Secondly, they are all team sports. Thirdly, in these sports not even the players involved in the call are necessarily in a position to have all the information or seen all aspects of the play in order to make the call.

A better analogy is golf, an individual sport where officiating does not take place on every stroke of the ball, and officials are not expected to be able to see every stroke taken by every player.

And in golf, players routinely call penalties on themselves, EVEN when no one else including their playing partner, officials, or spectators saw the infraction. It is expected for a player to do this. As a matter of fact, if they don't call the penalty on themselves and the infraction is later discovered or reported, that player is DISQUALIFIED from the event. This is one reason golf is considered a gentleman's game played by men of honor in spite of the storied gambling and hustling that is part of its history.

As far as the Earl-Charlie incident goes, when I saw it it did not appear to me that Earl was simply abiding by the referee's decision like some here have said. It appeared to me that he was basically arguing the point that since the ref didn't see it then he cannot call it, whether it happened or not. Whether you agree or disagree with whether he should have called it on himself in that situation (major tournament, big money involved, ref's responsibility etc.) is really beside the point. To me the point is that in that situation - where your opponent, the spectators, the commentators, the TV cameras (and slo-mo replays) and the entire TV viewing audience saw the foul - then it doesn't make you look good if you don't man up to it and your reputation (legacy even) will be damaged to some extent because of it, right or wrong.

 

[woody_968]

Golf is not a good analogy in the instance you guys are talking about. Like you said, golf does not have someone standing over the players on every shot. When a match has a ref, it is up to the ref to call the game. Some will feel that he should have called it anyway, but few of us have ever played in a match with a ref. The times a ref is called into our matches to call a hit, what he says goes.

I have been in a game when my opponent was at the table and I called in a ref to watch a hit. It was obviously bad but the person watching the hit called it good. My oppenent ran out, and the said I cant believe he called that good. I didnt think ANY less of him as thats how it goes, the ref missed it.

I find it interesting that people like to get on Earl for that shot because it was on tape. If anyone watches much straight pool you will see many of the past champions commit fouls that the ref doesnt call, and NONE of them call it on themselves. Im talking about double hits, and am not bringing up names because it really doesnt matter.

Anyone that knows me knows if I foul, or even think there is a high chance that I commited a foul, I will call it on myself. I would like to think that I would do the same in the case being discussed but intil I make my living playing pool and playing in matches that have refs I wouldnt be able to answer positively.

When your in a match and someone is called in to watch the hit, if you think its bad and the person calls it good do you go ahead and call the foul on yourself? This question is not posed to anyone inparticluar. Just a general question for everyone to consider.

Woody

 

[DogsPlayingPool]

Golf is not a good analogy in the instance you guys are talking about. Like you said, golf does not have someone standing over the players on every shot. When a match has a ref, it is up to the ref to call the game. Some will feel that he should have called it anyway, but few of us have ever played in a match with a ref. The times a ref is called into our matches to call a hit, what he says goes.

I have been in a game when my opponent was at the table and I called in a ref to watch a hit. It was obviously bad but the person watching the hit called it good. My oppenent ran out, and the said I cant believe he called that good. I didnt think ANY less of him as thats how it goes, the ref missed it.

I find it interesting that people like to get on Earl for that shot because it was on tape. If anyone watches much straight pool you will see many of the past champions commit fouls that the ref doesnt call, and NONE of them call it on themselves. Im talking about double hits, and am not bringing up names because it really doesnt matter.

Anyone that knows me knows if I foul, or even think there is a high chance that I commited a foul, I will call it on myself. I would like to think that I would do the same in the case being discussed but intil I make my living playing pool and playing in matches that have refs I wouldnt be able to answer positively.

When your in a match and someone is called in to watch the hit, if you think its bad and the person calls it good do you go ahead and call the foul on yourself? This question is not posed to anyone inparticluar. Just a general question for everyone to consider.

Woody

Interesting points. This happened recently in the U.S. Open Tennis tournament this summer where the ref did get a call wrong going in favor of Federer, and he gave the point to his opponent anyway. Now, this was not Federer calling a foul on himself but rather voiding a foul that was called on his opponent.

