Shaun Murphy

First thing's first, congrats to Shaun on a very impressive display at last night's Premier League final. Ronnie has always been the master of time limit snooker, but he was deservedly beaten 7-3 by Murphy last night, and looked secnd best for most of the game.

Of course, we're not going to lose the plot just because of a Premier League final. But is this an encoraging result for Murphy? Absolutely. Their's little doubt that Murphy is the best player outside of the 'big two'. Neil Robertson is improving fast, while Maguire and Selby can put in a cracking display when on form, but for consistency over the last 5 years, it has to go to the Rotherham man.

Personally, I don't care for Murphy all that much. He strikes me as very arrogant and condescending. Also, he defeated my favourite player in the 2005 World Final, and I didn't care too much for his attitude even back then. I'm not alone in my dislike of Murphy, but the qualit of his game has never been in doubt.

Having been World Champion in 2005 at the grand old age of 22, he clearly posseses a lot of talent. He makes it to ranking semi-finals on a more consistent basis than anyone else, and his record in the longer events is very impressive. Twice World Finalist, 2005 Champion, 2007 losing semi-finalist. UK Champion 2008, losing semi-finalist 2007. The ability has always been there.

I expect Murphy to become a more consistent tournament winner soon. I'd also be very surprised if he didn't win another World Title within the next three years. What I'd like to know is whether or not Murphy has the potential to become one of the great players. He's not spectacular, but he's a fine player and clearly a cut above Higgins' and Ronnie's other challengers.

I think he'll be the next World Number One after the big two, and I think he could win up to 10 ranking events. Will he become a great? Wouldn't bet against it.

I dont exactly like Murphy but i cant deny that i enjoy watching him in full flow

eirebilly wrote:I dont exactly like Murphy but i cant deny that i enjoy watching him in full flow

yeah he is proberbly a top 3 player when in full flow, but don't like him as a person

Supermurph is my favourite player at the moment. As has been stated, his game isn't the most spectacular, however he is capable of some beautiful snooker when he's on form. Plus, he is always tenacious and determined.

Also, I think he comes across as intelligent and articulate in his interviews, and can be relied upon to call a spade a shovel when the situation calls for it. Granted, he does have a habit of making the odd Alan Partridge-esque faux-pas, but he is still one of the better interviews in the game right now.

Murphy just comes across as arrogant and smug no matter how hard he tries not to be.

He just strikes me as the kid who was picked on a bit at school, but instead of giving as good as he got, he always ran to the teacher and grassed in people.

I really like like Murphy and rate him highly. I’ve said a lot of times he is the only top 16 player with the same attitude as Davis and Hendry. Unfortunately for him he hasn’t found the consistency as them two greats. When on form he is a great player and once Higgins and O’Sullivan’s game finally slip he will own this sport I’m sure. A lot of people don’t understand the life he has had, he was once beating so badly in school that the headmaster didn’t know who he was because his face was covered in blood. He was picked on for being different and maybe that’s why you lot think he is smug in his older years. Me being a big snooker fan how can I dislike someone with the talent and drive that Murphy has?

N_Castle07 wrote:once Higgins and O’Sullivan’s game finally slip he will own this sport

gone are the days when one man owns snooker, when o'sullivan and higgins go he we be up against the next breed. din,robertson,selby,maguire,trump and so on. he may win more titles but wont own the sport, no one will own it.

rocket_ron wrote:

N_Castle07 wrote:once Higgins and O’Sullivan’s game finally slip he will own this sport

gone are the days when one man owns snooker, when o'sullivan and higgins go he we be up against the next breed. din,robertson,selby,maguire,trump and so on. he may win more titles but wont own the sport, no one will own it.

its possible but mindset of players think that they cant so they wont.

however it wont be murphy only 3 titles in 5 years and about 5 finals.

he is a consistent player but he wont be a consistent winner. he is the modern day Terry Griffiths or Alan Mcmanus always falling short of silverware.

wildJONESEYE wrote: he is the modern day Terry Griffiths or Alan Mcmanus always falling short of silverware.

wild I agree with your statement

rocket_ron wrote:

wildJONESEYE wrote: he is the modern day Terry Griffiths or Alan Mcmanus always falling short of silverware.

wild I agree with your statement

Its hard to say that hes this generations version of Griffiths or McManus.

