PDA

View Full Version : Admit your own fouls?



BRussell
02-23-2007, 01:10 PM
This past year I've had my first experience in league play, and this has come up a few times. Most people acknowledge it up front when they make a foul, but at times, maybe 10-20% of the time, they foul and then just walk back to sit down without saying anything, making their opponent ask.

It seems to me to be poor sportsmanship to not acknowledge your own foul in some fashion, e.g., picking up the cue ball. If it's obvious, that's one thing, but when it's ambiguous and you're basically trying to get away with it, that seems to me to be poor sportsmanship.

Am I naive?

bradb
02-23-2007, 01:18 PM
Its the true sign of sportsmanship to admit a foul in any game!!!!
I remember once I was watching a important frame of snooker where Jimmy White was in a big run to go ahead. Suddenly he stopped and admitted a foul. Nobody saw it... not the ref, camera or the spectators. Jimmy lost that match but he gained a lot of respect from that.

Tom_In_Cincy
02-23-2007, 01:23 PM
This is all part of playing in a league.

You meet all different kinds of players from all walks of life. Some don't have the rules knowledge necessary to call a foul on themself or anyone else for that matter.

Let me ask you this, if your opponent called a foul on you, say you were looking for the ob to hit a rail, it didn't and you didn't know if the cb hit a rail, would you agree so easily? You didn't see it one way or the other... but it did happen in your opponents view.

What would you do?

By the way... it is your opponents responsibility to watch the table when you are shooting. He should know when you foul. Or at least ask the question. Some players are mad when they foul and can't wait to get away from the table.

Don't expect everyone to play at the same level or know the rules either.

Obvious fouls are the easiest to call on yourself. What about the ones that are questionable?

Not all of your opponents will suffer from poor sportsmanship, some are just not educated.

dr_dave
02-23-2007, 01:56 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote BRussell:</font><hr> This past year I've had my first experience in league play, and this has come up a few times. Most people acknowledge it up front when they make a foul, but at times, maybe 10-20% of the time, they foul and then just walk back to sit down without saying anything, making their opponent ask.

It seems to me to be poor sportsmanship to not acknowledge your own foul in some fashion, e.g., picking up the cue ball. If it's obvious, that's one thing, but when it's ambiguous and you're basically trying to get away with it, that seems to me to be poor sportsmanship.

Am I naive? <hr /></blockquote>
Sometimes, people just don't know the rules that well; and even when they do, sometimes judgment is required (e.g., see the links under "fouls" here (http://www.engr.colostate.edu/~dga/pool/threads.html)). Whenever judgment is required, disagreements can arise.

Regards,
Dave

SpiderMan
02-23-2007, 02:23 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote BRussell:</font><hr> It seems to me to be poor sportsmanship to not acknowledge your own foul in some fashion, e.g., picking up the cue ball. If it's obvious, that's one thing, but when it's ambiguous and you're basically trying to get away with it, that seems to me to be poor sportsmanship.<hr /></blockquote>

If it is truly ambiguous, then by most rules it isn't a foul. Most close calls are awarded to the shooter.

If I foul in an obvious manner, or believe I fouled in a non-obvious manner, I will generally acknowledge it to my opponent.

If it's truly ambiguous, I wait to see if he speaks up. If he doesn't, fine, it was legally fair anyway. If he does, I often concede in order to avoid him (mistakenly) thinking me a poor sport. Unless he's a known jerk, in which case I may press the point.

SpiderMan

Cydpkt
02-23-2007, 02:30 PM
Even when its an abvious foul I still ask my opponenet. Sometimes they are really upset and my asking could upset them more. You only grab the cue ball once thinking it was a foul when it was actually a good hit.
I also get a little frustrated when my team members or the other team isn't paying attention. Every time they come to the table they ask if it was a foul. Some opponents also get upset when you ask them to wait and have someone watch for a good hit.
Sportsmanship goes well beyond just letting your opponent know if you foul. It is sad that some people have to do this to win matches.

jjinfla
02-23-2007, 03:02 PM
I don't worry about it anymore. If I am paying attention then I know if it was a foul or not. If I am not paying attention, and he does not tell me it is a foul, what do I care, I will never know about it.

