Topic locked

has snooker gone to pot for good?

Postby Roland

The time was when snooker used to boast a rich variety of contrasting characters, straight from a Damon Runyon short story. There were the grinders, the likes of Cliff Thorburn, Steve Davis and Stephen Hendry; the dashers, speaheaded by Alex Higgins, Jimmy White and Ronnie O'Sullivan; and, in the 1980s at least, men such as Terry Griffiths and Dennis Taylor, who looked as if they had seen plenty of life beyond the green baize and were plainly human beings, not automatons.

Sadly, though, the sport has lost a lot of that allure, on the evidence of this week's proceedings at the UK Championship in Telford. There have been plenty of close encounters, but most of these have turned into wars of attrition purely as a consequence of the deficiencies of the central characters.

Wednesday evening's quarter-final clash between Shaun Murphy and the reigning world champion, Neil Robertson, was typical of why the tournament has thus far been a snooze. At one point, Murphy attempted to leave a snooker behind the brown and misjudged his effort terribly, whereupon his Australian opponent followed suit with another glaring gaffe, as the duo seemingly did their best to gift opportunities to their opponent.

The Scottish contingent have hardly glittered either, or at least apart from John Higgins, who has bounced back from his six-month suspension withoit missing a heartbeat. Hendry, a seven-times world champion, who has carried on too long - like Michael Schumacher in F1 - was in such pitiful form at the beginning of the week that his two matches resembled car-crash television.

You could hardly bear to watch, and yet there was something horribly compelling about the sight of a man who used to compile century breaks as if it was simplicity itself, but nowadays has so much trouble with his cueing action that it is similar to the "yips" in golf or the "dartitis" which afflicted Eric Bristow.

The darts comparison is interesting in another sense. Barry Hearn, a fellow with the populist instincts in sport that Simon Cowell posseses in music, has dramatically transformed the fortunes of those who ply their trade on the oche. There are competitions all over the world, genuine superstars in the guise of Phil "The Power" Taylor, who will be gunning for his 16th world title later this month, and features on the shortlist for the BBC's Sports Personality of the Year award. and Raymond van Barneveld, who is detemined to hunt down the Englishman and end his supremacy. Darts has changed into different formats, introduced shorter matches, racked up the decibel level, and is in positively rude health again.

Yet one doubts whether Hearn can achieve similar success in snooker, a game which doesn't lend itself to crowds whooping and hollering, addicted as it is to hushed auditoriums and participants weighing up every conceivable option before playing the percentages, as we witnessed in the protracted battle between Higgins and Graeme Dott, which finished 9-8, but was scarcely a triumph for either man.

It hardly helps that the game's most marketable individual, O'Sullivan, spends so much time moaning about how snooker "does his head in"; Taylor, in contrast, has a twinkle in his eyes, as if recognising how lucky he is to be at the forefront of darts' second coming. Why shouldn't he be happy? He has grown rich through a combination of his own sublime skill and Hearn's shrewd eye for the man chance. So has O'Sullivan, but if he can't get excited by snooker, then why should the paying customers flock to the new events on the calendar?

All in all, 2010 might prove a watershed for snooker. It was the year we lost Alex Higgins, who, whatever his faults, embodied the showbusiness values which thrilled the punters. It was also the year when John Higgins returned from a ban as if he had never been away, and exposed the shortcomings of most of the rest of the field. The rwo events are unconnected. But they hint at the difficulties facing Hearn in sexing up a pastime which has become a job for the main players.

:fart:


http://sport.stv.tv/world-sport/215116- ... -for-good/

Re: has snooker gone to pot for good?

Postby Wildey

complete Tit.

he tries to say mistakes in snooker was something new.....

idiot <ok>

Re: has snooker gone to pot for good?

Postby Roland

He hasn't got a clue yet writes as if he knows what he's talking about. You're right wild, a complete tit <ok>

Re: has snooker gone to pot for good?

Postby Wildey

There's a lot of Jealousy in the Press for snooker they hated the fact in the 80s Snooker was talked about more than Football as Hendon said in his interview with Matt (Pro Snooker Blog) Snooker Back then was What X Factor is today and there was so much snobbish attitude about it that they been wanting to knock it at every opportunity since very similar to X Factor.

Re: has snooker gone to pot for good?

Postby Tubberlad

I don't think this article should have been posted here Sonny, to be honest. It really, really doesn't deserve an audience.

Re: has snooker gone to pot for good?

Postby SnookerFan

thetubberlad wrote:I don't think this article should have been posted here Sonny, to be honest. It really, really doesn't deserve an audience.


<laugh>

Re: has snooker gone to pot for good?

Postby gallantrabbit

Obviously the writer is snooker but this should be published here.
He has a point about the differences between snooker and darts and it`s unfortunate the crowds cannot get involved more. In darts the audience goes for a night out. In snooker you go to watch the game, so you have to like the game more. Can`t defend stufff blindly always, which is one reason that Hearn has to make snooker even more global than darts, to spread the audience.

Re: has snooker gone to pot for good?

