NOTW has released the unedited tapes

Your'e a total idiot you know that..

so what are you saying the WPBSA had no right to ban him from WPBSA Events

Bloody stupid pin end.

and sonny im not apolagising for that because this cretinous rubbish deserves it

sigh...

...you are so easy to wind up wild. You are already on 2 warnings for this sort of thing. Don't get personal when you don't agree with an opinion. Other people are allowed opinions you know. You're not the snooker guru with all universal knawladge you know.

sonny thats not a opinion thats a insult and exactly what 606 is famous for are you telling me your letting that pin end ass buck get away with wuming like that

come on show balls and kick the runt in to touch where he belongs.

he does not belong on a forum thats for sure unless you want 606 mark 2

To be fair Sonny, although Wild's wording was totally over the top, Cueist didn't exactly show Wild's opinions a lot of respect either.

to be fair, wild saying the cueist doesn't deserve to be on this forum is ott also.

so everyone has had their rant, say sorry guys and chill

As i say wild,You can think what you like,And if im an idiot then i would hate to think what you should be called.

I also have a right to my opinion,And i like you dont have to respect any one else's if i dont agree with it.

To be honest i dont come on here much as posters like you are more interested in minituae of snooker rather than snooker.

Your posts dont even make sense you runt.

Alright that's enough now.

When you speak to people how wild does you've got to learn to take it as well. This subject matter is always going to have strong opinions attached to it. Try and stick to opinions and not get personal. And that applies to everyone.

Cueist,

just returned back to this thread to see the carnage since i last checked it haha

it hardly takes a genius to work out what i was alluding too with my pervert side story i elaborated on to use as a similar example.

Witz78 wrote:Cueist,

just returned back to this thread to see the carnage since i last checked it haha

it hardly takes a genius to work out what i was alluding too with my pervert side story i elaborated on to use as a similar example.

It has nothing to do with being a genius to work it out Witz

It is just so far away from a match fixing coup that never even saw the light of day in a non sanctioned WSA event.

Anyway,Whatever,I am allowed my opinion based on facts that i do know,I never said John Higgins should go unpunished for bringing the game into disrepute .

The NOTW and Pat Mooney are very instrumental in the whole sorry episode,What the buck would you do?

I know Higgins is no saint,But his actions have been wrong but most importantly it has not affected anything the WSA adfministers.

As for wild,He can think what he likes.I dont have to agree with him if i dont want to and i see things differently.

If i was about to lose my livelihood and heard or read what he was saying i would want to fdo something to his big fat gob.

It has to be said, that is a fair comment (at the end).

The Cueist wrote:

Witz78 wrote:Cueist,

just returned back to this thread to see the carnage since i last checked it haha

it hardly takes a genius to work out what i was alluding too with my pervert side story i elaborated on to use as a similar example.

It has nothing to do with being a genius to work it out Witz

It is just so far away from a match fixing coup that never even saw the light of day in a non sanctioned WSA event.

Anyway,Whatever,I am allowed my opinion based on facts that i do know,I never said John Higgins should go unpunished for bringing the game into disrepute .

The NOTW and Pat Mooney are very instrumental in the whole sorry episode,What the buck would you do?

I know Higgins is no saint,But his actions have been wrong but most importantly it has not affected anything the WSA adfministers.

As for wild,He can think what he likes.I dont have to agree with him if i dont want to and i see things differently.

If i was about to lose my livelihood and heard or read what he was saying i would want to fdo something to his big fat gob.

thats where your wrong though, WSA event or not, the sport as a whole WHICH the WSA governs suffers from negative press and knock on effects if something like this isnt taken seriously by them.

I certainly amn't going to make you agree with Wild, that would defeat the purpose of this place. That said, I feel any wrongdoing within the sport should be dealt with, and if the WSA can't suspend a player for something that potentially brings the game into disrepute, at any level under any administration, I don't see sense in that. My opinion. From a personal point of view, I always liked John Higgins, but IF he has done wrong in such a way, bye bye as far as I'm concerned.

Witz,That is your opinion and you are entitled to it,Though it is not mine as you know.

There is entrapment involved in this story,As well as greed.

As i said in an earlier post"I know Higgins is no saint,But his actions have been wrong but most importantly it has not affected anything the WSA administers."

I am not wrong mate,I am just not as frenzied as some to see a man stripped of his livelihood via entrapment by red top wipe your bottom on it newspaper that ruins people for kicks.

Think about it Witz.

Tubber That is your opinion and you have took the hard line stance.

You are young and dont yet have a family and mortgage to pay for and keep fed and watered,We see things differently,We will have to agree to differ mate.

love the reply Cueist. I get what you're saying, but it's not like Higgins is a pauper now, is it? If it were a middle ranked journeyman, I think your comment would hold a lot more ground with me. Not that I think it's right for anyone to be involved in this.

Maybe someone can clear the air for me...

