12Bet.com UK Championship Qualifying !!!!!!!!

StalinESQ wrote::idea: Swail was a disgrace in that match with the repositioning of the balls from memory, blatant cheating.

Alex0paul WC wrote:

StalinESQ wrote::idea: Swail was a disgrace in that match with the repositioning of the balls from memory, blatant cheating.

Don't you mean Liang?

Alex0paul WC wrote:

Sonny wrote:

randam05 wrote:Oh wow joe swail pulls another one back..i am LOVING this..ever since his run to welsh open final where i met himand WC second round match with wenbo (which by the way was one of my favourite matches ever) i have really liked the guy. A LOT.

Funny that because I went right off him after the Wenbo match at the Crucible. He is very good to watch when he plays his natural game, I could watch his wrist flicks all day long but I didn't like his attitude during and after the match. He's one of those players who can't take it when someone gets a bit of run of the ball against him.

Didn't help that Liang started blatantly cheating and also celebrated in his face dispite the fact the match was far from over.

Bourne wrote:If Liang was a parakeet in that incident then so was Joe, both players have to agree to the ball going back and Joe didn't object

StalinESQ wrote:

Bourne wrote:If Liang was a parakeet in that incident then so was Joe, both players have to agree to the ball going back and Joe didn't object

I aint watching a half hour clip right now, but from memory Joe got a good deal and the commentators picked up that he was a bit of a turd for not being honest

Alex0paul WC wrote:

StalinESQ wrote:

Bourne wrote:If Liang was a parakeet in that incident then so was Joe, both players have to agree to the ball going back and Joe didn't object

I aint watching a half hour clip right now, but from memory Joe got a good deal and the commentators picked up that he was a bit of a turd for not being honest

I think you need to watch the clip if you think thats what happened

PLtheRef wrote:Yep, the rule states that both players have to give their consent to the referee. Joe did so, hence Liang cannot have been in any breach of the rules. I'd like to think it was the fact that the match was so important that caused Joe's behaviour because it was nothing short of unprofessional.

StalinESQ wrote:MCDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

Ultimate_snooker wrote:

StalinESQ wrote:MCDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

evening bennet

StalinESQ wrote:

Ultimate_snooker wrote:

StalinESQ wrote:MCDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

evening bennet

evening Krisss

Ultimate_snooker wrote:

StalinESQ wrote:

Ultimate_snooker wrote:

StalinESQ wrote:MCDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

evening bennet

evening Krisss

are you supporting MCD, Group leader and Widnes?