2020 World Snooker Championship

human 19

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Not if the opponent does it on numerous occassions and is a professional snooker player - best who has ever picked up a cue.
1) Gives an air of fcuk you
2) I don't care and won't try

It is all ability based of course.

But there is certain etiquette in snooker, right down to dress code. Might as well play in jeans and t shirt if we follow your logic.

Also not the first time for O'Sullivan:
Failed drug tests, slagging off fellow pros, conceding mid match, towel on head, refusal to attend press conferences (at a time a seriously ill Paul Hunter attended his Press obligations) etc etc

Using chalk as a marker (which should have been a foul)

But of course many excuse it as 'Ronnie being Ronnie'

In my opinion although he is a great player he should be held to the same levels of Professionalism others are held to. Hearn too soft on him imo.

But none of those examples relate to how he plays the cueball, perfectly legally, within a frame.
Regarding your points 1 and 2...if it does give that air...what difference does that make? It's just the opposite of a poker face. How would he be using that to gain an advantage?

You may as well complain about a player

1) not spending enough time to take a shot, or
2) spending too much time taking a shot

There are no strict rules in that regard. Players are allowed to play their own game

gormdubhgorm

Deleted User wrote: »

Bloody 'purists' - a lot of people (in general, not just on here) seem to think that a player shouldn't go for a 2-6/10 shot unless safety was 70% + guaranteed if the player wasn't successful, and would perhaps like to see them sanctioned for doing so.

I think the environment gets to them Nice shiny shoes; pants, shirt and waistcoat all nicely ironed; and a sedate crowd - when there are crowds - maybe makes them think that a few Hail Mary shots are anathema to snooker.

I have to disagree. If it wasn't for one player - Alex Higgins - who played with abandon, not at all unlikely that the game would not even be on TV anymore.

Perhaps they'd rather watch billiards :pac:

Nothing to do with purists. The game is called snooker and there is more than one style. Safety important aspect of the game as it can create chances - even Ronnie copped this once Reardon explained it to him.

As for Alex Higgins yeah he was a bit of a spark initially. But got to be honest I think Alex is the most overrated player in the history of the game. Awful positional play, not many centuries even compared to his contemporaries. Most of the attraction of watching Alex was whether he was likely to headbutt someone. So he drew a certain different element to snooker, who read about his off table carry on.

gormdubhgorm

human 19 wrote: »

But none of those examples relate to how he plays the cueball, perfectly legally, within a frame.
Regarding your points 1 and 2...if it does give that air...what difference does that make? It's just the opposite of a poker face. How would he be using that to gain an advantage?

You may as well complain about a player

1) not spending enough time to take a shot, or
2) spending too much time taking a shot

There are no strict rules in that regard. Players are allowed to play their own game

Same thing comes down to etiquette and sportsmanship. Ronnie's behaviour in smashing balls around aimlessly was just as bad as Ebdon taking 5 minutes to pot a few simple balls (which drove him mad).

Both examples of poor snooker etiquette from pros.

Joe_ Public

As a point of fact, there is a rule covering slow play and referees have the power to issue warnings and, potentially, penalties if they deem players fall foul of it. Though in practice, it's rarely, if ever, applied, including when selby took 6 minutes over a shot earlier this season.

Dodge

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

But there is certain etiquette in snooker,

Every sport has their own etiquette and it’s nearly always a nonsense

If there’s no rule against it, then there’s no problem at all

Ronnie playing loose was a gamble that worked. That’s all

People being upset by this is genuinely hilarious to me

Just as well Ronnie is 'box office' . If everyone played like Selby, anyone who deviated from what's perceived as 'etiquette' would probably have to end up explaining themselves for playing 'fast and loose'.

It would be like 7yr old kids at soccer academies and whatnot, and their natural attacking ability being drilled out of them.

For a cavalier player, Ronnie winning 5 out of 6 crucible deciders must have the boffins scratching their heads.

human 19

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Same thing comes down to etiquette and sportsmanship. Ronnie's behaviour was just as bad as Ebdon taking 5 minutes to pot two simple balls (which drove him mad).
Both examples of poor snooker etiquette from pros.

