World Snooker Championship 2021

Say Your Number

Great start by Wilson, but knowing what these long matches are like, there might be a few twists to come.

gormdubhgorm

DelBoy Trotter wrote: »

Some great snooker by Wilson, 6-2 out of this session has to be a minimum for him from here

Bit that made me laugh was Hendry. He said at the start of each session his own goal was to win the session 6-2. It was not 5-3 he said but 6-2 that showed how ruthless a fella Hendry was/is.

Arthur Daley

Long way to go though. But need 1 of these two frames anyway.

gormdubhgorm

I remember I saw a bit on Eurosport I think it was - that Kyren's sponsor from Kettering will donate a 100 pound for every century Kyren makes to a charity in Kettering. So Kyren said he felt it was important for him to try and make a century when he can.

Sandor Clegane

As great as Wilson has played if Murphy can keep this anyway close he'll be happy, dont think anyone could maintain the form Wilson is showing so theres plenty left in this you'd feel.

Arthur Daley

Great response by Shaun

gormdubhgorm

Lisowski doing this analysis gives an insight into to his snooker mind. Earlier on he seemed to regret not being able to create a methodical snooker routine when he is at the table.

The impression I got was he tried it but was not able to make it succeed. Plus he seemed to regret the fact that he could not do it. Angles McManus took the sting out of it by saying it depends on the player and Lisowski plays off the cuff like a ballerina!

gormdubhgorm

Say Your Number wrote: »

Great start by Wilson, but knowing what these long matches are like, there might be a few twists to come.

Tournament has definitely improved over-all from the QF on. I wish the matches were even longer. Back in the early 70's the finals were the first to 37 !

dobman88

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Lisowski doing this analysis gives an insight into to his snooker mind. Earlier on he seemed to regret not being able to create a methodical snooker routine when he is at the table.

The impression I got was he tried it but was not able to make it succeed. Plus he seemed to regret the fact that he could not do it. Angles McManus took the sting out of it by saying it depends on the player and Lisowski plays off the cuff like a ballerina!

Yeah, that and he admitted he struggles with safety play also. Which means he will likely never be a "top" player but has the talent to have a good career.

Arthur Daley

Best of 73. Leicster Square Hall or Tower Circus Blackpool. Those were the days

gormdubhgorm

Come on Murphy keep it together. This would be a match defining frame.

I typed too soon..

Fecking eejit

DelBoy Trotter

Massive chance missed by Murphy, robbing that frame would have really hurt Wilson

tanko

Terrible shot by Wilson to pot the yellow but Murphy messes up the chance to only be 5-3 down.

Sandor Clegane

I tell ya that last frame was important, Wilson would of been gutted going into the next session only 5-3 up the way he played, even at 6-2 Murphy is still well in this, the way these sessions go Murphy could come out tomorrow and play like Wilson did today.

raclle

Sandor Clegane wrote: »

the way these sessions go Murphy could come out tomorrow and play like Wilson did today.

He hasn't played well at all in the last two sessions so he needs a big turnaround

Sandor Clegane

raclle wrote: »

He hasn't played well at all in the last two sessions so he needs a big turnaround

Yeah he made hard work of Trump in the end, bottled it almost, Trump wasn't playing well at all but still nearly managed the comeback, he hasn't really got going since.

gormdubhgorm

Sandor Clegane wrote: »

Yeah he made hard work of Trump in the end, bottled it almost, Trump wasn't playing well at all but still nearly managed the comeback, he hasn't really got going since.

Hendry made the point he has not seen Murphy looking so angry around the table before. Normally mild mannered.

I think that is a good thing to a point. To me it looks like he is almost trying too hard to the detriment of his technique. Hacking at shots almost. And was very loose in a lot of safety play from the bits I saw today and yesterday.

Controlled determination is what he needs to let that silky cue action get going.
Easier said than done though.

ArmaniJeanss

6-6 at the msi. Selby really just hanging on.

Random question that occurred to me when Selby needed one more red to leave Bingham needing snookers, but was having to stretch over other balls to reach it and could potentially have a waistcoat foul.

Potting a red whilst fouling (in off, push, even knocking it off the table) is a 4 point foul. Shouldn't it really be an 8 point foul as that's what you've taken from the table?
If you lead by 33, pot the last red but go in-off, then you actually gained a game advantage.

Arthur Daley

This Gods of Snooker programme on the 80s will be a must watch.

But the BBC seem to have scheduled it for 9pm BBC2 on Sunday. Just as the snooker audience are in the middle of the second 9 frame session of the final

Joe_ Public

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

6-6 at the msi. Selby really just hanging on.

Random question that occurred to me when Selby needed one more red to leave Bingham needing snookers, but was having to stretch over other balls to reach it and could potentially have a waistcoat foul.

