Opinion question on sportsmanship

[Cuebaldness]

In my opinion there is no difference; I'll tell you I fouled. But if you're not paying attention to the point that you're not aware of the last THREE shots I've made you're gonna have to run out when I give BIH because you don't deserve that three foul win. That's my feeling on it.

 

[couldnthinkof01]

I understand your point. But, if a store clerk is on his phone while I walk through shopping and he doesnt see me steal is it his fault because part of his job is to prevent shoplifters.

Rules say if you foul 3 in a row you lose. Or do they say if your opponent had to tell you first.

If it is agreed they tell you your on 2 at the start of your inning then, they have to tell you.

If you foul and it is a loss, and your opponent doesnt see it, that is dishonest to say nothing, imo.

Should not be that tough.

 

[realkingcobra]

You know that feeling when you know your wrong, it comes up in more then pool. When gambling, playing a tournament, or coaching your kids team, you know whats right.

What you choose says alot about who you are. Its about how you conduct yourself when no one is watching.

I agree 100%, I've admitted to committing a foul on myself more times than I can count, even if my oppopponent didn't see the foul....in tournaments and gambling. To NOT call a foul on yourself if you commit one, is to admit you're a cheater....because you know the truth....before anyone else does.

 

[TX Poolnut]

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

 

[Matt]

This is not a question of whether you call a foul on yourself or not, it's a question of whether it's your responsibility to help your opponent 3-foul you, and it depends on the rule that is in place.

If the rule was simply that 3 consecutive fouls is a loss of game, it would be cheating to knowingly foul 3 times in a row and refuse to concede, but that's not the rule in most tournaments. The WPA rules state that the referee (which is your opponent in the absense of a referee) must warn you when you're on 2 fouls, or the 3rd foul is only considered the 2nd foul, so it is clearly your opponent's responsibility to warn you on 2 fouls. It's part of the 3-foul process, so if they don't warn you, they haven't 3-fouled you.

If you choose to help out your opponent, that's very kind of you, but I wouldn't say it's poor sportsmanship if you don't. In my opinion, this is roughly on par with shooting at the wrong ball; I wouldn't consider it poor sportsmanship (on my opponent's part) if my opponent didn't warn me that I was about to commit a foul, but would be grateful if they did.

 

[Skippy27]

In my opinion, this is roughly on par with shooting at the wrong ball; I wouldn't consider it poor sportsmanship if my opponent didn't stop me, but would be grateful if they did.

Yet another example of the poor moral foundation of this country.

"It's not my fault they didn't catch me."
"I didn't get caught, thus I did nothing wrong."

In my opinion, if you have to have low moral standards to win, then maybe you shouldn't be playing.

 

[9Ballz]

Right or wrong. I have to win honestly. I will always call a foul on myself even if no one else saw it. That's just the way I play.

 

[michael4]

I've often argued this point -

If you don't tell your opponent that you fouled, and he didn't see it, the argument goes "its his responsibility to watch the match".

So would it be the same argument to reach out and move a blocking object ball because he didn't pay attention it's fair?

interesting analogy, and I agree with you that a person should call their own fouls........unless winning a pool game is more important than their character...

 

[Scott Lee]

While it's very likely true in gambling (you snooze, you lose), I have ALWAYS chosen to call my own fouls, even when gambling. Either you have ethics...or you don't. It shouldn't matter if you're 'ethical' some of the time, and not some of the time. If you cheat, you're a cheater...simple as that. I have always been able to look at myself in the mirror, as a poolplayer.

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com

I guess it depends. In tournament/league there is code of conduct you should follow. But in a gambling situation, that goes right out the window. I have never seen a game for money where I witnessed a player foul and the player called it on himself. Something else is on the line besides trophies and bragging rights. So unless the the opponent calls it, and there's a witness, it didnt happen. Comes with the territory on this side I suppose, but then you'll undoubtedly will get arguments to follow.

In league/tournament you want your win to be clean as a whistle. In gambling, you're trying to hustle, and calling a foul on yourself is counter-productive. This by no means says you're cheating. It is the responsibility of the opponent to attend to the game. If he didn't see it. His tough luck.

 

[Skratch]

I would agree. This is certainly a personal ethics decision. However, knowing your opponent isnt being held to the same standards make it harder pill to swallow if you lose on some sketchy play on his part.

 

[Scott Lee]

Skratch...If you can live with yourself cheating at pool, that behavior will follow into other areas of your life as well. If my opponent chooses to cheat, that's on them. I will take the high road.

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com

I would agree. This is certainly a personal ethics decision. However, knowing your opponent isnt being held to the same standards make it harder pill to swallow if you lose on some sketchy play on his part.

 

[fastone371]

I would say I would call the foul on myself and have at all times, but this changed Sunday nite during league. I played a guy that I had to get his attention every time it was his turn to break or shoot because he was too busy playing with his phone to watch the game. Its a 2 man team format, between me and my team mate we play a total of 8 singles games. It took just short of 2 hours to complete these 8 games.

