Proposal: Implement a "call fouls on yourself" rule in pool

there is little or no money in pool, in most instances. If someone intentionally doesnt mention a foul, and tries to get away with it....I actually appreciate this, it lets me know that that person has little or no integrity, and the little bit they may have is for sale cheap....and this information costs me little or nothing, thats awesome.

When someone shows you they are untrustworthy, dont complain, just say "thank you", because now you know.
 
owll said:
there is little or no money in pool, in most instances. If someone intentionally doesnt mention a foul, and tries to get away with it....I actually appreciate this, it lets me know that that person has little or no integrity, and the little bit they may have is for sale cheap....and this information costs me little or nothing, thats awesome.

When someone shows you they are untrustworthy, dont complain, just say "thank you", because now you know.
Click to expand...





.....this.........;):wink:
 
I foul sometimes and don't notice or don't have position to see. Usually on soft shots. Though once I was told that I brushed the cueball with my tip on a warm up stroke - missed that too. I need to get my eyes checked.

So what happens if I don't see see the foul? And what happens when a player simply claims not to see a foul? Fouls are tricky things - especially when there's no ref there to judge them.

APA does as good a job as you can to rule on it. If you think a shot could be close, get someone to watch. Good players will even ask for a watch on themselves just to keep it honest. If no one watches and there's any dispute, the call goes to the shooter. So the burden really is on the opponent to keep an eye on the match.
 
Called a foul on myself the other night in 9 ball league. Almost exactly as the OP described. I was on the 2 and barely shaved the 3 where it hardly moved and my opponent did not see it. With ball in hand he lined the 2 up for a combo on the 9 that was a gimme. I still feel I did the right thing and would do it again. I ended up getting the rolls in the match anyhow. Read my signature line about character.
 
arps said:
what if the player just says, "i didnt foul." or "i didnt see it."
Click to expand...
I'd like to see that be unsportsmanlike conduct and a serious foul, if it's repeated and the intent is to get away with a foul you know you committed.

It's a gray area, but it already is a gray area. In most rules I've seen, if there's a disagreement between the shooter and the seated player, and there's no ref, the call goes to the shooter. So anytime someone calls a foul you can just say "I didn't foul" and there's nothing they can do.
 
bobprobst said:
APA does as good a job as you can to rule on it. If you think a shot could be close, get someone to watch. Good players will even ask for a watch on themselves just to keep it honest. If no one watches and there's any dispute, the call goes to the shooter. So the burden really is on the opponent to keep an eye on the match.
Click to expand...
That's a good point. That should be part of the call-own-fouls rule. If you're the shooter and you can see that a foul is possible (like a close hit), the shooter should let the opponent or a ref/observer know.
 
BRussell said:
I'd like to see that be unsportsmanlike conduct and a serious foul, if it's repeated and the intent is to get away with a foul you know you committed.

It's a gray area, but it already is a gray area. In most rules I've seen, if there's a disagreement between the shooter and the seated player, and there's no ref, the call goes to the shooter. So anytime someone calls a foul you can just say "I didn't foul" and there's nothing they can do.
Click to expand...

That about sums it up. If you are playing a dishonest player there is not much you can do but chalk it up to experience. At least now you know the guys character. The next time you play him have the tournament director watch on what appear to be close calls on hits.
 
9Ballr said:
Usually you're not allowed to interrupt a player that's at the table.
But there's no rule against leaving chalk in as many places as you want.
Click to expand...

Sure there is.

I haven't looked it up, but there are rules against marking or otherwise giving yourself an aiming point to shoot at.

I don't leave my chalk on the table, but there are many who do. I don't have a problem with it, but I won't allow someone to mark there shot by setting the chalk cube at an aiming point. I will stop them before they shoot and either ask them to move the chalk or move it myself.


Royce
 
9Ballr said:
Usually I play by BCA rules.
And there is no rule against people leaving their chalk on the rail.
If I point it out to people they act like they just left it there by accident.
The whole thing is done very inconspicuously.
Like oh, they're just standing there checking out their shot and now the chalk goes exactly where they need to shoot.
Frustrating as hell to have to point this out to people every shot so eventually I just stop.
Click to expand...

