Snooker Chiefs trying to make Snooker Sexier than Darts!

ratinakeg

Get a grip snooker chiefs!:rolleyes:

WE WILL MAKE SNOOKER EVEN SEXIER THAN DARTS

World Snooker chiefs are turning to darts in a bid to sex-up the sport ahead of next year's World Championship.

The sport's rulers want to create the same kind of renaissance that has seen a new generation of darts fans paying homage to the oche.

They were particularly envious of the fact that while 900 fans crammed into Sheffield's Crucible Theatre for snooker's world final, down the road at the Hallam Arena last week more than 5,000 saw Matchday 13 in the Darts Premier League.

World Snooker boss Sir Rodney Walker wants to transform the sport with the help of Tim Darby, the man who worked with Barry Hearn to take darts to a new level.

Darby said: "I have been asked to look at the overall operation of world snooker and make a report into what elements can be changed and how.

"The report will look into what sort of things could be done to improve its image and make it more exciting.
Depending on the reaction it gets, we will have to take it from there."

It is music to the ears of Ronnie O'Sullivan, snooker's main box office draw, who insists the game is "dying'' and in need of a Simon Cowell-type impresario.

No chance!:D

Double Top

maybe they should try and get snooker walk on girls:D:D:D, tell you something would mind one of then holding my cue:p:p

ratinakeg

Double Top wrote: »

maybe they should try and get snooker walk on girls:D:D:D, tell you something would mind one of then holding my cue:p:p

Cracking stuff!!:D:D

I want all female topless snooker!;):D

Evolution Enter

Depeche Mode - Enjoy the Silence

That song should be snookers anthem

With darts, a boisterous crowd is encouraged, you can let loose at a darts match, during snooker, it's all about being quiet

Like I read on the sky sports site, it's unfair to compare snooker to darts, pool can be compared to darts, not snooker!!

Snooker needs characters, that's what darts has had in recent years, and that's the difference, if everyone in darts was a Terry Jenkins (who I love) or a Jelle Klassen, then darts would be in the same state as snooker. The Peter Manleys, Mervyn Kings, and even though I hate him, Wayne Mardles make darts the spectle it is!

Taylor is your inspired Ronnie O'Sullivan, but without the supporting cast it doesn't work. Sports Entertainment is what we're watching, and I don't mean wrestling

ratinakeg

Evolution Enter wrote: »

Sports Entertainment is what we're watching, and I don't mean wrestling

Darts is an entertaining sport but it's a proper sport and you can't compare it to made up storylines and the madness of sports entertainment!:rolleyes:

Evolution Enter

Of course I can compare the two, hell, darts has already directly taken two wrestling entrance theme songs to go along with the darts entrances.

The way each match is built up in the league is very much like a wrestling promo package before a 'fight'! I think modern darts has much more in common with pro wrestling than it does with snooker

ratinakeg

Evolution Enter wrote: »

Of course I can compare the two, hell, darts has already directly taken two wrestling entrance theme songs to go along with the darts entrances.

The way each match is built up in the league is very much like a wrestling promo package before a 'fight'! I think modern darts has much more in common with pro wrestling than it does with snooker

I'd compare darts more with boxing way more than wrestling anyday.

Evolution Enter

This is semantics, seeing as boxing copied alot of what do now to build up fights from wrestling when boxing hit the doldrums

My point is that darts lends itself to a one on one fight type atmosphere, it's back and forth and the crowd are allowed play their part

Snooker is different, a player can lose a frame after only hitting one shot, it's slow paced and the crowd is not allowed to interact

ratinakeg

Evolution Enter wrote: »

This is semantics, seeing as boxing copied alot of what do now to build up fights from wrestling when boxing hit the doldrums

My point is that darts lends itself to a one on one fight type atmosphere, it's back and forth and the crowd are allowed play their part

Snooker is different, a player can lose a frame after only hitting one shot, it's slow paced and the crowd is not allowed to interact

When was this exactly? First I ever heard of it and I'm a boxing fan and I even used to box!

I agree with the rest of your statement though!

Degag

In fairness, Evolution Enter is right... Darts has borrowed alot from pro wrestling... The Elaborate entrances, giving players nicknames and superhero persona's, the tedious promo's, ott commentary, wrestlers music etc....

ratinakeg

Degag wrote: »

In fairness, Evolution Enter is right... Darts has borrowed alot from pro wrestling... The Elaborate entrances, giving players nicknames and superhero persona's, the tedious promo's, ott commentary, wrestlers music etc....