But I agree, until a person is in that position it is just wishful thinking about what they would actually do.

Woody, you mentioned that anyone that knows you knows you would call a foul on yourself and that you'd like to think you would even in the high stakes of the case being discussed. May I ask, why would you? Now, if there was a ref would you still call a foul on yourself, and why? I'm sure everyone has their reasons and I'm wondering what those are.

 

[ShootingArts]

two questions

Two questions about golf:

If nobody sees it how do you or anyone else know if the fine gentlemen of the game always call fouls on themselves?

If these are such fine gentleman who always call fouls on themselves, why are the penalties so draconian if they are caught cheating? You don't need any penalties at all for not calling your own fouls if the players are always honest.


Back to Pool:

When playing pool without an official I do consider it the player's responsibility to call their own fouls in most situations. When there is an official there, it is his or her job to make all calls. When the rules of the event specify that it is the other player's responsibility to make all calls then they have made him an official and he has every right to do whatever necessary to call shots. I have done just that when people wouldn't call their own fouls. If you don't want me standing over you when you shoot, call your own fouls. Otherwise I will be in position to call them even if that means looking over your shoulder or directly in your line of vision just like any designated official.

Hu

I don't agree with your analogies. All the sports you mention are games that by nature are highly officiated with referees required to make calls on every pitch, hike or dribble. Secondly, they are all team sports. Thirdly, in these sports not even the players involved in the call are necessarily in a position to have all the information or seen all
aspects of the play in order to make the call.

A better analogy is golf, an individual sport where officiating does not take place on every stroke of the ball, and officials are not expected to be able to see every stroke taken by every player.

And in golf, players routinely call penalties on themselves, EVEN when no one else including their playing partner, officials, or spectators saw the infraction. It is expected for a player to do this. As a matter of fact, if they don't call the penalty on themselves and the infraction is later discovered or reported, that player is DISQUALIFIED from the event. This is one reason golf is considered a gentleman's game played by men of honor in spite of the storied gambling and hustling that is part of its history.

As far as the Earl-Charlie incident goes, when I saw it it did not appear to me that Earl was simply abiding by the referee's decision like some here have said. It appeared to me that he was basically arguing the point that since the ref didn't see it then he cannot call it, whether it happened or not. Whether you agree or disagree with whether he should have called it on himself in that situation (major tournament, big money involved, ref's responsibility etc.) is really beside the point. To me the point is that in that situation - where your opponent, the spectators, the commentators, the TV cameras (and slo-mo replays) and the entire TV viewing audience saw the foul - then it doesn't make you look good if you don't man up to it and your reputation (legacy even) will be damaged to some extent because of it, right or wrong.

 

[DogsPlayingPool]

When playing pool without an official I do consider it the player's responsibility to call their own fouls in most situations. When there is an official there, it is his or her job to make all calls. When the rules of the event specify that it is the other player's responsibility to make all calls then they have made him an official and he has every right to do whatever necessary to call shots. I have done just that when people wouldn't call their own fouls. If you don't want me standing over you when you shoot, call your own fouls. Otherwise I will be in position to call them even if that means looking over your shoulder or directly in your line of vision just like any designated official.

Hu

I like your style Hu, always have.

In regard to your question about golf, obviously no one can say that no player has ever failed to knowingly not call a penalty on themselves. But I can tell you that players call unseen penalties on themselves often enough that this far outweighs the opposite behavior. Also, should a player, thinking his infraction went unseen by his playing partner for instance, not call the penalty on himself, he would become an outcast among his peers and fans.