The 1st final I didnt watch in about 15 years was Ebdon's first. Wasn't going to put myself through that torture. But that's his style so, IMHO, an opponent should just find a way to cope with it.

gormdubhgorm

Dodge wrote: »

Every sport has their own etiquette and it’s nearly always a nonsense

If there’s no rule against it, then there’s no problem at all

Ronnie playing loose was a gamble that worked. That’s all

People being upset by this is genuinely hilarious to me

Might be no rule against it but it is bad form especially when done to excess. And especially when at pro level. Not in the spirit of the game.

gormdubhgorm

human 19 wrote: »

The 1st final I didnt watch in about 15 years was Ebdon's first. Wasn't going to put myself through that torture. But that's his style so, IMHO, an opponent should just find a way to cope with it.

Ah he was really taking the p. I understand slow players. But there are limits when it moves beyond natural rhythm or even gamesmanship. Refs rarely call it - pity.

Joe_ Public

Dodge wrote: »

Every sport has their own etiquette and it’s nearly always a nonsense

If there’s no rule against it, then there’s no problem at all

Ronnie playing loose was a gamble that worked. That’s all

People being upset by this is genuinely hilarious to me

Dunno, i think its maybe the equivalent of an underarm serve in tennis. That might not strictly be against the rules either - afaik - but it causes strife anytime someone does it.

And also think there's a certain irony in that some of those (not all, but some) who were most upset by ronnies antics as they were unfolding are also those who afterwards were saying whats the big deal, only giving selby a dose of his own medicine etc. At least thats the impression i get anyway.

AllForIt

Joe_ Public wrote: »

As a point of fact, there is a rule covering slow play and referees have the power to issue warnings and, potentially, penalties if they deem players fall foul of it. Though in practice, it's rarely, if ever, applied, including when selby took 6 minutes over a shot earlier this season.

6 minutes! :eek:

On the one hand I ask myself if this is just Selby's style but on the other hand, he has benefited by slowing his opponents down. Ronnie being one of them.

Joe_ Public

AllForIt wrote: »

6 minutes! :eek:

On the one hand I ask myself if this is just Selby's style but on the other hand, he has benefited by slowing his opponents down. Ronnie being one of them.

Yes he took a full 6 minutes and spare change over a shot in a frame where he had a 50-60 point lead and a stupidly easy safety shot to play. It was ridiculous and ref did nothing. I remember Fergal O'Brien getting a warning in a tournament bout 10 years ago and since then, not one. It might have happened, just I've never witnessed it.

Joe_ Public

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Dunno, i think its maybe the equivalent of an underarm serve in tennis. That might not strictly be against the rules either - afaik - but it causes strife anytime someone does it.

And also think there's a certain irony in that some of those (not all, but some) who were most upset by ronnies antics as they were unfolding are also those who afterwards were saying whats the big deal, only giving selby a dose of his own medicine etc. At least thats the impression i get anyway.

Hard to disagree with the 2nd paragraph :pac:

Chalk McHugh

Ronnie only damaged himself with his wild shots. I was disappointed with him for doing so but only because i felt he was giving up too easily and it was almost like he was conceding those few frames he did it in. And as a fan i want him to fight hard for every frame. I certainly wasn't upset with him for disrespecting Mark Selby or disrespecting the game. Just for losing his head and giving frames away without much of a fight. Pretty simple really.

AllForIt

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Yes he took a full 6 minutes and spare change over a shot in a frame where he had a 50-60 point lead and a stupidly easy safety shot to play. It was ridiculous and ref did nothing. I remember Fergal O'Brien getting a warning in a tournament bout 10 years ago and since then, not one. It might have happened, just I've never witnessed it.

That says a lot about how Selby goes about how he can figure out a way to win.

spurshero

I bet selby didn’t mind the wild shot on the pink that Ronnie took to gift him the frame that put him 2 up with 3 to play. But when it works out for Ronnie it’s disrespect .ya can’t have it every way .

Chalk McHugh

spurshero wrote: »

I bet selby didn’t mind the wild shot on the pink that Ronnie took to gift him the frame that put him 2 up with 3 to play. But when it works out for Ronnie it’s disrespect .ya can’t have it every way .