Same can be said about boxing throughout the years, from Ali, to Tyson to Mayweather and so on. I'm not having ago or anything but just saying that boxing never copied off wrestling, more the other way around. It's wrestling that has payed top name boxers to compete in WrestleMania's and the likes, namely Tyson, Mayweather and Butterbean of the top of my head. I agree mostly with what Evolution Enter has to say but in my opinion darts is more along the lines of boxing. The only ott commentator in darts is our "good old friend Sid". I've seen some great boxing entrances over the years. Boxers mostly always have nicknames and I think I can remember a few superstars in boxing. Barney also uses Rocky music and I remember a few others who have or still use boxing music as walk on songs.

Evolution Enter

There isn't really an argument here, just a consensus that darts has been able to borrow from other sports and entertainment such as boxing or wrestling

The term sports entertainment is exactly what darts has become, what wrestling is, and what boxing is.

With darts you have the players, the rules, the scoring, averages, rankings etc that make up the sports aspect, but the entrances, the walk on girls, the ott commentary, the good guys and the bad guys, the characters, the exhibitions - these are all entertainment

My point in relation to snooker, it has a clearly defined sports aspect, but that's it. Outside of the game itself it becomes limited. Is there room within the game to add to it's appeal?? A feud even??

ratinakeg

Evolution Enter wrote: »

There isn't really an argument here, just a consensus that darts has been able to borrow from other sports and entertainment such as boxing or wrestling

The term sports entertainment is exactly what darts has become, what wrestling is, and what boxing is.

With darts you have the players, the rules, the scoring, averages, rankings etc that make up the sports aspect, but the entrances, the walk on girls, the ott commentary, the good guys and the bad guys, the characters, the exhibitions - these are all entertainment

My point in relation to snooker, it has a clearly defined sports aspect, but that's it. Outside of the game itself it becomes limited. Is there room within the game to add to it's appeal?? A feud even??

Well said mate, I'm on the same wavelength now!

They tried to sex up snooker before and it was still boring with the Snooker Premier League, No characters at all left in the game now!

iseethelight

ratinakeg wrote: »

No characters at all left in the game now!

Can't agree
Is O'Sullivan not a character.Everyone hates Ebdon. Robertson is certainly a character to name but 3 and there are others.
Also Maguire and Murphy are known to hate each other.

So the characters are there. The wider question is what to do with the product regarding entertainment. Snooker is not in keeping with our modern instant fix of excitement society. Perhaps the 6 reds idea is one to run with for a new darts like league.

Its not so long since darts was looking in the mirror facing the same problems i.e. public apathy and low viewing figures. Darts turned it around and I hope snooker can.

ratinakeg

iseethelight wrote: »

Can't agree
Is O'Sullivan not a character.Everyone hates Ebdon. Robertson is certainly a character to name but 3 and there are others.
Also Maguire and Murphy are known to hate each other.

So the characters are there. The wider question is what to do with the product regarding entertainment. Snooker is not in keeping with our modern instant fix of excitement society. Perhaps the 6 reds idea is one to run with for a new darts like league.

Its not so long since darts was looking in the mirror facing the same problems i.e. public apathy and low viewing figures. Darts turned it around and I hope snooker can.

Sorry I forgot about the Rocket!:o

As for the others you have named, in my view not entertaining. Murphy is real religous and never steps out of order. He's not a character. Ebdon is so slow and boring but I do like John Higgins!

I use to love watching snooker but it's gone stale and sadly I don't see it returning to its former glory years (hope I'm wrong). An example would be the Snooker Premier league as I mentioned earlier, that went balls up (sadly).

Evolution Enter

O'Sullivan is one of snookers biggest problems despite being it's biggest draw. He is apathetic towards the game, wheras Phil Taylor, when dominant over darts when it was in the doldrums, was part of the brains behind the premier league, and always remained enthusiastic and optimistic about the sport

How does O'Sullivan help snooker when as it's biggest draw, continually moans about losing interest in the game himself

At the end of the day, a darts leg lasts what, maybe two minutes, 30-40 darts between the two players before the race of a new leg starts again. With snooker it's obviously much longer and far more tactical.