Hes won the UK and Worlds in the 5 years hes been classed as a top player. Sure, he maybe should have won more given his talent, but if he continues to be around the elite for another decade and making quarters regularly without threatening to win tournaments, then yes - id class him as a modern day Griffiths (though hes an entirely different type of player)

Re: McManus i look at his career in 3 periods, the early to mid 90s when he was at his peak, still a perenial bridesmaid though who failed to win what his talent merited.

The period from around 97-06 when he still remained in the top 16 was his "Mark King" era when he would win his opening game and scrape his top 16 status from season to season.

Now, hes in a dramatic downward spiral, and headin off the main tour very soon unless he gets some form back

Witz78 wrote:

rocket_ron wrote:

wildJONESEYE wrote: he is the modern day Terry Griffiths or Alan Mcmanus always falling short of silverware.

wild I agree with your statement

Its hard to say that hes this generations version of Griffiths or McManus.

Hes won the UK and Worlds in the 5 years hes been classed as a top player. Sure, he maybe should have won more given his talent, but if he continues to be around the elite for another decade and making quarters regularly without threatening to win tournaments, then yes - id class him as a modern day Griffiths (though hes an entirely different type of player)

Re: McManus i look at his career in 3 periods, the early to mid 90s when he was at his peak, still a perenial bridesmaid though who failed to win what his talent merited.

The period from around 97-06 when he still remained in the top 16 was his "Mark King" era when he would win his opening game and scrape his top 16 status from season to season.

Now, hes in a dramatic downward spiral, and headin off the main tour very soon unless he gets some form back

what could we say then? modern day jimmy white, gets to business end alot but never win the big ones?

rocket_ron wrote:

Witz78 wrote:

rocket_ron wrote:

wildJONESEYE wrote: he is the modern day Terry Griffiths or Alan Mcmanus always falling short of silverware.

wild I agree with your statement

Its hard to say that hes this generations version of Griffiths or McManus.

Hes won the UK and Worlds in the 5 years hes been classed as a top player. Sure, he maybe should have won more given his talent, but if he continues to be around the elite for another decade and making quarters regularly without threatening to win tournaments, then yes - id class him as a modern day Griffiths (though hes an entirely different type of player)

Re: McManus i look at his career in 3 periods, the early to mid 90s when he was at his peak, still a perenial bridesmaid though who failed to win what his talent merited.

The period from around 97-06 when he still remained in the top 16 was his "Mark King" era when he would win his opening game and scrape his top 16 status from season to season.

Now, hes in a dramatic downward spiral, and headin off the main tour very soon unless he gets some form back

what could we say then? modern day jimmy white, gets to business end alot but never win the big ones?

Hmm, maybe more like a John Parrot.

Even if he was the twin brother of Jimmy, we couldnt possibly say one of the most hated players ever is the modern day version of one of the most loved players of all time.

he has won the UK and World and World as unseeded so he is very much a modern day Terry Griffiths although Griffiths won the masters aswell so hes not quite up to griffiths yet.

He has a long way to go before he can be compared to Parrott.

wildJONESEYE wrote:he has won the UK and World and World as unseeded so he is very much a modern day Terry Griffiths although Griffiths won the masters aswell so hes not quite up to griffiths yet.

He has a long way to go before he can be compared to Parrott.

Was gonna suggest Murphy as more of a Thorburn than a Griffiths when i remembered all his Masters triumphs DOH !!

Suppose your right enough about Griffiths, he was the nearly man in snooker for about 15 years after his world title triumph, Always seemed to make the QF and SF then fall short !!

Assuming Murphy doesnt win anymore Majors but adds a few more smaller rankers to his titles tally, then Parrot wouldnt be too bad a comparison.

murphy over the last 3 years has looked every inch the tournament winner and not done it....ok you can contribute the Ronnie and Higgins factor to that but hes not performed when push came to shove...1st,2nd even quarters he plays well then runs out of steam.

Murphy is very good against players that are not Ronnie or John

case_master wc wrote:Murphy is very good against players that are not Ronnie or John

Just like Griffiths was good against most players apart from Davis

Witz78 wrote:

case_master wc wrote:Murphy is very good against players that are not Ronnie or John

Just like Griffiths was good against most players apart from Davis

I think Shaun Murphy is a quality player, I really do. The problem I have with him is the adulation he gets from being a quality player & how he deals with it. He's not Man enough for it in my book. Only my opinion.

Murphy is a very good player, that goes without saying. It takes serious quality to win the two most important tournaments in the game.

