Topic locked

Re: Ruhr Championship (EPTC 5)

Postby Wildey

Witz78 wrote:
wildLOVESWAGNER wrote:
Witz78 wrote:
randam05 wrote:Witz..if you read this anymore,

I know you dont like higgins..but this could ruin the WC or other tournaments for you one year,Listen!..For example, ive always hated ryan day, but when he was winning, I had to grow to like him else it would ruin the matches he played in and won for me ( like when he reached the grand prix final) If I had hated him like I do now (cause hes losing again!), i wouldnt have enjoyed the grand prix because I wasnt supporting him at all. Although I have always hated him and always will, I try not to unsupport him when hes winning else I dont enjoy.So I think you should feel mutual against higgins now before the worlds or uk come around and he wins it..cause you will feel youve spent the whole tournament booing him and you wont have enjoyed the snooker. =)


no can do im afraid, id rather ruin my enjoyment of a tournament by hating Higgins and willing him to lose :D

could you stay off the computer when he plays then <ok>

its the same comments every match ......getting repetative :seif:


no by doing that, id become the silent majority who feel a certain way towards Higgins. Me, Stalin, Davros and others will continue to preach our views on this, it wont go away so get used to it, just like Higgins will have to for the rest of his career. This dark cloud wont dissapear.

pity :redneck:

Re: Ruhr Championship (EPTC 5)

Postby Tubberlad

You see Witz.... I'm not doing cartwheels that he won this tournament myself. However, he was found not guilty by an independent body, and all we've been fed is a heavily edited video from a very dodgy newspaper.

I don't know what John Higgins has or has not done. Some people with far more evidence at their disposal made the call. I just wish we were shown some of this, as I still feel a niggle at the back of my mind with Higgins, that is probably going to stay there.

In the meantime, I'm getting a bit sick of all this talking down of Higgins, and bigging up of Higgins. He's not a hero and far from it. He's not a villain and far from it. When Smart criticises him, I take it more seriously as I feel he would have the same opinion regardless of whoever was involved. When I hear more hardcore Ronnie fans criticising him, I know that they would not be consistent if their own man was involved. When I hear certain people cheering on Higgins, I know some of them would be crucifying O'Sullivan in the exact same situation.

And that, as I've said many times, is what really annoys me.

Re: Ruhr Championship (EPTC 5)

Postby Wildey

yes spot on its a jump on a bandwagon time with some

Re: Ruhr Championship (EPTC 5)

Postby Witz78

thetubberlad wrote:You see Witz.... I'm not doing cartwheels that he won this tournament myself. However, he was found not guilty by an independent body, and all we've been fed is a heavily edited video from a very dodgy newspaper.

I don't know what John Higgins has or has not done. Some people with far more evidence at their disposal made the call. I just wish we were shown some of this, as I still feel a niggle at the back of my mind with Higgins, that is probably going to stay there.

In the meantime, I'm getting a bit sick of all this talking down of Higgins, and bigging up of Higgins. He's not a hero and far from it. He's not a villain and far from it. When Smart criticises him, I take it more seriously as I feel he would have the same opinion regardless of whoever was involved. When I hear more hardcore Ronnie fans criticising him, I know that they would not be consistent if their own man was involved. When I hear certain people cheering on Higgins, I know some of them would be crucifying O'Sullivan in the exact same situation.

And that, as I've said many times, is what really annoys me.


Im not criticising him because i like Ronnie, infact as far as Ronnie goes im not a massive fan, albeit im a fan and probably want him to do better now to silence the many critics and haters he does.

But i see the Higgins verdict as a miscarriage of justice, hence im continually bleating on about it.

Re: Ruhr Championship (EPTC 5)

Postby GrumpyMrDavros

thetubberlad wrote:You see Witz.... I'm not doing cartwheels that he won this tournament myself. However, he was found not guilty by an independent body, and all we've been fed is a heavily edited video from a very dodgy newspaper.

I don't know what John Higgins has or has not done. Some people with far more evidence at their disposal made the call. I just wish we were shown some of this, as I still feel a niggle at the back of my mind with Higgins, that is probably going to stay there.



Yeah we saw a heavily edited video . The problem with this independent , sorry " independent " tribunal is that we have no idea WHY they came to the conclusion that Higgins hadn't cheated . This so called independent body must have known that they'd be opening yet another can of worms by not allowing the press access to the trial . No one but NO ONE has stated why they think Higgins is not guilty of anything other than gross naivety .

