News Carom Billiard

 

Carom Billiard - 3-Cushion - Kozoom News - Lier (BEL)

Raymond Ceulemans (82) says farewell in Belgium

Posted by on June 16, 2020

Raymond Ceulemans (82) says farewell in Belgium

© Kozoom
The Ceulemans team with Bart, Raymond, Kurt and Peter in one of its recent matches

LIER - The end of a historical team in the Belgian league is near. Raymond Ceulemans (82) has decided to stop his career as a team player in the line-up for Mr. 100 Lier. The motivation and the drive are no longer there, that's how the billiard legend commented himself. The Mr. 100 team with four 'Ceulemansen' (Peter, Kurt, Raymond and Bart) played together since 2007. The new player to replace Raymond Ceulemans is Dutchman Jerry Hermans.

The all time most successful billiard player ensures that it is not his final farewell. "I will still be available as a stand-in player," the figurehead said. ''That means that I can still play for the first, second and third Mr. 100 team in competition. So, if they need me, I can still play and I will be happy to join them. In the Netherlands, I will continue playing for two teams: five matches for Sluiskil and all matches for 't Caves.''

Raymond Ceulemans thinks the time is there to take a step back for his home team. ''I will turn 83 years old, it is a good decision. Jerry Hermans, the new Mr. 100 player, gave me the push. I want to give the youth a chance. The Corona crisis has not determined my future. I already had the idea to quit the team last season. Jerry Hermans joins a team that he knows very well, because Peter and Kurt play in his team in the Netherlands.''

The most recent flashback dates from February 24 this year. Mister 100 Lier ran over the Kortrijk team, which was the revelation of the competition, 8-0, with 1,628 on team average. The star of the evening was Raymond Ceulemans. It turned out to be his last match.

Grandsons Peter (39) and Bart (36) respect the grandmaster's decision. ''It is unfortunate, of course, but we knew it could not last forever. Moreover, we expect him to play with us a number of times in the new season. When not playing, he will be our coach. For now we say: Bompa, thanks for everything!''

Raymond Ceulemans is the 21 times world champion three cushion in his career. With that record, he leads the rankings for Torbjörn Blomdahl (6), Dani Sánchez and Dick Jaspers (4) and Frédéric Caudron (3).

The Mr. 100 team will appear in the highest league in Belgium in the following line-up: Peter Ceulemans, Kurt Ceulemans, Jerry Hermans, Bart Ceulemans. Reserve players Raymond and Koen.

The Ceulemans team with it's five players in the line-up: Bart, Kurt, Peter, Raymond and Koen.

Back to All News

My Comments

Jordi_Fontdevila
Jordi_Fontdevila
What Suspended and Non-Suspended Players Must know: The Legal Approach

I’ve posted the following comment at “Top-five players in summer: waiting for new starts, Posted by Frits BAKKER on June 9, 2020”:

“On 2020-May-10, I e-mailed “To Stay on Point: The Legal Approach, by Jordi Fontdevila" to my 3C friends, an opinion about the 3C Players crossover.

I had no intention to post that opinion here, but, after some phone calls and out of respect for Kozoom fellow readers, here we are, here we go, again. Sorry!

I will change just the title to “What Suspended and Non-Suspended Players Must know: The Legal Approach” and I will maintain the subtitles, as follows:

Part 1/3: Let’s Introduce How Life Goes
Part 2/3: Let’s Look At “The Suspension of Players” (as Mr Barki puts)
Part 3/3: Now, The 5 Yeses

I will post the full content in the incoming Mr Frits Bakker News Articles, as comment, even if unrelated to the subject (I offer my apology for that).

Enjoy, if possible, of course.”

The 3 following Comments will assert the line “Promise MADE, Promise KEPT!” WHAT A WAY TO HONOR CEULEMANS

Jordi Fontdevila

Message 1/4 - Publish at June 16, 2020 3:11 PM

Jordi_Fontdevila
Jordi_Fontdevila
What Suspended and Non-Suspended Players Must know: The Legal Approach, Part 1/3, by Jordi Fontdevila

Part 1/3: LET'S INTRODUCE HOW LIFE GOES

Generically speaking, it’s quite easy, to men in positions of power, to swiftly impose on those who are “faithful to them” or “depend on them”, even with a simple gesture or facial expression, a process through which a sort of army is born to force their views on others, on the other side, the side not in line with the alignment, the one that, they are sure, will cause a lose-lose situation that will kill the 'chicken that lays the golden eggs' or that will cause a “great future uncertainty".