Well, if it was left there by accident, then it won't hurt to move it somewhere else before they shoot.


Royce
 
If they do not do the proper thing and call a foul on themselves when they do it and their opponent was not paying attention to call it what in the world makes you think that they are going to call it on themselves just because it is in the rules?

Good sportsmanship does not require rules written in stone, nor can you write in stone good sportsmanship.

If I saw it as an observer I would have, and have in the past, informed the player that the other fouled and be sure that the offending player hears me. Now I just put their integrity out there for all to see and it is up to them to step up and be a man and admit they fouled.

If they don't admit it, then the other player knows they are a cheater and need to keep an eye on them as will probably every other player that plays them from then on out.
 
Skippy27 said:
If they do not do the proper thing and call a foul on themselves when they do it and their opponent was not paying attention to call it what in the world makes you think that they are going to call it on themselves just because it is in the rules?

Good sportsmanship does not require rules written in stone, nor can you write in stone good sportsmanship.

If I saw it as an observer I would have, and have in the past, informed the player that the other fouled and be sure that the offending player hears me. Now I just put their integrity out there for all to see and it is up to them to step up and be a man and admit they fouled.

If they don't admit it, then the other player knows they are a cheater and need to keep an eye on them as will probably every other player that plays them from then on out.
Click to expand...


I see where you are coming from Skippy, but a match that I am not involved in is none of my business. That is also a form of sportsmanship.
 
Tin Man said:
There is a very fine line between a rule that can't be enforced and a suggestion. This only would make things tougher for those that follow the rules.

When it is 'opponent must call foul' we are all on even playing ground. What's the problem?

We all grew up differently. I grew up in a pool room where you didn't call foul on yourself, but if someone asked you'd absolutely admit it. That was considered to be having integrity. That's still how I play. I will never lie, but I don't feel it's my job to watch to see if the ball rubs the rail or not.
Click to expand...

BRussell said:
Yeah I know that lots of people see things the way you see them. Many people that I respect are exactly the same way, and I think they do otherwise have integrity, that's just the norm they learned.

The problem is that the norm is to try to get away with committing fouls that they know they committed but may have been difficult for an opponent to see. I believe that norm encourages an attitude of "getting away with it" which is contrary to sportsmanship. Putting an "own fouls" rule in could improve the sportsmanship of pool.
Click to expand...


I make a distinction between playing singles and playing in team events.

Here's what I said a few months back on this subject:
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showpost.php?p=5121431&postcount=40

Call me crazy but I think a singles match is different than a team one.

In singles, if I foul I can't think of a scenario where I wouldn't call it on myself (although honestly it's possible there may be one).

Teams is a different animal and I learned that lesson the hard way. I was playing in my first team event and I played a nice safety. The opposing player came to the table and attempted a 3 rail kick shot which he hit but he didn't get a rail. I was so full of nerves and so surprised he even hit the ball that I missed the fact that he didn't get a rail. My teammates could say nothing.

I ended up losing the rack and I was pretty ticked off about it after hearing all the details from my teammates but later I realized it was my own fault for not paying attention. Had I simply asked the guy if it was ball in hand -- which is a standard requirement before taking one, he would have acknowledged the foul. It was my mistake not his.

Now it would be great if we all called all fouls on ourselves, but that's not the reality. So when playing in a team event I think it's important to understand you aren't just calling a foul on yourself but you are calling a foul on your team. There are now times when I'm playing in a team event where if my opponent chooses to NOT pay attention I will not call fouls on my team that he chooses to ignore.

I sort of disagree with the idea that the player in the chair is not the quasi referee. Every team event I've played in this is the understanding. I've never once had my view of the table obstructed by anything. If something crazy on the table happens (like a miscue) all you have to do is ask the player if it was a good hit. If you choose to stay disengaged from the action on the table you are just asking for trouble.

I don't think playing like this is perfect but I also choose not to impose my own moral code on my teammates in order to look like some sort of purist.

