wtf???????

If you forfeit a game in a tournament by sweeping the balls of the table,
and there's a rule in that tournament that by doing so you lose that game
and the next. People were told to play the games out as people have
come to watch. The rule was discussed at the players meeting.

It's the semi finals and a race to 11 you already have 9, when your
opponent does this.

Do you call it on the guy?
 
Last edited:
I believe the rule also states that the incoming player must acknowledge that he has been told he is on 2 fouls. If Danny made this acknowledgement and then did this, then is was a douche move.
 
Bob Dixon said:
If he wasn't noticed of two fouls on his approach to his inning, as the rules state it must be done, then there was nothing to acknowledge.

How many more excuse have to be made for a player who didn't read the rules and didn't even pay attention to the explanation of the rules that the opposing player voluntarily went out of his way to inform him of?
Click to expand...

Lol, I think you just have a man-crush on Danny.
 
corvette1340 said:
holy shit, would all of you guys that are saying "Danny followed the rules", "It's the rule, people must follow it", etc. etc..please kindly shut the f@##$ up and read what the other side is writing?

Nobody is saying that Danny didn't follow the rule or that he was wrong in the letter of the rule book by calling the guy on not telling him at the proper time. What we are all saying is that it was a Dick move, pure and simple. It's a move that I'd like to think that the majority of the good sportmen in the pool world would not make. It's an angle shooting, douche bag move. If Corey or Efren or anyone else felt the need to make this type of move against someone then I'd call them douches as well.
Click to expand...

First, please don't tell me to shut up, kindly or not.

Next, what you keep failing to understand is that Danny DID NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to speak on behalf of his opponent. No one has the right to speak for someone else during a match.

You can't activate the three-foul rule on yourself. You can call a foul on yourself, sure, but your opponent or a referee must warn you that you are on two fouls at the proper time in order for the three-foul rule to take effect. You can not warn yourself.
 
Last edited:
Bob Dixon said:
Go change your diaper for Christ's sake. You're smelling up the forum.

LOL. I'd say let's stop wasting our time but this is a mental derangement that's fascinating. It's so weird that you think it will never be seen again but I really do know better from past experience at AZB. Look at the behavior that the moderators here let run rampant. I'm waiting to see them show up to ban the targets of the behavior and please the low IQ slimebags. Someone has to call it like it is. What kind of a knuckle-dragging dimwit has to use terms like "douche" and "douchebag" to express himself?
Click to expand...

Just so I'm clear, it's acceptable to call others "low IQ slimebags" and "knuckle-dragging dimwits", but "douche" and "douchebag" are off limits? Serious question, my IQ won't allow me to figure it out on my own.
 
Bob Dixon said:
Kudos to John Brumback for trying to raise pool to the level of an actual sport and out of the morass of the nosepicking, shiftless, underachieving slobs who seem to have a major problem with engaging in an activity which has rules that are actually expected to be followed.
Click to expand...

What John Brumback did is totally different than what Danny did. John's opponent was taking an unfair advantage by jumping with his break cue. Danny's opponent wasn't trying to gain any unfair advantage whatsoever.

What you are failing to understand is that we (I guess I can't speak for everyone on my side of the debate) aren't against any rules. We are against taking advantage of a technicality of a poorly-written rule. I cannot think of any other pool rule that I think is written contrary to the spirit of the rule.

Also, I would accept FULL responsibility if I was Danny's opponent. He didn't understand what he was told, and even though he tried, he did it wrong per the rule. But that wouldn't make Danny any less douchey for calling it.

Someone asked if I would take the win being on 9 games and my opponent conceded game 10. Are you kidding? Of course not. The day I want to win like that is the day I break down my cue for good. I'd have to take the win if the ref called the match because of it though, but I guarantee that I wouldn't call it myself.

Get it yet, Bob?
 
Thing is, the rule was not "poorly-written."

They wanted to make sure people didn't make the announcement right after the 2nd foul, but instead announce it as the fouler was walking up to the table on his next try.

Someone said the timing element of the rule was based on straight pool, with the reasoning that in long innings, a player could forget he was on 2 fouls.

But you can't have three fouls span multiple games, so why even try to force that timing on 9ball?

That's what i was trying to say before- it was a new rule, really, for them to specify WHEN you could tell your opponent he's on 2, and people were heated in every possible way about it back then.
 
easy-e said:
What John Brumback did is totally different than what Danny did. John's opponent was taking an unfair advantage by jumping with his break cue. Danny's opponent wasn't trying to gain any unfair advantage whatsoever.

What you are failing to understand is that we (I guess I can't speak for everyone on my side of the debate) aren't against any rules. We are against taking advantage of a technicality of a poorly-written rule. I cannot think of any other pool rule that I think is written contrary to the spirit of the rule.

Also, I would accept FULL responsibility if I was Danny's opponent. He didn't understand what he was told, and even though he tried, he did it wrong per the rule. But that wouldn't make Danny any less douchey for calling it.

Someone asked if I would take the win being on 9 games and my opponent conceded game 10. Are you kidding? Of course not. The day I want to win like that is the day I break down my cue for good. I'd have to take the win if the ref called the match because of it though, but I guarantee that I wouldn't call it myself.

Get it yet, Bob?
Click to expand...

Great post. It all boils do to character.
 
easy-e said:
What John Brumback did is totally different than what Danny did. John's opponent was taking an unfair advantage by jumping with his break cue. Danny's opponent wasn't trying to gain any unfair advantage whatsoever.

What you are failing to understand is that we (I guess I can't speak for everyone on my side of the debate) aren't against any rules. We are against taking advantage of a technicality of a poorly-written rule. I cannot think of any other pool rule that I think is written contrary to the spirit of the rule.

Also, I would accept FULL responsibility if I was Danny's opponent. He didn't understand what he was told, and even though he tried, he did it wrong per the rule. But that wouldn't make Danny any less douchey for calling it.

Someone asked if I would take the win being on 9 games and my opponent conceded game 10. Are you kidding? Of course not. The day I want to win like that is the day I break down my cue for good. I'd have to take the win if the ref called the match because of it though, but I guarantee that I wouldn't call it myself.

Get it yet, Bob?
Click to expand...

Go ahead, ask John Brumback what he would do in that situation. (hint, he already said what in the other thread.) :wink:
 
Neil said:
Go ahead, ask John Brumback what he would do in that situation. (hint, he already said what in the other thread.) :wink:
Click to expand...

Why do I care what he'd do in this situation? I don't care what anyone else would do. If your buddy Jesus called the foul I'd say he was a douche for it also. I understand some people would call it, but I avoid socializing with people like that.
 
So the trick is to take your shot as soon as the balls stop moving so that your opponent doesn't have a chance to warn you that you are on two fouls at the end of his turn. There is nothing in the rules about pausing to give your opponent a window to declare that you are on two-fouls.

There's another trick for you Danny.
 
easy-e said:
Why do I care what he'd do in this situation? I don't care what anyone else would do. If your buddy Jesus called the foul I'd say he was a douche for it also. I understand some people would call it, but I avoid socializing with people like that.
Click to expand...

All I can say is, WOW!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top