Potting a red whilst fouling (in off, push, even knocking it off the table) is a 4 point foul. Shouldn't it really be an 8 point foul as that's what you've taken from the table?
If you lead by 33, pot the last red but go in-off, then you actually gained a game advantage.

I suppose once it's not intentional, a 4 point penalty is probably fair enough. A deliberate foul or in off and a player could be risking a frame forfeit though that would obviously be a very hard call for a referee to make. Not sure i've ever seen that happening.

Feels to me that selby is "winning" these sessions and mini sessions. High break 42 and he's 6-6. Thats a result. Classic selby.

DelBoy Trotter

Arthur Daley wrote: »

This Gods of Snooker programme on the 80s will be a must watch.

But the BBC seem to have scheduled it for 9pm BBC2 on Sunday. Just as the snooker audience are in the middle of the second 9 frame session of the final

It's scheduled for Sunday May 9th, not this Sunday night!

B2021M

Arthur Daley wrote: »

This Gods of Snooker programme on the 80s will be a must watch.

But the BBC seem to have scheduled it for 9pm BBC2 on Sunday. Just as the snooker audience are in the middle of the second 9 frame session of the final

What?! Thats incredible!

gormdubhgorm

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

6-6 at the msi. Selby really just hanging on.

Random question that occurred to me when Selby needed one more red to leave Bingham needing snookers, but was having to stretch over other balls to reach it and could potentially have a waistcoat foul.

Potting a red whilst fouling (in off, push, even knocking it off the table) is a 4 point foul. Shouldn't it really be an 8 point foul as that's what you've taken from the table?
If you lead by 33, pot the last red but go in-off, then you actually gained a game advantage.

Very good question actually!

I saw a few rule changes here.

https://www.prosnookerblog.com/2011/07/01/snooker-rule-changes-explained-by-referee-andy-yates/

I assume in your scenario the ref would replace the red and the cueball to where it was?

Similar to the this scenario in the article:

"Also the referee (in the interests of fair play) could call a foul AND replace all balls. Imagine a scenario where player A is 33 points ahead with one red left on the table. He strikes the cue ball whilst balls are moving and pot the last red. He would now be 29 ahead with only 27 remaining, thereby gaining an obvious advantage. I would call a foul, replace the balls and warn player A for ungentlemanly conduct. Player B would now have the usual options after a foul"

gormdubhgorm

Arthur Daley wrote: »

This Gods of Snooker programme on the 80s will be a must watch.

But the BBC seem to have scheduled it for 9pm BBC2 on Sunday. Just as the snooker audience are in the middle of the second 9 frame session of the final

B2021M wrote: »

What?! Thats incredible!

It is! Maybe it is aimed at those who do not like this flashy 'modern' post 1980's stuff?

:rolleyes:

ArmaniJeanss

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Very good question actually!

I saw a few rule changes here.

https://www.prosnookerblog.com/2011/07/01/snooker-rule-changes-explained-by-referee-andy-yates/

I assume in your scenario the ref would replace the red and the cueball to where it was?

Similar to the this scenario in the article:

"Also the referee (in the interests of fair play) could call a foul AND replace all balls. Imagine a scenario where player A is 33 points ahead with one red left on the table. He strikes the cue ball whilst balls are moving and pot the last red. He would now be 29 ahead with only 27 remaining, thereby gaining an obvious advantage. I would call a foul, replace the balls and warn player A for ungentlemanly conduct. Player B would now have the usual options after a foul"

Cheers, interesting that they've thought of it in some way at least.

I was thinking of it being more accidental than deliberate obviously. Pot the red and cannon in-off unexpectedly, or a tap foul when removing the rest/spider after the ball has gone in. I don't think your link/mechanism to replace the red would apply as it wasn't deliberate.

Would probably need to happen in a high-profile game for them to change it though. What a clusterfck it would be explaining to the once-a-year audience that player A didn't need snookers, player B fouled, and now player A does actually need snookers. Would be changed after that I'd say.

Joe_ Public

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

Very good question actually!

I saw a few rule changes here.

https://www.prosnookerblog.com/2011/07/01/snooker-rule-changes-explained-by-referee-andy-yates/

I assume in your scenario the ref would replace the red and the cueball to where it was?

Similar to the this scenario in the article:

"Also the referee (in the interests of fair play) could call a foul AND replace all balls. Imagine a scenario where player A is 33 points ahead with one red left on the table. He strikes the cue ball whilst balls are moving and pot the last red. He would now be 29 ahead with only 27 remaining, thereby gaining an obvious advantage. I would call a foul, replace the balls and warn player A for ungentlemanly conduct. Player B would now have the usual options after a foul"

Obviously a very clear deliberate foul in those circumstances and i imagine a warning for unsporting conduct too. But in the scenario where a player pots the red with deliberate in off, a much greyer area. Big judgement call for ref to make. Not usually of much benefit anyway, so a rare enough scenario.

gormdubhgorm

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Cheers, interesting that they've thought of it in some way at least.

