Ronnie's aftermath of the 140-147 incident

Really? I've found the tournament highly entertaining and think it's been far better than the boring run of the mill Grand Prix we were used to.

I found the Grand Prix round-robin really exciting, trying to pick out the matches that were obviously fixed

Thompson Lykes wrote:I found the Grand Prix round-robin really exciting, trying to pick out the matches that were obviously fixed

the great your love for snooker always shines through in your comments

GJtheaussiestud wrote:

Thompson Lykes wrote:I found the Grand Prix round-robin really exciting, trying to pick out the matches that were obviously fixed

the great your love for snooker always shines through in your comments

Bourne wrote:He's got people talking about snooker, that can't be a bad thing

A very good point. How many Monday's go unwitnessed, or unreported in snooker.

At least he made headlines for something that can be justified - not like offer a little Chinese reporter the chance to suck his microphone

"Mark Williams, a twice world champion, has no sympathy for 'The Rocket'.

"Ronnie's break should stand at 140 because he'd shaken hands before he potted the last black," he said.

Looks like Mark thought shaking of the hands was end of match/break as well. Can anyone find the actual rule that deals with hand shaking/unscrewing the cue and what it denotes?

sickpotter wrote:"Mark Williams, a twice world champion, has no sympathy for 'The Rocket'.

"Ronnie's break should stand at 140 because he'd shaken hands before he potted the last black," he said.

Looks like Mark thought shaking of the hands was end of match/break as well. Can anyone find the actual rule that deals with hand shaking/unscrewing the cue and what it denotes?

i dont think the 147 should stand due to the hand shake

Doesn't matter if you think it should or shouldn't count, the fact is it does.

Sonny wrote:Doesn't matter if you think it should or shouldn't count, the fact is it does.

sorry

Didn't Ding and Ronnie shake hands halfway through the Masters final in 07 while Ding was in turmoil ... but they still played the rest of it.

What about the handshake after a 147? Is that an offer to concede?

Or before a match? Is that a 0-0 draw?

Are you lovers of snooker or Masons?

Bourne wrote:Didn't Ding and Ronnie shake hands halfway through the Masters final in 07 while Ding was in turmoil ... but they still played the rest of it.

good point

Thompson Lykes wrote:What about the handshake after a 147? Is that an offer to concede?

Or before a match? Is that a 0-0 draw?

Are you lovers of snooker or Masons?

go away

Thompson Lykes wrote:What about the handshake after a 147? Is that an offer to concede?

Or before a match? Is that a 0-0 draw?

Are you lovers of snooker or Masons?

I don't care if it counts (IMO he made the max, it should stand), I just want to know what the actual rule is.

Thompson, don't be disingenious.

Shake before a match is good luck, standard.

Shake at the end of the match is well played, match over

You don't offer your hand to an opponent after you made a max unless the match is over. Your opponent might want to congratulate you and offer his hand but again, the intent is obvious.

ROS obviously wanted to end the match so the intent of the handshake was signify it was over.

The answer has been given by Jan Verhaas himself who reffed the match: the ref decides when the match ends. Simple as that. There is nothing in the rules regarding hand shakes at all.
Jan has decided that the match ended after the black was potted and that the 147 stands.

Hi Monique,

I don't know that's correct though. As I mentioned when you first posted Jan's answer, it's not up to the ref to decide when a match is done, it's up to the player.

Take the following scenario:

Player needs 2 snookers and doesn't feel they can get them so they walk over and shake their opponents hand. Does the ref have the power to say, no go play for your snookers? He doesn't so I have a hard time accepting the "it's up to the ref" statement.

I don't know if there's actually a rule about the handshake or unscrewing your queue but there's been an "understanding" as to the significance of those actions for as long as I've played cue sports.

I'm pretty sure there is nothing about handshakes or unscrewing cues or anything of the like in the rules. Yes there is an understanding but there were exceptions in the past. There were cases players refused to shake hands and I don't reckon those matches are still under way
When Ding wanted to shake hands in the Masters, neither Ronnie nor the ref took it and they saved him from a lot of trouble.
Of course you can't actually "force" a player to play, but the ref has his say and in this case his advice was to pot the black, which Ronnie did. Jan decided that the end of the match came when the black was potted and the maxi completed.
And it makes me smile how the media write about Jan to have to "persuade" Ronnie to do it ... it took him a couple of seconds. It's not as if there was much discussion. It would be more accurate to say he advised him to do it, for the fans, and Ronnie complied immediately.