Selby benefited from 90% of Ronnie's wild shots. It's all a load of nonsense. Selby just being a very bad loser.

Arthur Daley

Cetyl Palmitate wrote: »

WST retweeted Ronnie's interview with Betfred which is a far more reasoned assessment from him. Less of the crazy golf analogies and fixation on cue action, even if it is still mentioned.

I often think Ronnie is trolling the BBC. Well he does work for the rivals.

Brian?

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Might be no rule against it but it is bad form especially when done to excess. And especially when at pro level. Not in the spirit of the game.

I'm no fan of Ronnie normally, but feck bad form. He won fair and square. Selby was turning the screw and Ronnie found a way out.

Girly Gal

Selby was full sure he had broken Ronnie and it looked like he had, the wild shots helped Selby more than Ronnie and I was disappointed in him as it felt like he had given up and more or less conceded the match. The only benefit it had on Ronnie was that the frames were finished quickly and didn't allow Selby to drag out the frames as he usually does.
I think Selby was shell shocked from the way Ronnie played the last 3 frames where he was almost perfect even in the early stages of the last frame his safety play was more controlled. I think Selby was also annoyed that he didn't take the opportunity to clear the table when he got in in the last frame.
Overall the better player won and when it really mattered Ronnie played the better snooker and went for it. Selby knows he won't get a better chance to win the World championship again as he'd have fancied himself strongly to beat Wilson.

BQQ

Ronnie’s entitled to play whatever shots he wants

However if he stood up during Selby’s shot like he said in that interview, that’s well out of order

Anyone have a video of the incident?
Think he said it was frame 23

Arthur Daley

Barry Hearn could spin this off into a celebrity fight night.

While he still has the ring up in the garden:pac:

Brian?

Arthur Daley wrote: »

Barry Hearn could spin this off into a celebrity fight night.

While he still has the ring up in the garden:pac:

You're joking, but I've heard Ronnie is a tidy enough boxer, it's the family sport. I'd pay to see it.

Inviere

Inviere wrote: »

Agreed, it's over. Ronnie hasn't got the head to beat Selby...he has the skill, not the head. He takes on some stupid shots at times he should be tying Selby up in knots. Fine, he doesn't like to play that way...but sometimes you need to grind out a win & he doesn't seem happy to bother doing that. Selby wins four on the bounce, goes into the lead, & O'Sullivan not looking remotely interested in a safety battle....the rest of this match will be a slog of pure disappointment.

Hopefully Wilson gets through & beats Selby in the final.

Hands up on this one, somehow! All the signs were there for yet another Selby win over Ronnie, but somehow he skinned it through. I don't think the approach Ronnie had towards safety won him the match, he was definitely there for the taking, Selby just wasn't in absolute top gear is all. When Ronnie was able to get in among the reds, he looked great, really fluid...but heavens above some of the shots he took on were beyond stupid.

I'm not buying into the 'disrespect' nonsense thrown out by Selby, I think it's just sour grapes. Ronnie's play was wildly reckless at times, but I'm sure Selby was happy to try hoover up the results of Ronnie's recklessness.

Breaston Plants

Anyone know how the bookies had it priced up when Selby was leading 16-14?

ThewhiteJesus

RedDevil55 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/Eurosport_UK/status/1294383539379724289?s=19

Cue action, chipping it down the fairway etc etc

Very good interview and much better questions than the bbc, the bbc are so concerned with having a black woman front the show it’s lost something this year. Ken is very hard to take aswell, like a real union man in a company

ThewhiteJesus

Brian? wrote: »

You're joking, but I've heard Ronnie is a tidy enough boxer, it's the family sport. I'd pay to see it.

He’s a quality runner, and I mean real quality if you’ve read any of his books

Girly Gal

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

Very good interview and much better questions than the bbc, the bbc are so concerned with having a black woman front the show it’s lost something this year. Ken is very hard to take aswell, like a real union man in a company

I didn't see morning session as was working, but, tbf she wasn't involved in the late afternoon or evening sessions and didn't do any of the after match interviews yesterday, that was Rob Walker afaik.

zuutroy

This thread already has 700 more posts than the longest WC thread in the last few years. The O'Sullivan effect is strong!