I was thinking of it being more accidental than deliberate obviously. Pot the red and cannon in-off unexpectedly, or a tap foul when removing the rest/spider after the ball has gone in. I don't think your link/mechanism to replace the red would apply as it wasn't deliberate.

Would probably need to happen in a high-profile game for them to change it though. What a clusterfck it would be explaining to the once-a-year audience that player A didn't need snookers, player B fouled, and now player A does actually need snookers. Would be changed after that I'd say.

Joe_ Public wrote: »

But in the scenario where a player pots the red with deliberate in off, a much greyer area. Big judgement call for ref to make. Not usually of much benefit anyway, so a rare enough scenario.

I would say the ref has a 'interests of fairplay' discretion in any case where the person fouling is gaining an unfair advantage. Balls replaced etc. It has surely happened on occasion at some level of the game ? It would be daft otherwise.

Joe_ Public

In that scenario, there's no advantage for a deliberate in off. He pots red and opponent needs a snooker so why foul? There might be times a player might deliberately foul but it's not usually to gain advantage. One example was Ronnie fouling the ball that time when higgins had him in a snooker and they changed the miss rule after it. I also recall how common it was for players to suddenly miscue when in a tricky snooker but the miss rule put paid to that particular dark art.

Loafing Oaf

That red was huge for Selby:eek:

BonnieSituation

This match is magnificent. The tension is insane.

Some pot from Selby.

Mysterypunter

Really high quality match, 9-7 Selby

AllForIt

Arthur Daley wrote: »

This Gods of Snooker programme on the 80s will be a must watch.

But the BBC seem to have scheduled it for 9pm BBC2 on Sunday. Just as the snooker audience are in the middle of the second 9 frame session of the final

That doesn't sound right. Won't the final be on BBC2. Isn't it usually?

BonnieSituation

AllForIt wrote: »

That doesn't sound right. Won't the final be on BBC2. Isn't it usually?

He got the dates mixed up. The doc starts next Sunday 9th May.

Joe_ Public

BonnieSituation wrote: »

He got the dates mixed up. The doc starts next Sunday 9th May.

Actually the date of the seniors final which the bbc will be showing, red button jobby i'd imagine, so maybe they think it makes aense to coincide it with that.

Arthur Daley

DelBoy Trotter wrote: »

It's scheduled for Sunday May 9th, not this Sunday night!

Ok, it was advertised on the red button earlier as 'Sunday at 9 on BBC 2'

Suggesting it was this Sunday.

Still, point applies about the seniors final I guess

dobman88

Must say I'm enjoying the current players doing a bit of punditry on BBC. Judd in studio today and Jack has been in a few times. Been nice to get the perspective of current players.

beertons

Hon Murphy

B2021M

Surprised Murphy played that black. Sometimes it seems the TV pictures give a more accurate view than even the players can see!

DelBoy Trotter

dobman88 wrote: »

Must say I'm enjoying the current players doing a bit of punditry on BBC. Judd in studio today and Jack has been in a few times. Been nice to get the perspective of current players.

Agreed. I think a mix of the current crop of pundits and commentators with a few of the current players once they are knocked out of the tournament is a nice balance

eric hoone

Murphy already struggling

Augme

I was glad murphy beat judd when it happens but this is now looking like a really poor semi. Murphy is a bit all over the place again today. A real shame if this just peters out as a stroll for Kyren.

sligeach

That was funny. How many points did Wilson give away there? It only ended because he needed snookers.

53 points as John Virgo pointed out.

Reminded me of Wilson v McGill last year.

Joe_ Public

Extraordinary. Had enough goes at it anyway, not sure he had any other option. A maguire special only alternative probably.

waynescales1

Is Wilson having a mental breakdown here? The shot he is attempting isn’t on, the cue ball is sliding off the cushion too much. He’s just given away nearly 50 foul points and probably the frame.

sligeach

I don't agree with Steve Davis' thoughts there about snookers.

AllForIt

That was so unusual. Never seen so many points given away in consecutive fouls. Some sort of record I'm sure.


Wouldn't be a bit surprised if this causes a turning point in the match.

Sandor Clegane

sligeach wrote: »

I don't agree with Steve Davis' thoughts there about snookers.

What he say?

sligeach

AllForIt wrote: »

That was so unusual. Never seen so many points given away in consecutive fouls. Some sort of record I'm sure.


Wouldn't be a bit surprised if this causes a turning point in the match.

McGill did the same last year against Wilson. The torture only ended because he got to the point of needing snookers.

Joe_ Public

Davis doesnt like the miss rule but of course cant present an acceptable alternative. Everybody knows it isnt 100% perfect but if there was a better way, doesn't he imagine they'd have found it after all this time?

sligeach

Sandor Clegane wrote: »

What he say?

That maybe there should be a cap on the amount of points that can be given away.