This is a pretty common occurrence, and the pattern is very well known:

a)When this kind of army is established (continuing to follow the generic speaking previous approach), there’s no need of a battle: we haven’t there, anymore, a win or lose situation, because the other side didn’t even think a war was there, but just a small problem to be solved, as soon as possible, and their quiet thinking is about union and a thoughtful solution, at least in most of cases.

b)So, those in positions of power have a very strong and reliable position: they just need to simulate and to buy time to deteriorate processes and, if badly needed, to have some cosmetic arrangements to go hand in hand to the connected point. This hypothetical situation is more vivid when we look at organizations with decentralized operations and local managers, where effects must be particularly noticeable by the Master, or else.

c)During that so-called “war” and in the aftermath, soldiers of the “victorious” side expect punishment of the fellow “enemies” and bigger pay checks for them, promotions on one side, suspensions on the other: some, even knowing that injustice is there, look at the moon and try to see a fish there and remain in silence, no-action at all, while others, those who do not care, are laughing their heads off (with a light competition, they will move the scale upward and have bigger rewards). The question is (always is) for those in between, when dignity and honor is there and when they get the real picture (will they be able to laugh on the other side of their faces, or not?).

Do we have, here, any applicable way out? A flood is there, but we cannot hold back the flood when only light rain is visible and we barely can use an umbrella. So, everything depends on how wisely we are able to measure and to deal with the AFTERMATH, because that ability makes all the difference.

(To Continue)
Jordi Fontdevila

Message 2/4 - Publish at June 16, 2020 3:12 PM

Jordi_Fontdevila
Jordi_Fontdevila
What Suspended and Non-Suspended Players Must know: The Legal Approach, Part 2/3, by Jordi Fontdevila
Part 2/3: LET'S LOOK AT "THE SUSPENSION OF PLAYERS"(as Mr Barki puts)

Now, let’s drive the subject to Billiards, to 3C, to the "suspension of players", as per Mr Barki words

1.Did anyone give a serious thought on why Mr Barki said “and consequently the suspension of players that participate in non-UMB recognized PBA events will remain valid" (“Billiards president Farouk Barki speaks in times of crisis, posted by Mr Frits BAKKER on April 16, 2020")?

2.Why to point up “non-UMB recognized PBA events” and not “non-PBA recognized UMB events", or, more broadly, just “the recognizing process procedure”, considering that PBA doesn’t deal with suspensions (Players are free to play wherever they want to)?

3.Ah well, you say, PBA must pay a fee to be recognized by UMB. Ah well, I say, we are talking about the same fee that UMB has to pay to be recognized by PBA: we have an even-handed approach and even-handed regular justice, here, same rights for two distinct Legal Organizations.

4.UMB imposed a serious doubtful (to say the least) monopolized competition through their statutes (Art 22) and PBA didn’t, because PBA is in for Free Competition, not Monopolized Competition, but, doing that, PBA didn’t diminish any legal challenge or ability, of course.

5.In this case, if UMB wants to recognize PBA, or PBA events, please, do it. If not, UMB must demonstrate on legal ground, two things: firstly, that PBA must pay to be recognized and, secondly, that PBA does not need to recognize UMB, too, and to be paid, as well. And if arguments derive to recognitions without payments (most probable hypothesis), the logic demonstration would be the same, meaning that there is only free space to even judging.

6.Organizations cannot shield themselves, using the "protection" to surge as a monopolistic organization, and, by that assumption, capture the result, as an argument, to say that if others do not ‘Statute Shield their operations', even if on a non doubtful manner, they have not equal rights under the Law and, subsequently, that they have some kind of special legal authority on them. They cannot and they have not.

7.Any Court Judge would easily say this:

a)“So, let’s see what I have here: UMB doesn’t allow ‘their’ Players to play at PBA events, without recognizing, first, PBA events and the other side, PBA, allows ‘their’ Players to play at UMB events, with no need to recognize the UMB events. What’s the recognizing ground process truth about?

b)Moreover, “Your” Players, as I understood, is a very unclear and surely uncertain assumption (and, also, a very questionable argument, even if we could look at that as a separate issue), and you both very well know that even if you show to me a signed declaration of each Player saying that they are Players of “yours”, that would be of no legal frame ground to the situation and that would have no face value to the process, because Players are surely able to say, some of them, at least, that they will issue the same signed declaration to both of you and that would have, also, the same face value.