The Nal

The White Feather wrote: »

Do they have a history of not liking each other?

After the quarters Ronnie said Selby is one of the nicest and funniest players on the tour.

Awful stuff from Selby. A player who has no issues standing over a bog standard safety shot for 2 minutes, as he did in the 2nd last frame last night, just to slow down his opponents momentum. He'll happily turn down pots in favour of dragging players into long safety battles to try rattle them.

Inviere

The Nal wrote: »

After the quarters Ronnie said Selby is one of the nicest and funniest players on the tour.

Awful stuff from Selby. A player who has no issues standing over a bog standard safety shot for 2 minutes, as he did in the 2nd last frame last night, just to slow down his opponents momentum. He'll happily turn down pots in favour of dragging players into long safety battles to try rattle them.

Very much agreed. I'm so glad he's not in the final, a seriously painful player to watch and not at all averse to his own 'mind games' as you rightly point out above.

henke

Just from watching old clips from the past few years it reminded of something I'm not sure I've picked up on at this year's championship. When commentator's are discussing how to get out of a safety or where to place the cue ball they used to have the white lines drawn up on screen or a picture of a white cue ball placed on screen. Also the hawk eye views. Am I imagining it or has this technology not been there this year?

ThewhiteJesus

Girly Gal wrote: »

I didn't see morning session as was working, but, tbf she wasn't involved in the late afternoon or evening sessions and didn't do any of the after match interviews yesterday, that was Rob Walker afaik.

Yes sorry that wasn’t clear she wasn’t asking questions to be fair and is actually good, it was more a general point on not focusing on the snooker and talking openly about it instead of appearing pc

mdwexford

Chalk McHugh wrote: »

Ronnie only damaged himself with his wild shots. I was disappointed with him for doing so but only because i felt he was giving up too easily and it was almost like he was conceding those few frames he did it in. And as a fan i want him to fight hard for every frame. I certainly wasn't upset with him for disrespecting Mark Selby or disrespecting the game. Just for losing his head and giving frames away without much of a fight. Pretty simple really.

Totally agree bar the disrespect line.

It wasn’t like this was some tactic or plan by Ronnie to rattle Selby. It was just not having the patience required to try and play the correct shot. He said it himself after the game on Eurosport. He didn’t have the time for that or some nonsense. It’s the World semi final, cop yourself on and give every shot your best. Can you imagine Hendry, Davis, Higgins or anyone else doing that tripe. Not a chance. He donated that frame on the pink when he could have hit the thin edge but belted it off the cushion instead.

He’s mentally fragile as everyone knows. Just because he ended up winning last night doesn’t excuse his behavior. He let down his fans and disrespected the game and his fellow professionals in my opinion. I wanted him to win last night but those shots really disappointed me.

If Selby had cleared up that final frame Ronnie would be getting vilified from all angles today.

gormdubhgorm

Chalk McHugh wrote: »

Selby benefited from 90% of Ronnie's wild shots. It's all a load of nonsense. Selby just being a very bad loser.

Completely disagree Selby was spot on. Also saying Selby benefited from his RO'S own erratic shots completely misses the point it was still disrespect. Would not see it in the McGill v Wilson SF two were gents and a credit to the game.

gormdubhgorm

henke wrote: »

Just from watching old clips from the past few years it reminded of something I'm not sure I've picked up on at this year's championship. When commentator's are discussing how to get out of a safety or where to place the cue ball they used to have the white lines drawn up on screen or a picture of a white cue ball placed on screen. Also the hawk eye views. Am I imagining it or has this technology not been there this year?

Good point have not seen it used for a long time. Dennis used to love it in particular.

henke

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Good point have not seen it used for a long time. Dennis used to love it in particular.

Yeah disappointing. It seems at times BBC aren't half as arsed with their coverage any more. Why would they get rid of this tech seems like cost cutting.