I think it is pretty funny when a player is playing a shot that will be a close hit and he shoots and then he asks me if the hit was good. He knows if it is good or not so why is he asking me? So I just tell him to shoot.

But then I am not playing for anything so it really is not a big deal to me.

Jake

canadan
02-23-2007, 03:14 PM
One night in league this fool shot and didnt hit anything well maybe 5 rails. I looked at her and she shruged her soulders.(thougt she ment ball in hand) so I grabed it and she came back yelling "foul ball in hand" "you didnt ask for ball in hand" so I tryed to give the cb back. then we argued abit about me giveing her the ball and she didnt want it. She walked away bitching about I shuld know the rules by now.I ended up smashing the 8 into the side and scraching. (tryed to scrach) we ended up calling every little thing after that. but that through my whole night out the window

Cydpkt
02-23-2007, 03:23 PM
Thats why I always ask now a days. A guy I was shooting was on the 2 which was frozen to the end rail. Cue ball 4 inches away. He smashes into the 2 the cue ball comes up off the table hits his cue and ends up 2 inches from where it started. I called a foul and he said no it was a good hit. I can't say that it didn't get under my skin. (probably what he wanted to do anyway)The good news is that people only play with him for one session then find someone else to shoot with. Next time I play him he won't get to the table unless he is making a 3-4 rail kick.

bsmutz
02-23-2007, 03:58 PM
I don't think you are naive. There are some players that will never acknowledge a foul unless you ask. Others will always call the foul on themselves if they are aware of it. My best advice is to set a good example for your opponents to follow and hope that they do.

Billy_Bob
02-24-2007, 05:32 AM
I feel for the long run, it is best to call fouls on yourself. Eventually you will be in a regional or maybe national tournament with a ref and all fouls will be noticed.

If a player wins by getting away with fouls now, they will be at a disadvantage at regionals where they will not be able to win this way.

Best to call fouls on yourself - have a penalty - and learn to win by following the rules.

Stones
02-24-2007, 12:23 PM
Since I was a kid, I've always had this thing about being able to face myself in the mirror each day. My father was a psychologist and I guess he got to me early on.

I've been blessed with the ability to play this game better than a few and when I play someone who I know will cheat, I watch them like a hawk, bare down and drill them.

Any victory won by cheating is no victory at all. How some people live with themselves is a mystery to me.

BRussell
02-24-2007, 05:46 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Tom_In_Cincy:</font><hr> You meet all different kinds of players from all walks of life. Some don't have the rules knowledge necessary to call a foul on themself or anyone else for that matter. <hr /></blockquote>I see what you mean, but I honestly don't think that's been the case when I've seen it happen.


<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Tom_In_Cincy:</font><hr> Let me ask you this, if your opponent called a foul on you, say you were looking for the ob to hit a rail, it didn't and you didn't know if the cb hit a rail, would you agree so easily? You didn't see it one way or the other... but it did happen in your opponents view.

What would you do? <hr /></blockquote> That's a good point, and it shows the importance of trust. In most cases I'd simply accept it. But if I know the player is willing to lie by pretending they didn't foul, why should I trust that they're telling the truth when they claim I fouled?

BRussell
02-24-2007, 05:53 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Cydpkt:</font><hr>I also get a little frustrated when my team members or the other team isn't paying attention. Every time they come to the table they ask if it was a foul. <hr /></blockquote> I have to admit there have been times when I've been more interested in my beer than the game, and didn't pay close enough attention. I still think it would be poor sportsmanship - though of course strictly within the rules - to try to fool your opponent into thinking you didn't foul by just sitting down without saying anything.

trob
02-25-2007, 07:17 AM
It's simple..you see a foul..you call it. If they disagree then you let the captains deal with it. After many years of experience if it looks like its going to be a close call when a player is shooting I make sure the captain is watching the shot. I don't get into arguments anymore. I let the captains hash it out and whatever they decide they decide. It's just leagues.