To me it looks like nothing less than the whole of snooker closing ranks to defend one of its biggest stars and unless the NOTW releases that videotape where Higgins says or does something to convince me he's in fear of his life then I'll shut up about him cheating

Re: Ruhr Championship (EPTC 5)

Postby Tubberlad

GrumpyMrDavros wrote:To me it looks like nothing less than the whole of snooker closing ranks to defend one of its biggest stars and unless the NOTW releases that videotape where Higgins says or does something to convince me he's in fear of his life then I'll shut up about him cheating

And I actually agree with that. I said before hand we need to be left in no doubt, and in my opinion that means releasing the relevant information...

Re: Ruhr Championship (EPTC 5)

Postby KrazeeEyezKilla

The whole set up by the NOTW was so badly done that there wasn't enough evidence for Higgins to be found guilty but at the same time there was no way for him to prove himself innocent.

thetubberlad wrote:When I hear more hardcore Ronnie fans criticising him, I know that they would not be consistent if their own man was involved. When I hear certain people cheering on Higgins, I know some of them would be crucifying O'Sullivan in the exact same situation.


I've seen several arguments about Higgins were O'Sullivan wasn't mentioned but it was obviously all about him. On another forum I saw people claiming that what Higgins was accused of doing wasn't a big deal because it was 'only' a WSOS event and not a major. The same people were claiming that Ronnie's miss against Tian Pengfei was more worthy of investigation.

Re: Ruhr Championship (EPTC 5)

Postby Monique

What Higgins was accused of was a very big deal because our sport relies heavily on the betting industry and if that industry loses faith in the top players honesty, or their managers, it endangers what is probably today the main source of revenues. It is totally irrelevant in that respect that the event wasn't WOS (although if it had become an EPTC as was planned, it would have been): as soon as the World n° 1 agrees to fix matches for money it IS a big deal.
I personally regret that some charges were dropped. It would have been much better if they had been investigated in depth and the result made public. Then there would be less space left for doubts and speculations. Higgins, if actually innocent, would only have benefited from more transparency.
I personally still struggle with the whole situation.
On one hand I have the feeling that indeed John was betrayed and it's not really like him to do such things, although there were a couple of suspicious results where he was involved in in the past, notably in the GP round-robin phase.
On the other hand I credit him with more intelligence than he displayed under the circumstances. That he actually believed in this "Russian mafia" tale is already hard to swallow. He isn't a character in a Robert Ludlum novel ffs! But not making contact with WSA or Barry Hearn is beyond my understanding. He had plenty of time to do so. How long do you need to write a text on a mobile or give a phone call? Yes, he might have wanted to discuss with his family. But then it was not as if BH would materialise in front of him the next minute is it? Requesting an appointement left him with time to discuss the content with whoever he fancied, including his lawyer. But he had to make contact, that was non negociable and he knew it.
Last edited by Monique on 16 Nov 2010, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Ruhr Championship (EPTC 5)

Postby JohnFromLondonTown

I'm finding all this a bit farcical now. People keep regurgitating the same points. Is it to make them feel better or to try & keep putting the guy down because they want to believe that he is guilty without really knowing? Its a bit like the UFO's myth, people want to believe there is something out there because it makes it more interesting if there is. But they don't really know.

Re: Ruhr Championship (EPTC 5)

Postby Monique

"without really knowing" is actually my whole point John.
I think it would have been better for everyone involved if we had been made to know exactly what happened. As it is now, with some charges not being investigated, there is room for speculations.

Re: Ruhr Championship (EPTC 5)

Postby Wildey

Monique wrote:"without really knowing" is actually my whole point John.
I think it would have been better for everyone involved if we had been made to know exactly what happened. As it is now, with some charges not being investigated, there is room for speculations.

they investigated everything however when it came to the tribuneral there was little if nothing there to put before the tribuneral so they dropped that you cant have a kangaroo court thats different to a law court it has to follow strict guidelines

i think the law sucks in so many issues but thats something out of the hands of John,Snooker or this Independent tribuneral.

David Douglass Knows the law and he knows a competent Lawyer would have Dig holes in the investigation and then the Whole thing collapses so he did not put that in front of the tribuneral..

Re: Ruhr Championship (EPTC 5)

Postby GJ

monique

would you say the same if it was ronne who had been investigated

?

Re: Ruhr Championship (EPTC 5)

Postby Monique

GJtheaussiestud wrote:monique

would you say the same if it was ronne who had been investigated

?


Yes absolutely. If John is innocent then it is his interest that all doubts are swept away by having the procedure carried over in fully transparent manner.
Last edited by Monique on 16 Nov 2010, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Ruhr Championship (EPTC 5)

Postby GJ

Monique wrote:
GJtheaussiestud wrote:monique

would you say the same if it was ronne who had been investigated

?