 

[Skratch]

Don't miss understand. I'd rather play myself on the up and up. I prefer my games to be clean on my part. I want to know the true level of my play. What I'm saying to the OP is that expecting to get this noble attitude by both players is a tall order when they are gambling.

 

[Tennesseejoe]

I guess it depends. In tournament/league there is code of conduct you should follow. But in a gambling situation, that goes right out the window. I have never seen a game for money where I witnessed a player foul and the player called it on himself. Something else is on the line besides trophies and bragging rights. So unless the the opponent calls it, and there's a witness, it didnt happen. Comes with the territory on this side I suppose, but then you'll undoubtedly will get arguments to follow.

In league/tournament you want your win to be clean as a whistle. In gambling, you're trying to hustle, and calling a foul on yourself is counter-productive. This by no means says you're cheating. It is the responsibility of the opponent to attend to the game. If he didn't see it. His tough luck.

"Code of Conduct"----this is a very good post.

 

[Matt]

Yet another example of the poor moral foundation of this country.

"It's not my fault they didn't catch me."
"I didn't get caught, thus I did nothing wrong."

In my opinion, if you have to have low moral standards to win, then maybe you shouldn't be playing.

I believe you read something other than what I meant. To clarify, I wouldn't consider it poor sportsmanship (on my opponent's part) if my opponent didn't stop me (from shooting the wrong ball, thus committing a foul), but would be grateful if they did.

Unless you mean that it's evidence of a "poor moral foundation" that I don't consider it my opponent's responsibility to make sure I shoot the right ball.

 

[Matt]

I have seen lots of general replies about calling fouls on yourself, but very few answers to the original question(s)...and I'm still curious.

So, as the shooter, are you responsible for:

1. Reminding your opponent to tell you that you're "on two" after you commit two consecutive fouls?
2. Conceding the game if you commit 3 consecutive fouls, but were not told that you're "on two"?

 

[7forlife]

where is the OP in all of this?
Anyway everyone seems to be blaming the other guy for not knowing like you're expecting him to either (a) walk around the table like a ref when you're shooting (b) focus in with immense concentration and never blink or be distracted, not for one second. Well what if you opponent is blocked by none other than......YOU? does the "well you should be paying attention still come into play?

For me it all depends on the circumstances just like we do with everything else in our life, there are time when i'll tell him and there are times when i will not. Once not more shady than the other it's just a matter of where i feel most of the responsibility in knowing is.

 

[Matt]

where is the OP in all of this?
Anyway everyone seems to be blaming the other guy for not knowing like you're expecting him to either (a) walk around the table like a ref when you're shooting (b) focus in with immense concentration and never blink or be distracted, not for one second. Well what if you opponent is blocked by none other than......YOU? does the "well you should be paying attention still come into play?

For me it all depends on the circumstances just like we do with everything else in our life, there are time when i'll tell him and there are times when i will not. Once not more shady than the other it's just a matter of where i feel most of the responsibility in knowing is.

As I was saying, the OP's question is not about whether you should call the foul; it's about whether you remind your opponent to tell you that you're "on two" and concede the match if you commit 3 consecutive fouls without being told that you're "on two". I think it's a good question, and personally don't expect any of my opponents to help me 3-foul them.

 

[gregcantrall]

I have seen lots of general replies about calling fouls on yourself, but very few answers to the original question(s)...and I'm still curious.

So, as the shooter, are you responsible for:

1. Reminding your opponent to tell you that you're "on two" after you commit two consecutive fouls?
2. Conceding the game if you commit 3 consecutive fouls, but were not told that you're "on two"?

I would not remind him. It is not my job to coach him. If I did commit the 3rd foul and he called it I would concede the game and then explain to him that it is his responsibility to remind his opponent before the shot that he is on two. The next player might not give him the win if he doesn't.

If I commit the third foul and he does not call it, he gets ball in hand. That is provided that he is an experienced player. A new player I would concede the game and explain the situation.

 

[7forlife]

As I was saying, the OP's question is not about whether you should call the foul; it's about whether you remind your opponent to tell you that you're "on two" and concede the match if you commit 3 consecutive fouls without being told that you're "on two". I think it's a good question, and personally don't expect any of my opponents to help me 3-foul them.

And as i said it depends on the situation. So let me break it down a bit more for you

(a) if he's behind me and my hand hit a ball, I call it but if he's behind me and I'm shooting o we a ball am she does not get up to see that I don't foul then that's on him.
(b) if he's in clear view of the table and chooses to do other stuff rather than try to keep an eye on the table then there's a good chance he will not be told.
(c) if it's a close hot and he does not call a third party to check the hit or does not act like he cares the advantage shooter.
(d) depending on the nature of the game, the nature of the relationship, and the amount or potential amount at stake he had best try to be more attentive.
(e) etc
(f) etc
(g) etc

Everything has terms that dictate the action taken. If the OP committed fouls that his opponent may not of been able to see or just at of missed due to coincidence and he did that 3 times then shame on him