Fran Crimi
02-25-2007, 10:45 AM
Actually, if you're playing by BCA rules, it's more than poor sportsmanship not to admit your foul. It's considered cheating. In the absence of a referee, the players are REQUIRED to referee themselves and each other---Not just each other, but THEMSELVES as well. Not admitting your foul is an infraction of the rules.

Unfortunately, not enough people know that to enforce it. As far as what the punishment for cheating is, it is up to the one directing or running the league or tournament. It could mean anything from loss of game to loss of match.

Fran

underdog
02-25-2007, 12:39 PM
The way I see it, if you have to cheat in order to win, you have already lost. You shouldn't even be playing the game.

Billy
02-25-2007, 12:39 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr> Actually, if you're playing by BCA rules, it's more than poor sportsmanship not to admit your foul. It's considered cheating. In the absence of a referee, the players are REQUIRED to referee themselves and each other---Not just each other, but THEMSELVES as well. Not admitting your foul is an infraction of the rules.

Unfortunately, not enough people know that to enforce it. As far as what the punishment for cheating is, it is up to the one directing or running the league or tournament. It could mean anything from loss of game to loss of match.

Fran <hr /></blockquote>

I was playing Efren in a large PBT tournament with a referee officiating our match. I had him down 6-0 (going to 11) then while shooting I unintentionally nudged an object ball that the cueball eventually came back around the table and touched the ball I had moved. Efren saw the foul immediately, I knew I had fouled immediately, but the ref missed it. I unfortunately discussed with Reyes how I thought that if the ref missed it I should be able to continue.

mistake. it bothered me so much that I was helpless after this moral infraction. he went on to win 11-8 but the problem was with myself. to this day I'm still disturbed of how I handled it and did not just hand him the cueball

big lesson learned ...

jmo

SPetty
02-25-2007, 08:09 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr> Actually, if you're playing by BCA rules, it's more than poor sportsmanship not to admit your foul. It's considered cheating. In the absence of a referee, the players are REQUIRED to referee themselves and each other---Not just each other, but THEMSELVES as well. Not admitting your foul is an infraction of the rules.

Unfortunately, not enough people know that to enforce it.<hr /></blockquote>Hi Fran,

Although it's been awhile since I've read the rules front to back, I don't recall this rule. I know about the rule that the player not at the table is supposed to be refereeing and watching and is supposed to call fouls, but I don't recall ever seeing it written that the player at the table is supposed to referee themselves and call their own fouls on themselves. Is that actually written in the rules somewhere, or is it just "understood"?

Cydpkt
02-26-2007, 08:54 AM
I'm not saying that someone should try to fool your opponent by not admitting a foul. I was simply stating my frustration that every time an opponent comes to the table they ask if it was a foul. I guess there are those who play to socialize and those who are there to compete and learn. I have more than once stopped my opponent before they shoot because they were going to shoot stripes when they were solids. I'm not there to win by default.

Fran Crimi
02-26-2007, 09:00 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote SPetty:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr> Actually, if you're playing by BCA rules, it's more than poor sportsmanship not to admit your foul. It's considered cheating. In the absence of a referee, the players are REQUIRED to referee themselves and each other---Not just each other, but THEMSELVES as well. Not admitting your foul is an infraction of the rules.

Unfortunately, not enough people know that to enforce it.<hr /></blockquote>Hi Fran,

Although it's been awhile since I've read the rules front to back, I don't recall this rule. I know about the rule that the player not at the table is supposed to be refereeing and watching and is supposed to call fouls, but I don't recall ever seeing it written that the player at the table is supposed to referee themselves and call their own fouls on themselves. Is that actually written in the rules somewhere, or is it just "understood"? <hr /></blockquote>

Unfortunately, not stated directly but it's more than implied in the section where the players are responsbile for knowing the rules. If you hide the fact that you just fouled, then you are not following the rules, because according to the rules, if you foul you must suffer the applicable penalty.