Postby Wildey

gallantrabbit wrote:Obviously the writer is snooker but this should be published here.
He has a point about the differences between snooker and darts and it`s unfortunate the crowds cannot get involved more. In darts the audience goes for a night out. In snooker you go to watch the game, so you have to like the game more. Can`t defend stufff blindly always, which is one reason that Hearn has to make snooker even more global than darts, to spread the audience.

can not agree more Darts is played in a club you dont have to like Darts to be there.

its like taking a Gay Guy to a lapdancing Club he will enjoy it without getting that interested <laugh>

Re: has snooker gone to pot for good?

Postby Wildey

Sonny wrote:Which one did you take along last time wild?

no comment <laugh>

Re: has snooker gone to pot for good?

Postby Roland

You missed the bit about Murphy v Robertson being an error strewn boreathon and the Higgins v Dott match where neither player triumphed from the way they played. No mention of the Higgins break to level at 8-8 because the guy is a cockerel and doesn't have a clue what he's talking about. It's right to post it here because this is the sort of stuff so called journos can get away with and feed the general public. Articles like this should be presented to snooker fans so they can email the journalist in question and tell them they are talking crap.

Re: has snooker gone to pot for good?

Postby Monique

For those who read the press on Internet regularly It's not the first time that this guy has a go at snooker. Seems to hate it with as much passion as ignorance.

Re: has snooker gone to pot for good?

Postby Roland

I just googled his name along with snooker and was surprised and disappointed to find a couple of decent interviews with Robbo and Anthony McGill without having a dig at the game.

Re: has snooker gone to pot for good?

Postby Black2white

Monique wrote:For those who read the press on Internet regularly It's not the first time that this guy has a go at snooker. Seems to hate it with as much passion as ignorance.

:emu: it seems he has been watching a lot of snooker this week though :selby:
my point is why even bother if this sport is really dying :huh:

Re: has snooker gone to pot for good?

Postby SnookerFan

Sonny wrote:You missed the bit about Murphy v Robertson being an error strewn boreathon and the Higgins v Dott match where neither player triumphed from the way they played. No mention of the Higgins break to level at 8-8 because the guy is a cockerel and doesn't have a clue what he's talking about. It's right to post it here because this is the sort of stuff so called journos can get away with and feed the general public. Articles like this should be presented to snooker fans so they can email the journalist in question and tell them they are talking crap.


That guy obviously didn't see Robertson vs McLeod. rofl

Re: has snooker gone to pot for good?

Postby SnookerFan

Wednesday evening's quarter-final clash between Shaun Murphy and the reigning world champion, Neil Robertson, was typical of why the tournament has thus far been a snooze. At one point, Murphy attempted to leave a snooker behind the brown and misjudged his effort terribly, whereupon his Australian opponent followed suit with another glaring gaffe, as the duo seemingly did their best to gift opportunities to their opponent.

<doh>

Anybody would think this game is difficult. bucking hell, if this guy is so good and Robertson and Murphy, two top players, are such amateurs, why doesn't he turn professional? He'd obviously be winning loads.


idiot.

Re: has snooker gone to pot for good?

Postby GrumpyMrDavros

Sonny wrote:You missed the bit about Murphy v Robertson being an error strewn boreathon and the Higgins v Dott match where neither player triumphed from the way they played. No mention of the Higgins break to level at 8-8 because the guy is a willy and doesn't have a clue what he's talking about.


Well I forced myself to read it and came across the comments on Hendry going on long after his sell by date . It might not be up to the standards of their meetings in the 1990s but the White Hendry match was compelling snooker

Would snooker benefit from somebody like Phil Taylor winning every tournament he enters for two decades ? I don't think so

Re: has snooker gone to pot for good?

Postby wheelsofsteel

Sonny wrote:I just googled his name along with snooker and was surprised and disappointed to find a couple of decent interviews with Robbo and Anthony McGill without having a dig at the game.


I'd like to know how you managed to track this article down in the first place?

I suppose through tags which is where I came up with this http://sport.caledonianmercury.com/tag/stephen-hendry

The man Drysdale might like snooker players once he meets them but not snooker, if you see what I mean.

Re: has snooker gone to pot for good?

Postby SnookerFan

This guy was right... Yesterday's final was boring as hell, man. And Williams' semi with Murphy. Dull as ditchwater. I regreat how much time and money and time I've spent following snooker, and will instead, be dedicating my life to whatever sport this guy recommends I follow.

<doh>

Re: has snooker gone to pot for good?

Postby Casey

Last night we had one of the most entertaining matches in history. I know some people did not want John to win, regardless of that the match had everything. :bowdown:

Re: has snooker gone to pot for good?

Postby Wildey

the UK was a Great advertisement not only for snooker but for session snooker over long matches that what makes snooker even Steve Davis who talked bull after the World Open has come round to finding common sense at long last <ok>

Re: has snooker gone to pot for good?

Postby Casey

Monique wrote:Oh come! It was a snooze fest! Even Mark's son fell asleep ;)
Wha? He's only three? yeah, yeah, yeah ... wtf! <doh>

:stir:


<laugh>

Re: has snooker gone to pot for good?

Postby SnookerFan

wildJONESEYE wrote:the UK was a Great advertisement not only for snooker but for session snooker over long matches that what makes snooker even Steve Davis who talked bull after the World Open has come round to finding common sense at long last <ok>


Steve-o giving it; "Ronnie did win that shoot out tournament, whatever it was called..."
Hazel: "Power Snooker."
Steve: "That's the one."

<laugh>