However, I can't see him becoming a great. He isn't in the same league as the likes of O'Sullivan, Higgins, Davis, Hendry, White, Alex Higgins, Reardon, even John Parrott. Even if he does go on to achieve great things, people will still find it hard to place him among the greats as his attitude is a major let down, he doesn't carry te aura of a great.

People lost the bloody run of themselves when he won the World Championship, I even remember some idiotic journalist saying he may have a similar effect as Hendry in the game. Well, he's gotten his answer.

Murphy is only sixth in the world at the moment in my estimations, behind Higgins, O'Sullivan, Robertson, Selby & Ding.

thetubberlad wrote:Murphy is a very good player, that goes without saying. It takes serious quality to win the two most important tournaments in the game.

However, I can't see him becoming a great. He isn't in the same league as the likes of O'Sullivan, Higgins, Davis, Hendry, White, Alex Higgins, Reardon, even John Parrott. Even if he does go on to achieve great things, people will still find it hard to place him among the greats as his attitude is a major let down, he doesn't carry te aura of a great.

People lost the bloody run of themselves when he won the World Championship, I even remember some idiotic journalist saying he may have a similar effect as Hendry in the game. Well, he's gotten his answer.

Murphy is only sixth in the world at the moment in my estimations, behind Higgins, O'Sullivan, Robertson, Selby & Ding.

The 'te aura' bit done me, prompting my reply. Your nice tubber, but your contradicting yourself like style. I'm not gonna come down on you hard, but Shaun Murphy has more presence on a Snooker table than me & you put together.

I’m very surprised with some of the comments on this topic. People are letting there hate for Murphy blind there opinions on his talent. Murphy won’t reach the levels of Higgins and O’Sullivan but IMO he will be the next world number 1 after Higgins and O’Sullivan. I rate him the best player in the world apart from Higgins and O’Sullivan and I see another world title in him. Have you lot not seen this man’s long potting and break building when he is on form?
Ps I don’t recall Terry G. being good enough to make four century’s in a row in a ranker.

Murphy needs to get his best of 9 form together to be more consistent. He is a determined player and has time on his side and he is close to a cert to be World Champion again - something only the greats have done, however as the tubber highlighted public perception will make it harder for him to reach 'great' status.

IMO if you win 2 world titles then you are elevated in status but it might take Murphy to win 3 for the general public to recognise this, he has a good shout at doing it.

Okay, maybe my wording wasn't right.

I will admit, I despise Murphy. Sorry, but I do. That's not going to go down well, but that's my honest opinion of the man.

However, I DO think he's a very good player. And I think he will be World Champion again. He's a tough guy to beat, particularly over the longer formats.

Anyway, yes he does have the aura. Just ask Matthew Stevens. I chose the wrong words, he does get under players skins, and people do find it tough.

But I stand by saying that public perception will hinder his bid to be considered among the greats. Not that I think he'll be good enough anyway.

Excuse my bitterness, please, but I don't think it's all that much worse than some have to O'Sullivan, Higgins or Hendry.

I don't despise him, I think he's alright and he's certainly good to have in the game because he is somewhat controversial. Maybe if he was dominating and professing in Hendryesque manner that no one can touch him and he is the best in the world then I would despise him but as it is, his game has holes and he can be picked apart by better players.

I don't see him as the next world number 1 myself but he is top 4 and will be around for some years yet and N_Castle is right, when he's playing well he is a joy to watch. His ego makes him believe he can pot everything he goes for and when a player attacks every ball it generally makes for good viewing.

Murphy will never be No.1. If Selby can be more consistent he'll do it but I dont see O'Sullivan or Higgins dropping away yet.

Murphy will definitely win another World Title at some point. Possibly two.

sonny

Hendry earned that right by being the undisputed best unless people earn it on the table they shouldn't say it.

as for murphy i don't despise him but after 2005 his record as one of the best players in the world is pathetic.

Yes Hendry earned that right, but he didn't make himself any friends by his arrogance around that time ("I'm world champion and world number 1 and no one can touch me" etc) and my point was if Hendry was bad, then one can only imagine how bad Murphy would be if he'd lived up to his own hyping of being another Davis/Hendry and was sitting on top of the tree looking down on the other players.

i like murphy the player when he plays but the things he does and gets involved in is a bit pratty.

Sonny wrote:EDIT - please don't bring Seifer into unrelated topics