My understanding is that WPBSA operates as the professional governing body of snooker and billiards, along with
its amateur counterpart, the International Billiards and Snooker Federation (IBSF),. It also is responsible for the
trade association promoting snooker and billiards, The World Snooker Association, more generally known as WSA.
The WPBSA is responsible for organising invitational events such as the Masters. The organisation also determines the
rules and regulations of snooker, including disciplinary matters. It is in that capacity, head of discipline, that David Douglas has shouldered the Higgins/Mooney problem and carried it forward on behalf of WPBSA.

Its subsidiary, the World Snooker Association, is responsible for running and administering snooker's commercial interests
including the main ranking circuit events. These historically and variously included the Shanghai Masters, UK Championship, Welsh Open, China Open and the World Snooker Championship, and all the PTCs. The subsidiary is often referred to informally as simply World Snooker, although this is more properly the title of its website.

Prior to Barry Hearn's leadership, Sir Rodney Walker's policies were the subject of much criticism in the late 2000s.
John Higgins has been particularly vocal in his opinion that World Snooker has not done enough to promote the game in new territories, particularly in Eastern Europe. Intending to capitalise on that unfilled opportunity to market snooker in the EU,
the rival World Series of Snooker was launched by a consortium including Higgins and Mooney in 2008.

With a new board and mandate for the expansion and development of many more tournaments, WSS was called upon to organize a series of four PTC - WPBSA-sanctioned events in Europe on behalf of WSA.
These are the ones that the alleged match-fixing was about.
I posted this up at the time based upon an early organizational outline from the WPBSA...






So, if fact yes, the entire issue is a WPBSA disciplinary matter, and not just because Higgins is a "player". Not just because Mooney was a board member of WPBSA at the time, either. WSS was a contract event organizer (Mooney and Higgins) sent
out there to negotate PTC tournaments on behalf of WSA (WPBSA).

All in a very sad and screwed up situation for everyone. I'm sure the "You WILL confess" spotlight on a star like Higgins helps stall off all the other behind the scenes issues also coming to light. It's all bound to come out sooner or later anyway I expect.

I stand to be corrected...


=o)

Noel

Well then Noel has pointed out that it was indeed well and truely under the remit of World Snooker to get involved in disciplinary matters so that's put that one to bed.

Just think - at least Higgins is going to have a fair hearing and not be subject to a kangaroo court behind closed doors with no details emerging afterwards as would have happened in the pre-Hearn days.

Today's the day we get to find out. Come on John!

Well I am not sure Noel has put it ti bed. The format that Mooney & Higgins were discussing was a WSS event were they could guarantee matches with Higgins against Dott & Selby, also he said it would be on TV & tell players for TV this needs to go 5-3 or whatever

At the end of the day, Mooney was on the board and Higgins was World Number 1 so it stands to reason they are answerable to World Snooker even for outside interests. That's not what this should be about though. The fact is Higgins was caught answering questions which could have been tongue in cheek given the way the reporter clearly hadn't got a clue what he was talking about, and it was an event that hadn't been scheduled to take place so it was HYPOTHETICAL!!!!

How can anyone face any charges for discussing something hypothetical? Well I know they can in extreme circumstances, but stick a few drinks inside someone and get them talking about something they know about and watch the bravado come to the surface.

Yes why didn't the NOTW go as far as they did with the cricket and produce the money, there is were clear guilt or innocence is found.

Or Fergie for that matter.

OK.
Simple example.

Stand up struggle your way past the fat and the sleeping to the aisle.
Announce loudly "I have a bomb".

Good luck with that "hypothetical" statement.
Let us all know how you make out.


=o\

Noel

When I said that above and added "Well I know they can in extreme circumstances" I was referring to claiming you had a bomb in an airport. That is called extreme circumstances.

But from experience, I know I've had many many hypothetical discussions about things which I had no intention of actually carrying out the actions. For example, how could I take out the singer Dido and not be caught.

How could I hypothetically lose a frame of snooker on purpose without anyone spotting me? It's possible, let's talk about it.

Sonny wrote:Or Fergie for that matter.

Plenty of similarities between the two... hypothetical future benefits for money.
One exception... Fergie couldn't scream "MAFIA!"




=o(

Noel

She bagged an envelope stashed full of cash though. Big difference.

I just thought, my god she's ugly these days then realised that's Higgins face photoshopped on

Sonny wrote:She bagged an envelope stashed full of cash though. Big difference.

In business illions "change hands" on just a handshake and a banker's name mate,
or as with Higgins' helpful suggestion, credits on a mortgage on his castle in Spain.
261,000 pounds in cash is .... OBVIOUS? Ya?


=o\

Noel

Yeah, I bet he regrets saying that bit

Still, alcohol fuelled, anything is possible.

Sonny wrote:Yeah, I bet he regrets saying that bit

Still, alcohol fuelled, anything is possible.

Sonny give up the weaksauce mate.
Higgins in his own text said "I'm screwed".
And if he isn't then that's a whole other mess of hurt for snooker.


=o(

Noel

Thats a great photoshop edit! haha love it

Noel wrote:

Sonny wrote:Or Fergie for that matter.

Plenty of similarities between the two... hypothetical future benefits for money.
One exception... Fergie couldn't scream "MAFIA!"




=o(

Noel

Hypothetically!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

There is irony here.