Too appeal to the masses, darts is like fast food to use another comparison!! It's easy to consume a large amount of small doses!!

The thing is, with that being the biggest difference, I really don't see snooker being able to change! It's a tactical game, and reducing the number of balls to make the games shorter will remove what snooker fans love about the game.

So.....I guess what I'm saying is that snooker is, well, snookered!!

Degag

ratinakeg wrote: »

Same can be said about boxing throughout the years, from Ali, to Tyson to Mayweather and so on. I'm not having ago or anything but just saying that boxing never copied off wrestling, more the other way around. It's wrestling that has payed top name boxers to compete in WrestleMania's and the likes, namely Tyson, Mayweather and Butterbean of the top of my head.

Undertaker and Batista are two wrestlers who've carried the flag at Boxing Events in recent times (Batista Saturday night last from what i've heard) Now, i've no idea if they were paid or not so perhaps my point is invalid, but i know it garnered alot of media attention.

iseethelight wrote: »

Can't agree
Is O'Sullivan not a character.Everyone hates Ebdon. Robertson is certainly a character to name but 3 and there are others.
Also Maguire and Murphy are known to hate each other.

I know what you are saying but some of the commentators were frowning on Robertson fist pumping in the World Championships.... Unless the social stigma of anything even slightly OTT in snooker disappears, it's going to get worse before it gets better.

Evolution Enter wrote: »

O'Sullivan is one of snookers biggest problems despite being it's biggest draw. He is apathetic towards the game, wheras Phil Taylor, when dominant over darts when it was in the doldrums, was part of the brains behind the premier league, and always remained enthusiastic and optimistic about the sport

I don't know, Taylors dominance could have turned alot of people off darts... i know alot of people who don't bother watching his games anymore because he's going to win 95% of the time. Speaking relitivaly, Tayler is much more dominant than O'Sullivan in their respective sports. I also think that O'Sullivan has drawn more fans to snooker rather than away from it regardless of his questionable behaviour at times.

ratinakeg

Batista and The Undertaker at differant fights escorted Manny Pacquiao to the ring that's all, you don't get paid for that.

Evolution Enter

I have to say, Taylors dominance puts me off at times, but when you have players chasing the incredibly high standards he sets, it makes for compelling viewing. What is a Wade v Barney match now only a gauge on whether his rivals are improving to beat Taylor...which in time I believe they will, if Wade matures further and Barney relaxes and gets his head together.

Rival darts organisations is also a darts strength over snooker, and players switching, like Anderson and Webster tonight. Have to say, also, the increasing numbers of asian players will only reduce interest in the game in the western hemisphere, if that trend continues

Degag

ratinakeg wrote: »

Batista and The Undertaker at differant fights escorted Manny Pacquiao to the ring that's all, you don't get paid for that.

Yeah, i partly guessed that they weren't......

ratinakeg

Sid Waddell's view;

Snookered by darts?

Why is snooker on the wane, while darts is on the up and up?


I read an article in the Daily Mail recently, which posed this question: Why is the popularity of darts going through the roof, while interest on snooker seems to be on the wane?

It's an interesting point. With the success of the world championship at Ally Pally and packed houses at the Premier League every week, darts has never been more popular. Both sports were in Sheffield this week so it seems like a good time to have this debate.



Snooker or darts: which do you prefer?

My personal view is that the success of Phil Taylor is driving darts forward. He is doing things that have been making his fellow professionals gasp in recent times. James Wade (his biggest rival) and Dennis Priestley (now probably his biggest fan) have both commented on how he is raising the bar.

In last year's UK Open he broke the record for the highest televised average with 114.53 against Wes Newton and he continued his record-breaking in the world championship final where he averaged 111 against Barney, by far the best ever in a televised world final.



Just over a week ago, he beat his own record for the highest televised average with 116.01 against John Part in the Premier League. Such a playing level is thrilling players and fans alike. In comparison, a snooker player getting a maximum 147 break seems almost mundane.

In snooker, the appeal has mainly come from the mavericks. In its heyday there were guys like Alex Higgins and Jimmy White; maverick geniuses who were great to watch.

We have a sport where there are mavericks like Adrian Lewis and Peter Manley, but the tone of our sport is set by the amazing achievements of Taylor. He seems to be able to break some sort of record almost every week.

