USTA (tennis org) Lifts Ban on Russians and Belarusians. WPA (pool org) should also!

wrldpro

H.RUN 311/Diamond W.R.
Gold Member
Silver Member
After speaking to the BCA they said they are following the WPA guidelines and would not recognize any Russian players. The Legends Of Pocket Billiards will allow all Russian Players to play in the High Run Events and Challenge matches. If any of them in the Mens or Womens division set any World Records they will be awarded 100% of the prizes from us.
 

JAM

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Well, the Russians are welcome here in USA for a long as they want. We enjoy seeing them in the pool room as well as on the offs. Looks like Fedor and Kristina are becoming Americanized. Look who's driving. :cool::p:love::)

Photo credit: J. Sword from FB.

289222604_10105921116592064_6988331591108658557_n.jpg
 
  • Haha
Reactions: sjm

sjm

Older and Wiser
Silver Member
After speaking to the BCA they said they are following the WPA guidelines and would not recognize any Russian players. The Legends Of Pocket Billiards will allow all Russian Players to play in the High Run Events and Challenge matches. If any of them in the Mens or Womens division set any World Records they will be awarded 100% of the prizes from us.
The BCA has never had any authority when it comes to who can participate in exhibitions. The Legends is an exhibition, not a tournament. In fact, the Legends, no matter how much money was put up, would still not qualify for sanctioning as it has stated limits on participation to those having won a world championship of some kind, and even this kind of stratification is disallowed under existing rules for sanctioned events. The current ban does not pertain to unsanctioned events. The addition of challenge matches (which we haven't seen in the Legends event) wouldn't change any of this, either, because it would remain an exhibition.

Thankfully, to this point, nobody has even tried to ban the Russians from any US-based unsanctioned event, and if it were to ever happen, all hell would break loose. As we've seen, those staging unsanctioned events in America have welcomed Fedor and Kristina with open arms, and properly so.

The BCA, not unexpectedly, is acting exactly as WPA is, following a policy with which they have openly disagreed because they feel bound by the WCBS (World Confederation of Billiard Sports) decision on the ban. I believe the ban will be lifted when WCBS meets in July, but we shall see.

That said, Bobby, at least in theory, you could ban them from your event, but you'd be way out of line. Nonetheless, your stated policy of paying them if they were to be successful no matter what outside contingencies were to arise is beneficent and should give Fedor and Krisitna a comfort level should they choose to participate.

Thumbs up to Bobby, a principled businessman, but not to the BCA, which continues to uphold a ban with which nearly all of us are greatly dissatisfied.
 

WilliamK

Registered
How are the sanctions seen as "discrimination" when they are intended to be a clear message that despite what they may be led to believe by their dictator and his propaganda, that westerners are not scum, and that the "discrimination" shown by their own government cannot stop until they get rid of that dictatorship and let the country be run by its people.
 

kling&allen

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
How are the sanctions seen as "discrimination" when they are intended to be a clear message that despite what they may be led to believe by their dictator and his propaganda, that westerners are not scum, and that the "discrimination" shown by their own government cannot stop until they get rid of that dictatorship and let the country be run by its people.

Because, in the United States at least, we have laws against discriminating against people based on their national origin. Congress, and not some pool association, has the ability to change those laws.

(by sanctions, I assume you mean the WPA ban on Russian players, and not the sanctions properly enacted by the US and other governments).
 

sjm

Older and Wiser
Silver Member
(by sanctions, I assume you mean the WPA ban on Russian players, and not the sanctions properly enacted by the US and other governments).
Unfortunately, those sanctions are also discriminatory, doing widespread damage to all Russian nationals by weakening the Russian economy and by reducing the value of the currency in which most of their assets are denominated. Sanctions such as America's choice not to buy Russian oil may do financial damage to Russia, but it has driven up gas prices in America at a time when inflation was already a growing problem and this has done indiscriminate damage to many Americans, too. There are victims of these policies everywhere.

I'll close with some questions, as you seem to understand the legalities far better than I do:

1) For those who are visiting America but don't have a green card or a work visa, do they have the same protection as all other Americans?
2) Do the rights associated with American nationals pertain to those who visit?
3) Hypothetically, If I am trying to fill a position in my company and I pick the applicant that is American solely because he/she is American and, therefore, has the legal right to remain in America indefinitely over the foreign applicant without a work visa, am I being discriminatory or just sensible?
 

WilliamK

Registered
by sanctions, I assume you mean the WPA ban on Russian players, and not the sanctions properly enacted by the US and other governments).
I do mean all sanctions against Russians. But if "discrimination against people based on their national origin" is the key here, then discrimination laws of Congress that were designed to prevent racism and religious persecution of Americans, protecting Americans from Americans, should not condone the invasion of passive neighbouring countries, nor the persecution and genocide while calling them scum.

And that is why such laws do not work all of the time. We have similar laws here that are continually abused/misused whenever an argument is needed. For example if I was interviewing for any sort of position and the losing applicants are sore and either senior-aged, tattooed, coloured, handicapped, female or religious, then they can claim "discrimination" when in fact all applicants were considered and one chosen as the best fit for skillset and attitude. At the end of the day, they still do not get a job and I have a lawyer's bill. So what use is that legal abyss?