The reason that the penalties in golf are so severe is to reflect the importance placed on a certain code of conduct including honesty as well as playing by the rules. The players support this policy, not grudgingly accept it. I'm not sure what you meant by this unless you are suggesting cheating would be rampant in professional golf if these penalties weren't there. Somehow I wouldn't agree with that suggestion. BTW, it does happen on occasion that players get DQ'd for violating the rules but almost invariably this results from an unintentional rather than intentional violation. Also, keep in mind that the disqualification penalty is for signing and submitting an incorrect score card, not for the infraction itself. The actual infraction usually involves a one or two stroke penalty. Also part of this code is that if a player feels his playing partner has incurred a penalty even inadvertently, he will tell him so in order to give that player a chance to have an official rule on the matter and save the playing opponent from a potential DQ once he submits his scorecard. Additionally, probably more DQ's have nothing to do with cheating or even an on course rules infraction. The Masters was lost once (by DiVincenzo, IIRC) for simply not signing his scorecard. In the British Open not too many years ago, a Brit (IIRC) and his playing partner were both DQ'd because they unknowingly had each others scorecards. Though they both signed and submitted the correct scores for their round, they each kept their scores on the wrong card and therefore had submitted incorrect cards. Tough pill to swallow for sure, but neither player whined about it.

All that aside, I do understand the viewpoint of those that feel if the match is officiated it should be like most other sports, where the players basically stay out of the decision and the official makes the ruling. I'm not sure I agree with this, but I do see that viewpoint.

 

[Big C]

Stu

The image of pool sucks because the poor leadership and their lack of imagination - not because of anything any player does or does not do - including Earl Strickland.

Just my view from the outside looking in.

Can you give specific examples of the "poor leadership and lack of imagination"? What are you doing to make a better image for pool?

 

[woody_968]

Woody, you mentioned that anyone that knows you knows you would call a foul on yourself and that you'd like to think you would even in the high stakes of the case being discussed. May I ask, why would you? Now, if there was a ref would you still call a foul on yourself, and why? I'm sure everyone has their reasons and I'm wondering what those are.

You know, I didnt really think about it until you asked, that is a GREAT question.

All I can say is I have always tried to treat both the game and my opponents with the respect I feel they deserve. I have always said I would rather lose and do the right thing than win by doing something I would question later.

But after giving your question some serious thought, I have learned a couple things. Most of my pool playing has been done in my home town with people I know. For the most part, this is how everyone here plays.

But in a few of the bigger tournaments I have played in I have encountered players that do not share my views. To say it simply, I have been shafted a few times by people that new they had fouled and I didnt realize til later. Sort of shell shocked at the moment if you know what I mean.

Now you can look at that a couple of ways. Some would say they were in the wrong, others will say it is my place to call the foul and I didnt. All I can tell you is this. I havent ran up against this enough yet to totally change the way I treat the game, but I have seen it enough to understand how someone could get there and not judge those who may have more riding on the game than just enjoyment. I dont rely on the outcome of a tourney to pay my bills.

I have been close to deciding not to call fouls on myself, but not only for the reasons above. I dont mean I would deny a foul when called, just waiting for the opponent to call it. The problem with calling fouls on yourself is you may be taking the short end of the stick.

One example is a double hit. I have spent a good amount of time learning the rules and how to judge if a hit is a foul or not. If my opponent has not studied as much as me he may well NOT call a foul simply because he doesnt understand the rule in a case where I would have called a foul on myself. In this case I am being punished for learning the rules. At the same time if I call the foul on him an argument can be started, this is why refs should be called in.

The more we talk about it, the more I understand those players that keep their mouths shut. Not saying I will be one of them, but I understand.

Woody

 

[PoolSharkAllen]

still waiting for one of you detectives to substantiate your claims that I have a history of bashing Earl. Surely in the 10-12 hours that you made the claim you can come up with some hard evidence. Then again, that would make too much sense.

Better just keep on skimming threads and making unsupported claims.

Corvette,
Read the title of your thread: "Once again Earl shows his lack of class, what a disgrace". The title of your thread alone indicates that you've bashed Earl more on more than one occasion.

In searching the archives, you've mentioned Earl in 133 separate postings over the years so you've certainly have been a major contributor to critiquing Earl's behavior.

In this thread alone, you've called Earl everything from a clown, to classless and a disgrace to the sport. It's ironic that you're calling Earl a clown when it's you that should be called a clown. Your opening this thread with such a vitriolic title shows your own lack of class. Furthermore, I would say that you're a disgrace to us fellow rail birds.