Witz78 wrote:thetubberlad wrote:To be honest Witz, I cannot believe a professional player could miss by that much. It's his look when he flukes the pink though that got me...
Yes im not saying its the easiest pot ever but the only way you see pros miss this type of shot is either by it rattling the jaws when hut with pace, or being slightly undercut or overcut and therefore an edge of it clipping one of the knuckles of the pocket causing it to miss.
case_master wrote:Monique that report does not say Douglas has received the tapes, it suggests he has viewed them which is different going forward.
access to footage shot during the NotW investigation, but it is understood that he had conditional access (possibly on NotW premises), meaning he had to agree to some kind of indemnity waiver about the use of the footage.
Witz78 wrote:infact as i normally play with pace and am decent judging the angles even i wouldnt have missed it anything like as bad as Jamie did
Monique wrote: with specific charges.And the guardian is usually a serious paper and reliable.
Monique wrote:The important point is that they were made available to Douglas. So all the speculations about why NOTW didn't want to show them etc... fall flat. Douglas had access to them and decided to push the case to Resolution Sport with specific charges. The guardian writes Douglas handed the tapes to Resolution. If that's true he obviously got them. And the guardian is usually a serious paper and reliable.
Monique wrote:Sporting Intelligence have been very cautious in their wording this time. Whether NOTW refuses to give Higgins and his lawyers access is still to be seen. But even so the Chief Investigator has seen them and therefore he knows exactly to what extend they were edited. He still decided to push the case further...
Monique wrote:Case my understanding of both article is that Douglas saw the tapes before taking the decision to push the caseto sporting resolutions. Of course now it's not in his hands anymore but he certainly could be summoned as an expert witness if needed.
by JohnFromLondonTown » 28 Jul 2010 Read
John Higgins hearing will be September 7 and 8
HIGGINS CASE: HEARING DATE SET
John Higgins will learn his fate, following allegations in the News of the World that he was prepared to lose frames for money, in a two day hearing on September 7 and 8.
The tribunal at Sports Resolutions will be presided over by Ian Mill QC.
I understand that Higgins's punishment - if applicable - will be decided at the hearing.
It is not ideal that this falls in the middle of the Shanghai Masters but a date had to be found that was acceptable to all parties.
Posted by Dave H at 4:40 PM
by Rocket_ron » 05 Aug 2010 Read
StalinESQ wrote:lengthy ban
rocket_ron wrote:StalinESQ wrote:lengthy ban
why smart? please give details of your conclusions
by Rocket_ron » 05 Aug 2010 Read
StalinESQ wrote:rocket_ron wrote:StalinESQ wrote:lengthy ban
why smart? please give details of your conclusions
rocket_ron wrote:StalinESQ wrote:rocket_ron wrote:StalinESQ wrote:lengthy ban
why smart? please give details of your conclusions
that tells me buck all
rocket_ron wrote:StalinESQ wrote:rocket_ron wrote:StalinESQ wrote:lengthy ban
why smart? please give details of your conclusions
that tells me buck all
by N_Castle07 » 06 Aug 2010 Read
Monique wrote:http://snookerscene.blogspot.com/2010/08/higgins-case-hearing-date-set.htmlHIGGINS CASE: HEARING DATE SET
John Higgins will learn his fate, following allegations in the News of the World that he was prepared to lose frames for money, in a two day hearing on September 7 and 8.
The tribunal at Sports Resolutions will be presided over by Ian Mill QC.
I understand that Higgins's punishment - if applicable - will be decided at the hearing.
It is not ideal that this falls in the middle of the Shanghai Masters but a date had to be found that was acceptable to all parties.
Posted by Dave H at 4:40 PM
wildJONESEYE wrote:it all depends whats on that original unedited tape.
Noel wrote:wildJONESEYE wrote:it all depends whats on that original unedited tape.
No it doesn't.
I hope John is innocent as we all do. But I'm not stupid.
If this could have been cleared up, swept under the carpet, whatever, so that John
could have continued as # 1 it would have happened long ago. That's not in the plan.
This is not about whether the tapes were edited or not. They always are.
This is not about whether or not Higgins was caught with his pants down. He was.
It was a slick effective setup just like with Sarah Ferguson. At least she didn't try to mention "Mafia".
John has brought Snooker into wide disrepute and that is the truth and that is his problem. And worse.
All this "due process" is not really about Higgins at all. It's bigger than that. It's Snooker's future at stake.
Decisions will be made to try to remedy the damage that has been done to our sport.
My prediction... Higgins will have to take the big one for the team.
=o(
Noel
Noel wrote:[quote="case_masterYes it does
Noel wrote:wildJONESEYE wrote:it all depends whats on that original unedited tape.
No it doesn't.
I hope John is innocent as we all do. But I'm not stupid.
If this could have been cleared up, swept under the carpet, whatever, so that John
could have continued as # 1 it would have happened long ago. That's not in the plan.
This is not about whether the tapes were edited or not. They always are.
This is not about whether or not Higgins was caught with his pants down. He was.
It was a slick effective setup just like with Sarah Ferguson. At least she didn't try to mention "Mafia".
John has brought Snooker into wide disrepute and that is the truth and that is his problem. And worse.
All this "due process" is not really about Higgins at all. It's bigger than that. It's Snooker's future at stake.
Decisions will be made to try to remedy the damage that has been done to our sport.
My prediction... Higgins will have to take the big one for the team.
=o(
Noel