Joe_ Public

When people say "he can play whatever shot he likes", this is of course empirically true but only up to a point. There is a limit to it. If a player concedes a winnable frame, it is a violation of the code of conduct and, similarly, if a player is playing shots that could be construed as facilitating the same result, then the question of behaviour also arises. May not make selby any less of a sore loser or hypocrite, whatever peoples views, but nor should O'Sullivans behaviour be overlooked or excused purely on that basis.

spurshero

I think though towards the end of the match Ronnie has decided he was playing the snooker he wanted and if he lost so be it . But he wasn’t going to lose playing 2 hour safety slogs that selby wanted to play. Like selby wants to keep it tight and fancies himself in long drawn out frames . He will refuse pots that 95 percent of players will go for till he gets a gilt edged chance . On the other hand o Sullivan wants open one chance frames . I’m not a big Ronnie fan as I hate his snooker owes me personality but I’m certainly glad to see no more selby .

Mysterypunter

Breaston Plants wrote: »

Anyone know how the bookies had it priced up when Selby was leading 16-14?

11-2 O'Sullivan v 1-10 Selby.

petes

I don't think he should have been playing shots like that but I also don't think it was some kind of mind game like others suggested.

Not even sure he lost the head either as the composure for the third and second last frames was second to none.

Ronnie is the only one that knows what he was at!!

mdwexford

spurshero wrote: »

I think though towards the end of the match Ronnie has decided he was playing the snooker he wanted and if he lost so be it . But he wasn’t going to lose playing 2 hour safety slogs that selby wanted to play. Like selby wants to keep it tight and fancies himself in long drawn out frames . He will refuse pots that 95 percent of players will go for till he gets a gilt edged chance . On the other hand o Sullivan wants open one chance frames . I’m not a big Ronnie fan as I hate his snooker owes me personality but I’m certainly glad to see no more selby .

If he doesn’t want to play safe and go for shots that’s up to him. Like the stupid blue he took on. The two shots on the pink and lashing the snookers were just stupid bad play. Same as the shot in the last frame where he got lucky.

Selby has the 6th most centuries of all time. He is a prolific break builder. The way some people are talking on here it’s like he can only pot balls hanging over pockets.

SnowyMay

henke wrote: »

Just from watching old clips from the past few years it reminded of something I'm not sure I've picked up on at this year's championship. When commentator's are discussing how to get out of a safety or where to place the cue ball they used to have the white lines drawn up on screen or a picture of a white cue ball placed on screen. Also the hawk eye views. Am I imagining it or has this technology not been there this year?

Saw the line thing once on yesterday evening’s Eurosport coverage. I love it. One of my snooker memories, when getting into it, was watching Hendry toboggan the white along that line like it was actually carved into the table.

ThewhiteJesus

300 in the crowd today aswell, great to see

Mervyn Skidmore

henke wrote: »

Just from watching old clips from the past few years it reminded of something I'm not sure I've picked up on at this year's championship. When commentator's are discussing how to get out of a safety or where to place the cue ball they used to have the white lines drawn up on screen or a picture of a white cue ball placed on screen. Also the hawk eye views. Am I imagining it or has this technology not been there this year?

One of them put up a line yesterday when someone was going into the pack. I miss the lines for snookers. I wonder what the thinking was in getting rid of them?

BQQ

The only way I see Wilson winning is if he gets a great start and has a nice cushion when it gets near the finish line

He had awful trouble getting the job done yesterday and it brought back memories of him in the semi against John Higgins in 2018 where his game fell apart at the business end

It seems to mean too much to him
He gets too emotional

petes

I like the lines too, can't remember if they put up a line and the player took a completely diff shot though

Joe_ Public

May be that they dont have access to hawk eye this year, with a slimmed down operation. They dont have the usual array of camera angles either so that could be the reason. Possibly all part of simple cut backs too. Just guessing, though.

SnowyMay

petes wrote: »

I like the lines too, can't remember if they put up a line and the player took a completely diff shot though

Maybe they get rid of them when Ronnie is playing so. :pac:

TheHopeful

Surely Wilson will be rolling up behind the yellow/green/brown a few times today to test the water! I expect Ronnie to take a more measured approach now though. I think he just had it up to the eyeballs with Selby and his negative tactics.