I hope this makes sense to some of you without making me look like a murderer.
Click to expand...

Now sitting here today thinking about this some more I'm having trouble with the idea of even calling fouls on myself in a singles event. If you were to show up to a tournament and you knew you were the only guy in the entire room that would honestly call a foul on yourself would you still do it? I'm not sure I would anymore because at some point if everybody is playing by a different set of rules than you are, you're just handicapping yourself and for what gain?

It sort of reminds me of this ad I saw a while back that was put out by The Foundation for a Better Life: http://www.values.com/inspirational-stories-tv-spots/106-basketball

The jest of the ad is that during a basketball game a ball went out of bounds and the refs made a bad call that this kid couldn't live with. He wanted to correct the call and the ad paints this picture that the kid did the right thing by telling the ref the ball went out on him. Check it out.

Anyway, my initial reaction to the ad was that the kid's good intentions were misguided because all he was doing was handicapping his team. It's not his responsibility to assist the referee and he shouldn't feel responsible for a bad call since that's just a part of the game. That's my dilemma with the whole calling a foul on yourself situation. For most of the people I play with, they don't call fouls on themselves so if I do, I am essentially playing by a different set of rules than they are.

So having said all that,I think BRussell is going down the right path with this rule change proposal because we really need to put the onus on the shooter to call fouls on themselves and eliminate this loophole because it really forces the honest players to continually give up a handicap to all those players that would NEVER call a foul on themselves.
 
Last edited:
ElCorazonFrio said:
There most definitely is a rule about using chalk as an aiming point in the BCA rulebook.

3.43 ILLEGAL MARKING
If a player intentionally marks the table in any way (including the placement of chalk) to assist in executing the shot, it is a foul.
Click to expand...

Don't really need a chalk anyway. Most tables are pre-marked with these things called "diamonds". All you need to do is aim at them and the ball goes right to it. Almost every time! :grin:
 
This whole discussion is pointless. The only rules that matter are ones that can be enforced. When it is up to the player whether or not they follow the rule, and there is no consequence if they choose not to follow the rule, they will still follow their own moral/ethical code, if they even have one. Adding this "rule" solves nothing.

The only way to get close to solving this problem is to either have a referee for every match, or record every match, and give each player a certain number of times during a match that they are allowed to get an official to come review the tape to determine if a foul was committed or not.

Currently, the only way to prevent this is for the opponent to predict when a foul is likely to happen, and call an official to watch the shot before it happens.
 
The rule they should make is the one everyone is terrified of, but also the one that is most likely to work. That is, if your opponent thinks you fouled then that's all there is to it, you fouled. Period.

In my opinion this would lead to two things.

1) You would never hit a shot where there was any possibility of doubt as to whether it was a good hit or not without getting a ref, or if you did hit it without the ref, you'd make DAMNED sure to hit it in such a way that there was no doubt that it was good.

2) If someone pulls BS moves on you by calling you for a foul where there wasn't one, you can do it right back the very next shot. It would be like causing peace through Mutually Assured Destruction.
 
Please tell me you are joking, or trolling.

Bbutler said:
The rule they should make is the one everyone is terrified of, but also the one that is most likely to work. That is, if your opponent thinks you fouled then that's all there is to it, you fouled. Period.

In my opinion this would lead to two things.

1) You would never hit a shot where there was any possibility of doubt as to whether it was a good hit or not without getting a ref, or if you did hit it without the ref, you'd make DAMNED sure to hit it in such a way that there was no doubt that it was good.

2) If someone pulls BS moves on you by calling you for a foul where there wasn't one, you can do it right back the very next shot. It would be like causing peace through Mutually Assured Destruction.
Click to expand...
 
railbird99 said:
I definitely am. I would probably start having nightmares if that approach was ever seriously considered.
Click to expand...

Add me to the list of people frightened by this. Stupidity usually frightens me.

This would be, perhaps, the worst rule of any game ever. I know people who would call foul on the coin flip or the opponent chalking their cue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top