However, I believe there will be a good chance in the near future that that part will be stated more clearly in the rule book, so it won't be just a more than implied rule anymore.

Fran

Sid_Vicious
02-26-2007, 11:40 AM
Until a definitive rule is established to cover this opinion, it's still the opponent's task to watch for fouls. On the teams I've played for in Vegas at the Nationals, it has been stressed by the veterans to NOT call fouls upon yourself, make them do their jobs. These players in reference are capable of wins without taking advantage of their mistakes mind you. The format and team aspect of winning in Vegas uses the ruleset as it is today. As I understand it, it is a majority of opinions from organized teams who have, and copntinue to go to the Nationals, to NOT call your own fouls yourself.

I call my own fouls in singles games, unless my opponent is a chatty-cathy and isn't watching. On teams, well you best watch my game if you are playing me...sid

TennesseeJoe
02-27-2007, 10:25 AM
This area needs to be clarified by the organizations. In many sports such as football, baseball, basketball, etc., only referees call fouls. If a player would call one on him/herself, people would think they are crazy. In pool: Why should an honest, respectable player be at a disadvantage when playing someone who would not call a foul on themselves. I'm guessing that 50% would call a foul and 50% wouldn't call one on themselves. Even if it is 90/10, so what? I think it is extremely important to be a gentleman, but it is more important not to be a fool.

Stretch
02-27-2007, 01:10 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote TennesseeJoe:</font><hr> This area needs to be clarified by the organizations. In many sports such as football, baseball, basketball, etc., only referees call fouls. If a player would call one on him/herself, people would think they are crazy. In pool: Why should an honest, respectable player be at a disadvantage when playing someone who would not call a foul on themselves. I'm guessing that 50% would call a foul and 50% wouldn't call one on themselves. Even if it is 90/10, so what? I think it is extremely important to be a gentleman, but it is more important not to be a fool. <hr /></blockquote>

The Strangest thing i ever saw was a Pro that waved off a Refs foul call and played the cue where it finished! This guy had his oppenent IN JAIL, i mean seriously fu7$ed with the cue frozen behind a few on one corner and the ob frozen behind a few balls on the other corner end of table. So this guy shoots backwards into the the head rail and hits an INSANE 4 rail kick through traffic at perfect weight to just bump the ob and roll safe trouble was the ob didn't quite catch the rail it was beside so no rails after hit. Ref calls foul, Pro was so amazed this guy even came close goes no that wasn't that was a great shot! He plays it out but has no shot himself so he plays a kick safe and the game went on. St.

Fran Crimi
02-27-2007, 01:15 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote SPetty:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr> Actually, if you're playing by BCA rules, it's more than poor sportsmanship not to admit your foul. It's considered cheating. In the absence of a referee, the players are REQUIRED to referee themselves and each other---Not just each other, but THEMSELVES as well. Not admitting your foul is an infraction of the rules.

Unfortunately, not enough people know that to enforce it.<hr /></blockquote>Hi Fran,

Although it's been awhile since I've read the rules front to back, I don't recall this rule. I know about the rule that the player not at the table is supposed to be refereeing and watching and is supposed to call fouls, but I don't recall ever seeing it written that the player at the table is supposed to referee themselves and call their own fouls on themselves. Is that actually written in the rules somewhere, or is it just "understood"? <hr /></blockquote>

Unfortunately, not stated directly but it's more than implied in the section where the players are responsbile for knowing the rules. If you hide the fact that you just fouled, then you are not following the rules, because according to the rules, if you foul you must suffer the applicable penalty.

However, I believe there will be a good chance in the near future that that part will be stated more clearly in the rule book, so it won't be just a more than implied rule anymore.

Fran <hr /></blockquote>


<font color="blue"> Bob, being that you're a rules writer, do you know of anything in the rule book that makes it clear that players have to police themselves as well as their opponents? I remember you posting something to that effect about a year or so ago. Can you recall it?