If everyone had imposed sanctions without making trade-offs then that war may have been over before the warlord's PR team had a chance to fabricate his excuses.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: sjm

kling&allen

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Unfortunately, those sanctions are also discriminatory, doing widespread damage to all Russian nationals by weakening the Russian economy and by reducing the value of the currency in which most of their assets are denominated. Sanctions such as America's choice not to buy Russian oil may do financial damage to Russia, but it has driven up gas prices in America at a time when inflation was already a growing problem and this has done indiscriminate damage to many Americans, too. There are victims of these policies everywhere.

I'll close with some questions, as you seem to understand the legalities far better than I do:

1) For those who are visiting America but don't have a green card or a work visa, do they have the same protection as all other Americans?
2) Do the rights associated with American nationals pertain to those who visit?
3) Hypothetically, If I am trying to fill a position in my company and I pick the applicant that is American solely because he/she is American and, therefore, has the legal right to remain in America indefinitely over the foreign applicant without a work visa, am I being discriminatory or just sensible?

(1) Even people in the country illegally have some protections under our Constitution, like due process. For the Federal civil rights laws I've been squawking about (Title II of the Civil Rights Act), they protect everyone ("all persons") in the US regardless of citizenship, residency or immigration status.. Other laws (like employment non-discrimination laws) would apply only to those eligible for employment.

(2) People with green cards, travel visas, or temporary work visas have less rights than you as US citizen. For example, the government could revoke a traveler's visa and send them home.

(3) If the applicants are otherwise equally qualified, you (generally) can't refuse to hire someone because they have a green card and are not a U.S. citizen. For some jobs, like those handling classified information, the job qualification can be that the applicant is a U.S. citizen. There can be other exceptions too, like preferences for hiring veterans. And, if you have only a few employees, you might be exempt from some of these laws.

Many states (including New York and New Jersey) and even cities (including NYC) have civil rights law that are even stronger than federal laws.
 

sjm

Older and Wiser
Silver Member
(1) Even people in the country illegally have some protections under our Constitution, like due process. For the Federal civil rights laws I've been squawking about (Title II of the Civil Rights Act), they protect everyone ("all persons") in the US regardless of citizenship, residency or immigration status.. Other laws (like employment non-discrimination laws) would apply only to those eligible for employment.

(2) People with green cards, travel visas, or temporary work visas have less rights than you as US citizen. For example, the government could revoke a traveler's visa and send them home.

(3) If the applicants are otherwise equally qualified, you (generally) can't refuse to hire someone because they have a green card and are not a U.S. citizen. For some jobs, like those handling classified information, the job qualification can be that the applicant is a U.S. citizen. There can be other exceptions too, like preferences for hiring veterans. And, if you have only a few employees, you might be exempt from some of these laws.

Many states (including New York and New Jersey) and even cities (including NYC) have civil rights law that are even stronger than federal laws.
Thanks for your a most informative post.
 

xcorner

New member
I have only been around Fedor one time at a tournament. Seems like a good guy. Wonder if he would ever become a U.S. citizen ? Have no idea if he would ever think of that.
 

kling&allen

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
I have only been around Fedor one time at a tournament. Seems like a good guy. Wonder if he would ever become a U.S. citizen ? Have no idea if he would ever think of that.

It's a lengthy road. I don't know his current immigration status, but generally you need a green card for 5 years before you can start the process. Hopefully the mess in Europe ends long before then!
 

ideologist

I don't never exaggerate
Gold Member
Silver Member
The athletes could have renounced their citizenship and played all along.
 

kling&allen

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
The athletes could have renounced their citizenship and played all along.

If they did that, they probably would lose their visas to work and stay in the United States. They would have to seek asylum, which would be a high bar for a professional pool player to meet. Most people who renounce their citizenship have dual citizenship so they aren't stateless.
 

ideologist

I don't never exaggerate
Gold Member
Silver Member
If they did that, they probably would lose their visas to work and stay in the United States. They would have to seek asylum, which would be a high bar for a professional pool player to meet. Most people who renounce their citizenship have dual citizenship so they aren't stateless.

Sure, but it's an option if they truly aren't part of an unconscionable war. Otherwise, they are funding their government through their participation and that is what the sanctions aimed to prevent.
 

kev_eh

New member
Sure, but it's an option if they truly aren't part of an unconscionable war. Otherwise, they are funding their government through their participation and that is what the sanctions aimed to prevent.
They also have families in Russia to think of.
 

kling&allen

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Sure, but it's an option if they truly aren't part of an unconscionable war. Otherwise, they are funding their government through their participation and that is what the sanctions aimed to prevent.

I don't know if it's an option if the result is you just get deported back to Russia by the US. There are also government sanctions that prevent people from transferring money to Russia from the US, so it's hard to see how pool winnings in the US are funding the Russian government.

My point is this is a complex situation and isn't something the WPA / WCBS should be meddling in. They just rubber-stamped what the IOC did without thinking about anything.
 

skogstokig

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Sure, but it's an option if they truly aren't part of an unconscionable war. Otherwise, they are funding their government through their participation and that is what the sanctions aimed to prevent.

how would this work, exactly? unless they get a fast lane to american citizenship this would make them completely stateless?
 

ideologist

I don't never exaggerate
Gold Member
Silver Member
how would this work, exactly? unless they get a fast lane to american citizenship this would make them completely stateless?
Citizenship applications are available in many nations around the world. Ukraine is looking for citizens, I heard
 
Top