Bahrain Championship
I know this is a bit out of date as a discussion, but I am waiting for something to load at work, and I was daydreaming about snooker, and for some reason my mind wondered onto this tournament.
It seems to be remembered in a very negative light, but I never really understood why. Obviously, announcing it late meaning some players had Premier League commitments was a cock-up, but does that really mean the tournament in itself should never have run again? If World Snooker announced the tournament in plenty of time the following season, I didn't understand the problem.
I mean, Steve Davis was one of the four players involded in the Premier League that night. But with no disrespect to Steve, but at is age it was unlikely he'd be bothering the business end of the tournament if there was a full compliment of players there anyway, especially as his first match was against Ronnie O'Sullivan. (Who only wasn't at the tournament, because he couldn't be bothered to go.)
The only other problem I could see was that, the crowds weren't very big. Obviously, this is a problem, but it's a problem across the board. There are empty seats in some of the early matches at the UK. The second most prestigious. You can't really blame World Snooker for having a tournament in a rich, oil producing country. As far as we know, there might have been $$$$ in it for them. And the sport needed money at the time. Granted there are snooker loving countries out there not getting tournaments, but as far as I am concerned, the more the merrier. If there were tournaments in Germany, Poland, Russia etc AND one in Bahrain, nobody would've been moaning.
Okay, so there were aspects of it that were thrown together, but as I tournament I remember quite enjoying it. And, for every month of that season there was a ranking event. Something that didn't happen after Northern Ireland, and Bahrain vanished. Maybe it vanished because the people over there didn't want a second year, but I can't understand why so many people hated it and wanted it removed just because a few players couldn't make it (and one didn't want to), or that they considered it in the wrong tournament. I, for one, welcomed extra snooker, and a chance to see some players play that you wouldn't want to?
I know I am just kind of waffling, but what are people's thoughts? I'd be interested to know what people think.
It seems to be remembered in a very negative light, but I never really understood why. Obviously, announcing it late meaning some players had Premier League commitments was a cock-up, but does that really mean the tournament in itself should never have run again? If World Snooker announced the tournament in plenty of time the following season, I didn't understand the problem.
I mean, Steve Davis was one of the four players involded in the Premier League that night. But with no disrespect to Steve, but at is age it was unlikely he'd be bothering the business end of the tournament if there was a full compliment of players there anyway, especially as his first match was against Ronnie O'Sullivan. (Who only wasn't at the tournament, because he couldn't be bothered to go.)
The only other problem I could see was that, the crowds weren't very big. Obviously, this is a problem, but it's a problem across the board. There are empty seats in some of the early matches at the UK. The second most prestigious. You can't really blame World Snooker for having a tournament in a rich, oil producing country. As far as we know, there might have been $$$$ in it for them. And the sport needed money at the time. Granted there are snooker loving countries out there not getting tournaments, but as far as I am concerned, the more the merrier. If there were tournaments in Germany, Poland, Russia etc AND one in Bahrain, nobody would've been moaning.
Okay, so there were aspects of it that were thrown together, but as I tournament I remember quite enjoying it. And, for every month of that season there was a ranking event. Something that didn't happen after Northern Ireland, and Bahrain vanished. Maybe it vanished because the people over there didn't want a second year, but I can't understand why so many people hated it and wanted it removed just because a few players couldn't make it (and one didn't want to), or that they considered it in the wrong tournament. I, for one, welcomed extra snooker, and a chance to see some players play that you wouldn't want to?
I know I am just kind of waffling, but what are people's thoughts? I'd be interested to know what people think.
-
SnookerFan - Posts: 164431
- Joined: 13 December 2009
- Snooker Idol: Michaela Tabb
- Walk-On: Entry Of The Gladiators