ROBBO WC said all players knew there was no price and all players were made aware of this

that comment from the world champion confirms to me it was blatant attention seeking by ronnie orsome could call it showmanship

what would happen if a punter layed on a bet that Ronnie would make a 147 then Ronnie on the Pink perfect on the Black this guy on his settee Getting Excited £20,000 in the Bank then Ronnie walks out on 140 leaving this guy WITH £0,000

Showmanship

Bourne wrote:Showmanship

But you cant play with people like that .... Thousands is bet on 147 Every season .....Every fan should expect 100% commitment in to every shot that matters and that black mattered to a lot of punters.

betting is a mugs game but it all adds up to why it would have angered Barry Hearn if he did not pot it.

wildJONESEYE wrote:

Bourne wrote:Showmanship

But you cant play with people like that .... Thousands is bet on 147 Every season .....Every fan should expect 100% commitment in to every shot that matters and that black mattered to a lot of punters.

betting is a mugs game but it all adds up to why it would have angered Barry Hearn if he did not pot it.

Every shot that matters in terms of betting or the state of the match ? O'Sullivan had long won the frame and match so it made no difference to the snooker-side of it, but if you're going to bring betting side of it in then every point matters yes, but that's the point of betting, you're gambling on certain situations, you're gambling knowing full-well that O'Sullivan is unpredictable and could do anything.

GJtheaussiestud wrote:ROBBO WC said all players knew there was no price and all players were made aware of this

that comment from the world champion confirms to me it was blatant attention seeking by ronnie orsome could call it showmanship

as i keep saying...he knew there were no prize fund so he was gonna not pot the black to prove a point to hearn

GJtheaussiestud wrote:ROBBO WC said all players knew there was no price and all players were made aware of this

that comment from the world champion confirms to me it was blatant attention seeking by ronnie orsome could call it showmanship

Do you EVER read what people actually write? Of course Ronnie knew that, as I wrote above. But he wanted to make sure the audience did, hence the question and the waiting for the answer. It was indeed to draw attention, but not on himself, on the fact that there was no special prize for a maxi anymore and that this is wrong in his opinion. Mark Williams backed him and I very much doubt Robbo would refuse the prize money if the bonus is reinstantiated!
He still did complete the break -and what a break that was - for the audience innit? So I don't see what all this fuss is about.

wildJONESEYE wrote:what would happen if a punter layed on a bet that Ronnie would make a 147 then Ronnie on the Pink perfect on the Black this guy on his settee Getting Excited £20,000 in the Bank then Ronnie walks out on 140 leaving this guy WITH £0,000

One punter contacted the Scotman paper to say he'd bet Ronnie to make 140 then foul the black.

"I had a deal, i mean a dream where Ronnie would do that, and to cover myself, I mean in bed when I was having the dream, Jan would allow him to grab Mark King's hand then call foul to make doubly sure. I can't believe at odds of 1000/1 with £1000 on they have refused to pay out," said upset punter, a Mr Burnett from Glasgow.

He added "if you want the job done these days do it yourself"

Scottish solicitors must be rubbing their hands at all the libel battered about these days

I think the 147 from Ronnie was definitely showmanship. Would anyone else have done that? Would anyone else have gotten people talking about snooker?

By the way, I think this has been a very enjoyable tournament.

thetubberlad wrote:I think the 147 from Ronnie was definitely showmanship. Would anyone else have done that? Would anyone else have gotten people talking about snooker?

By the way, I think this has been a very enjoyable tournament.

some very memorable matches

I respect ROS just a little bit more after this statement. If he's just on a wind up then ok, and fair play for giving away the 4 grand. Hearn must be frustrated with him though because he loudly supported Hearn and has done nothing to help him, although if you go by the all publicity is good publicity trick then you could say he is 'upping' the profile if not exactly 'raising' it..

Do hope that Jim gives it to him tomorrow though. Trouble is if Jimmy does win everyone will say it was a hash..