Yes absolutely. If John is innocent then it is hus interest that all doubts are swept away by having the procedure fully transparent.



Fair play :ahh:

Re: Ruhr Championship (EPTC 5)

Postby Casey

GrumpyMrDavros wrote:
thetubberlad wrote:You see Witz.... I'm not doing cartwheels that he won this tournament myself. However, he was found not guilty by an independent body, and all we've been fed is a heavily edited video from a very dodgy newspaper.

I don't know what John Higgins has or has not done. Some people with far more evidence at their disposal made the call. I just wish we were shown some of this, as I still feel a niggle at the back of my mind with Higgins, that is probably going to stay there.



Yeah we saw a heavily edited video . The problem with this independent , sorry " independent " tribunal is that we have no idea WHY they came to the conclusion that Higgins hadn't cheated . This so called independent body must have known that they'd be opening yet another can of worms by not allowing the press access to the trial . No one but NO ONE has stated why they think Higgins is not guilty of anything other than gross naivety .

To me it looks like nothing less than the whole of snooker closing ranks to defend one of its biggest stars and unless the NOTW releases that videotape where Higgins says or does something to convince me he's in fear of his life then I'll shut up about him cheating


David Douglas spoke about different forms of evidence ie. Telephone, email the, full un-edited video and the NOTW's reporter's statment.
He didn't go into detail but it shows that there was a lot of evidence outside of the video.

As for the most serious charge being dropped, the QC himself said that was the right decision and John Higgins had no case to answer for that charge.

Re: Ruhr Championship (EPTC 5)

Postby Wildey

the Video we have saw made up 0% of Evidence.

Re: Ruhr Championship (EPTC 5)

Postby Monique

wildLOVESWAGNER wrote:the Video we have saw made up 0% of Evidence.


The video we saw was damning. The unedited video probably less so. John did agree to fix frames, he never denied it. He said he had no intention to actually do it and that he played along because he was afraid. But he never denied the fact that he agreed on the moment.
That's fact and that's what the video showed.

Re: Ruhr Championship (EPTC 5)

Postby Wildey

it would help if we saw the unedited tapes but i doubt we ever will

Re: Ruhr Championship (EPTC 5)

Postby Monique

wildLOVESWAGNER wrote:it would help if we saw the unedited tapes but i doubt we ever will


Indeed and you might wonder why.

Re: Ruhr Championship (EPTC 5)

Postby JohnFromLondonTown

Monique wrote:
Indeed and you might wonder why.

See this is it. Its exactly comments like this one that give elephants a bad name.

Re: Ruhr Championship (EPTC 5)

Postby Wildey

JohnFromLondonTown wrote:
Monique wrote:
Indeed and you might wonder why.

See this is it. Its exactly comments like this one that give elephants a bad name.

rofl

if you say so <laugh>

Re: Ruhr Championship (EPTC 5)

Postby Monique

JohnFromLondonTown wrote:
Monique wrote:
Indeed and you might wonder why.

See this is it. Its exactly comments like this one that give elephants a bad name.


Un éléphant ça trompe énormément!
Sorry guys the pun is not translatable. It says "An elephant deceives big time" but it plays on the word "trompe" which means both "deceive" (as a verb) and trunk (of an elephant - as a noun)

Having said that when I wrote "you might wonder why" I meant it litterally, not to imply that JH had to be guilty and that it's been swept under the carpet. There are more than one possibility: NOTW wanting to protect themselves from being sued, NOTW wanting to protect their sources and more.
My point is that indeed people are left to wonder why, and that leaves doors wide open to speculations. Total transparancy is the only way out of this vicious situation.
Last edited by Monique on 16 Nov 2010, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Ruhr Championship (EPTC 5)

Postby Roland

What's the point in people speculating? After all, that's all Higgins was caught doing, speculating. Just let him get on with his career ffs.

Re: Ruhr Championship (EPTC 5)

Postby Monique

Sonny wrote:What's the point in people speculating? After all, that's all Higgins was caught doing, speculating. Just let him get on with his career ffs.

I'm afraid you won't stop people speculating, it's in human nature. The only way to put a stop to that is to present full facts.

Re: Ruhr Championship (EPTC 5)

Postby Roland

You won't stop it, you've still got people going on about the moon landing. Best thing to do is ignore it and stop talking about it. Only bring it up again if he's caught out in future doing something he shouldn't which is related.