The only natural genius around in snooker these days is Ronnie O'Sullivan, but the tone tends to be set by "boy band" players with their infinite safety play. There are far too many young lads who are lacking charisma and I believe that is one of the reasons why snooker is losing popularity.

You could argue that darts can be performed in front of 6,000 to 9,000 people in fancy dress getting very excited. Obviously the crowd has to be more subdued when watching snooker. I'm not sure it's fair to compare the popularity of the two games because of that.

Generally though, darts has a wider demographic to appeal to. I think our sport - with its mad commentary, walk-on girls and razzmatazz - is more suited to people of both sexes aged between 15 and 45.

I would argue that the way darts is shown on Sky Sports, like a pop concert with plenty of razzle dazzle, is more attractive to that age group than snooker.

I have even read suggestions that snooker commentators should become as freewheeling - and occasionally off the wall - as us darts lot...

jamesbere

i like snooker, i play it a small bit when i get a chance, but what r they goin to do to sex it up, have people holding 7 signs when they pot the black, i mean darts has always been centred around a pub, which is loud distracting and can put u off ur darts and how is that different from the darts on tv. Snooker has to be quiet cos its a totally different setting, u would not see a snooker table in a pub. Whatever they try to do will be pointless i think, leave it alone.

abouttobebanned

You can see why snooker chiefs are worried.

Remember in Happy Gilmore when Happy was kicking the ****e out of people and some people were calling on him to be kicked off the tour...but they didn't cause the ratings were through the roof? At the moment, Ronnie O Sullivan is snooker's Happy Gilmore and he's almost through with the sport...he's become bored. Any sport where you'll likely to fall asleep in the front row is a sport that's always going to have marketing difficulties.

What can they do?

Well there are a lot of things they can do but the traditionalists won't particularly like them. Snooker is a game very similar to chess, unfortunately it has the same level of spectator enjoyment because it can be played at such a slow, and calculated pace. They tried the premier league with the time limits etc...it brought back memories of Big break with the possibility of players running around the table...unfortunately they gave them time outs, which defeated the purpose of the whole thing.

Some kind of FA Cup style tournament where we could see Ronnie playing against some 16-year old wonderkid from wrexham. That kind of romantic snooker - if I could call it such a thing - might arouse some interest from the punters.

My Day job is in PR so I'm trying in some way to get into the heads of the snooker chiefs...something does have to be done though....owners of snooker halls throughout the country are begging for it.

Evolution Enter

From a PR point of view, I think the angle is all wrong

Boxing-Wrestling-Darts all have linkable traits, and as a result we've been comparing them

Snooker's problem with the way they are thinking is comparing itself to darts!! They're just not on the same wavelength!! Darts is popular and they want a piece of the action!!

From a simple PR point of view, maybe moving the World Championships onto SKY, they know how to promote an event

ratinakeg

Evolution Enter wrote: »

From a PR point of view, I think the angle is all wrong

Boxing-Wrestling-Darts all have linkable traits, and as a result we've been comparing them

Snooker's problem with the way they are thinking is comparing itself to darts!! They're just not on the same wavelength!! Darts is popular and they want a piece of the action!!

From a simple PR point of view, maybe moving the World Championships onto SKY, they know how to promote an event

Well said!

Well maybe they could move it to SKY but I think SKY gave it enough time with the Premier League Snooker over the years and that was a total failure viewer wise even though they tried to speed it up and make it more "sexier"!

iseethelight

Evolution Enter wrote: »

From a simple PR point of view, maybe moving the World Championships onto SKY, they know how to promote an event

I don't think they can.I stand to be corrected but I believe that the World Championships are one of the protected for terrestrial television events.

ratinakeg

iseethelight wrote: »

I don't think they can.I stand to be corrected but I believe that the World Championships are one of the protected for terrestrial television events.

Yeah that is correct, just like Wimbledon, the Grand National or The Open(golf).

Evolution Enter

If it's really protected, why was there talk of it moving to Asia??

Truth is, there is nothing wrong with snooker, what it needs is maybe 3-4 big tournaments a year on tv, promote the hell outta them and abandon the premier league

iseethelight

Evolution Enter wrote: »

If it's really protected, why was there talk of it moving to Asia??

Truth is, there is nothing wrong with snooker, what it needs is maybe 3-4 big tournaments a year on tv, promote the hell outta them and abandon the premier league

Its the TV coverage thats protected,it doesn't matter where its held just that its on free to air tv.