Fran</font color>

supergreenman
02-27-2007, 03:03 PM
When this question came up last year, maybe it was here or on AZbilliards, my answer was mixed. I said at that time it depends on who I'm playing. Since then I think I must have growed (sic) up.

I now will call every foul on myself regardless of who I'm playing. I think the difference this year is that I recruited my little brother for my team and I suppose I wanted to be a better example.

SteveFromNY
03-02-2007, 02:02 PM
Nice change in attitude! /ccboard/images/graemlins/smile.gif For myself, there has NEVER been any instance where I would not call my own foul. It's cheating if you don't and it frustrates me when others try to get away with it.

bataisbest
03-02-2007, 03:14 PM
I agree. I remember a few years back watching a match of 7- ball ,I believe it was, on ESPN between Earl Strickland and Charlie Williams. The match was very close and Strickland committed a foul after his shot hitting another ball with his stick. Charlie immediately got out of his chair thinking he was getting ball-in-hand to run out the set. The referee stated he did'nt see the foul however on the replay, you can see Strickland clearly commit the foul and he knew it but refused to acknowledge it stating," The ref did'nt see it" . The crowd and everyone else including the announcers could'nt believe Strickland refused to admit the foul. Strickland ended up losing the match eventually but it was very clear he should od acknowledged the foul initially. I personally did'nt care for his style of play before seeing that match and afterward, well ,it just reinforced what I believed all along it's better to admit your foul, you will earn more respect from your peers and fellow players. Something I believe Strickland has lost over the years because of the way he acts sometimes.

cushioncrawler
03-02-2007, 04:41 PM
In English billiards, in my leagues, it is ungentlemanly (unladylike) to not warn yor opponent that he/she iz going to hit the wrong qball. Often, if a "wrong qball" foul iz called, the other player will apologize (genuinely) and say "sorry, i woznt looking". But, nonetheless, once called, apologetic or not, the foulee will try to make hay from the leev.

Allso, in snooker, a ref might call a "foul &amp; miss", but the foulee sometimes decides to "play them as they lay", instead of "sending hiz opponent in again", koz, he/she thinks that the ruling woznt fair. In fact, i seem to recall that for a while the top boyz in England had an unwritten convention to that end. madMac.

Bob_Jewett
03-02-2007, 05:59 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Fran Crimi:</font><hr> ... <font color="blue"> Bob, being that you're a rules writer, do you know of anything in the rule book that makes it clear that players have to police themselves as well as their opponents? I remember you posting something to that effect about a year or so ago. Can you recall it?

Fran</font color>

<hr /></blockquote>
I don't know of anything specific, and there is nothing in the proposed new rules, but I'll see what I can do about it.

Too many US players have the attitude, "Screw the rules, I'll get away with as much as I can, and if I get in a tight spot, I'll intimidate the ref/TD." I don't have that much experience playing overseas, but the impression I get is that the attitudes there are far different -- far more sportsmanlike.

In Europe and Asia, they play all fouls, even in unrefereed tournaments. The "cue ball fouls only" rule appeared mostly because in the US, you can't trust your opponent not to call a non-existent foul.

My feeling is that if there is no referee, both players are bound to respect the rules and ensure that the rules are all properly enforced, whether it is to their advantage or not. I consider anything less cheating and unsportsmanlike. When you foul, you lose your turn, you pay the penalty, and you sit down. Any other response, whether the ref saw it or not, whether your opponent saw it or not, is the nasty little move of a cheat.

In the rules meeting, there was a discussion of what to do at eight ball if the wrong group was being played by one of the players. The non-US people were startled that anyone would keep quiet until the end and then point out that the game was just lost by sinking the eight out of turn. This is like the US carom tactic of keeping quiet about having changed cue balls until it is to your benefit (your opponent just scored a point, for example). Respecting the game means that you call any foul that occurs as soon as it occurs.