I wrote before how some people admit if they foul when no one is looking, and others don't/wont.
I wrote it has to do with your internal ethic meter, maybe how you were raised, sometimes it even depends on what the score is or if you are in a team event or not.
I ran across an interesting scenario last weekend during the Omega Tour tournament. I saw this happen one other time on the the Ladies Tour I ran, and each similar situation still baffles me.
Long story short, a player called three fouls on himself. The additional problem was, it was hill-hill.
Some people are so honest, that the concept of NOT letting their opponent know they have just committed their third foul is just unfathomable to them.
In this situation, a player called me over and gave me the scenario. "Uh, well, I just told my opponent he's on two fouls, and he tells me, 'well, actually, that was my third foul in a row, so I just lost.' "
I stood there confused.
The player shares, almost with a sad, conflicted admission, "Melinda, it's hill-hill."
He was conflicted about the whole situation. He was dumbfounded and didn't know what to do. He hadn't told his opponent he was on two fouls until he thought he was on two, and now his opponent is telling him, "oh, I already was, so I lost."
I told his opponent that he isn't suppose to call fouls on himself. He looked deflated. You could tell he was internally upset that he did the right thing by admitting he was already on three fouls, yet I am telling him he needs to shoot again.
He tried to explain that he was on three fouls and deserved the loss. Yet his opponent and I are trying to almost plead with him that he's not suppose to call them on himself, tho.
He finally just gave up the fight. I was asked watch the hit (it was a really close shot), he fouled, and then it was officially three fouls in a row and he lost hill-hill.
I tried desperately to explain he shouldn't call two or three fouls on himself and so did his opponent. He finally told me, "Melinda, I hear what you are saying, I really do, but I know I will call this on myself in the future if it comes up."
You see, some people are just that honest. No matter how many ways I could explain to him why or show him the rule book that it's his opponents' responsibility to put him on two/three, he was not going to accept the fact because it is kind of lying or cheating in his eyes and heart.
And that's okay.
2 comments:
Honesty IS the best policy. How do you live with yourself if you know -- in your heart -- that you were not fair (notice I didn't say "fouled," or "cheated"). I recall the straight pool tournament where I had ever so slightly touched a ball. I stood up, took a step back, and appeared to be studying the table. But I was not ... I was struggling with the fact that I had fouled and my opponent had not seen it. Sure, I could go on with the game. But I stood there, wrestling with the thought that I KNEW it would be wrong. My opponent began to get restless -- sensing that something was wrong. Abruptly I turned to him and said, "I fouled." He looked puzzled, but took his place at the table. I sat down, dejected -- but relieved. Never again would I hesitate in similar situations. I had had a taste of the pain, and wanted no more of it.
Well, the point of the post is that honest is NOT the best policy when it comes to the 3-foul rule. The 3-foul rule is a strategy that your opponent is trying to place 3 fouls in a row to defeat you that game, not so you can call it on yourself. 99% of players do not call 3 fouls on themselves. Hence the dilemma for that hill-hill game I wrote about. As for fouls in general, I also believe honesty is the best policy.
Post a Comment