c)UMB states that ‘doesn’t allow “their” Players to participate in events not recognized by UMB and did not recognize PBA’, and that the recognizing process doesn’t have anything to do with Players, it's just a UMB/PBA 'thing', obviously, but, UMB has decided to suspend Players, just in case, instead of doing the appropriate correct things to solve the situation, to accelerate the process before questionable actions could take place, as if the first action (suspension) substitutes the second, as if, with the first action (suspension), UMB doesn’t need any more motivation to do what UMB, supposedly, need to do, as if UMB, really, doesn’t need to do anything at all, or never needed to do anything at all. Do you follow me, Counselor? Do I see any sense of proportionality, here, Counselor?

d)The invoked argument of fees and a fit calendar for tournaments of each side, has anything to do with Players? Of course, not. Is there an argument here, Counselors?

e)Do you want a fit calendar to accommodate each other events? Talk things over, both of you, or suffer the consequences. Do you want fees from each other? Talk things over, both sides. You are distinct Organizations. You do not depend on each other. Recognize yourselves first and, after that, try to recognize others. Players have nothing to do with your problems.

f)Why are you, People, here? Are you real? I have more to do, Counselors”.

8.Free Billiard Competition is glued with International Laws of Free Movement and Individual Liberties as opposed to Monopolized Competition and, because of that, Players have the right to apply to compete wherever they want to, having nothing to do with “competitions which had to be recognized by or with which UMB is concerned as well those which has not yet obtained the agreement of the UMB Board” (Statutes, art 22, nr 2), mainly if these competitions are outside UMB domain: PBA is a Legal Organization and does not need UMB agreement to operate.

(To Continue)
Jordi Fontdevila

Message 3/4 - Publish at June 16, 2020 3:14 PM - Edited at June 22, 2020 3:00 PM

Jordi_Fontdevila
Jordi_Fontdevila
What Suspended and Non-Suspended Players Must know: The Legal Approach, Part 3/3, by Jordi Fontdevila
Part 3/3: NOW, THE 5 YESES

Here we are: The 5 YESES

a)Yes, UMB statutes were written a long time ago, under other framed circumstances, and art 22 - at least nr 2 and nr 3, but only nr 2 matters to this case - it’s not only morally questionable or unacceptable, but surely unlawful - absolute certainty - and if presented to a Court of Law, any Judge would issue a mandatory order to change the statutes - in this case, to purge art 22 nr 2 (the same applies to nr 3, by the way).

b)Yes, we can gather persons for a purpose, call them members, approve statutes to protect or preserve our new organization (sometimes overlooking the creation of similar organizations, “just in case”), but there are limits that cannot touch certain grades of rights and/or liberties (both at individual and social spheres) and other side boundaries related to Free Movement, Competition and Monopoly.

c)Yes, this newborn organization, referred at b), with or not counsel advise, knowing or not legal implications, is able to approve unlawful procedures (members vote) and, after that, exert an authority based on a platform that, down the road, reveals itself to be illegal and to be purged. It appears that there is all the right to do what’s been done (members vote power efficacy), but the exerted right can be reversed.

d)Yes, to reverse a situation like this one, we need Process, Time, Money and Patience and only a few want to walk that road and Free Players must avoid that, if possible, to keep away the never-ending sticky red tape bureaucracy trap (only PBA is able to advance, if they want to stand up for Players, but that it's doubtful).

e)Yes, with the road empty, “autocrats”, if there are any, in this World, can reign in peace and we very well know that we cannot snap our fingers and remove them: they are there for the time they want to – as long as they take the post, a firm takeover is consolidated and not because they are bad guys, but because the flow of life goes that way (around very carefully designed and solidified election processes).

In sum, who has the chance of winning the case? UMB does not want legal cases and the why is quite clear and obvious. PBA has no time and no structure to advance that way. Players will stay at home: too much traffic. Only two approaches are available and just because there is a noticeable wind blow: the old framed approach based on the book “How To Get These Guys Out Of Business Without Effort With European Cuisine And Small Sweet Talk” and a new framed approach on the book “How To Live With European Cuisine And Sweet Small Talk Without Farting Too Much”.


Jordi Fontdevila

Message 4/4 - Publish at June 16, 2020 3:15 PM - Edited at June 22, 2020 2:58 PM

Post new comment

Log in or register now to leave a comment

Forgot your password?

Don’t have an account yet?

Sign up now for free to post comments, add your photos, partipate in our forums and receive exclusive Newsletter.

Then you can get a Premium Pass for a full Live and Video access.

Join Kozoom