Ding Accepts Disciplinary Charge

well lets hold onto those last sentences of yours because if nothing comes of ronnies match against bingham then his words are purely empty with no substance when it come to the real thing a bit like the politicians

it easy to say hearn doesnt give a stuff about anyones reputation he wants to govern a whiter than white sport but he let higgins off the hook and remember with higgins the evidence wasnt tested against they dropped the charges because they believed higgins story that he was scared so the actual charges the evidence were not even tested against

hearn to a small extent has a chance to back up his words or your faith in him by punishing ronnie

im sure he wont because he feels snooker needs ronnie he knows if he does anything to ronnie ronnie will probably walk away and that wont look good for the hearn pr hearn wants ronnie onside he wanted ronnie to be one of his main men this year in terms of pr promotion and the like and has been disappointed with him

however my gut feeling is that hearn feels snooker needs ronnie and if ronnie walks away thats ronnies own choice but hearn knows it wont look good for pr hearn from a marketing point of view if the games biggest crowd puller says buck off to the game in retaliation to being charged by hearn

but lets wait and see what happens first

i think we should hold this punishment as the benchmark of whats to come not whats been.

there are other players during the ptc that are far from faultless but ding got it caught on you been framed.

and it makes acting against him easier.

my guess theres more footage of that match but they only posted the break off frame on youtube.

hold this punishment as a benchmark ok but remember ronnies match came after so he has to be punished accordingly too

otherwise its complete and utter bull all this hearn bravado talk and we all know it if nothing happens to ronnie then when hearn comes out all this discipline rubbish it difficult to take it seriously a single word he says on it

Actually this is where I disagree. Ronnie was in show off mode on that black against Tian Pengfai and you can tell by his body language, how he stopped in his stride when he realised he'd fluffed the shot. He was showing off to play it with drag, but he decelerated on the shot and totally mis-timed it so it didn't reach the pocket. He didn't mean to stick it up therefore to punish him would be the biggest joke in snooker punishment history.

im talking about the bingham match

Ronnie's always been like this though. It's why he divides opinion. I'm of the opinion that it's in his make up as a manic depressive so leave him be.

may well be sonny but you not giving it large like hearn when it comes to disciplining players thats wht hearn has to do something about it

he wont because he fears ronnie will say buck off and walk away which is what hearn doesnt want
especially in this transitional period he wants ronnie onside

so all this talk of discipline and then picking on the peasent leaves a nasty taste in my mouth

All you can do is judge each case individually.

Sonny wrote:All you can do is judge each case individually.

SPOT ON

you have to look at evidence and each case individually .

thats why there is a integrity unit to look at these matches...in the past there was incidence where it was quicker to just brush it aside than to look at it properly.

Regarding the Ding punishment, it'll be interesting to see what Clive has to say in the next SSM

Sonny wrote:Regarding the Ding punishment, it'll be interesting to see what Clive has to say in the next SSM

all i know is Clive and SS Has been the guardian of whats right and pathetic for years thats not going to change.

if theres a incident thats similar in the future and the punishment lenient they will be making a deal of it.

Ding was ill he got £2,000 fine what if he was just snake hissed off whats the punishment then ?

jojo wrote:forgot to add peole might say well this is the new stance hearn been taking after the higgins shenanigans so anything before that it got nothing to do with hearn i might be wrong but has ronnie been punished by hearn after his performance in the uk against bingham ?

i was watching that match whilst logged onto this forum when i was new and from six all ronnie did everything he could to lose anyone who disagrees has got those same specs on the ones they look through to say higgins is innocent

bull of the highest order

if hearn has punished ronnie accordingly for his uk performance then i apologise but if not then yet again its one rule for one and another for the other the snooker bosses making thesmselves look weak by selectng their punishments to each player and not being accordingly universal

great post

Sonny wrote:We've had a good debate about it, that's the main thing.

did this debate at the time of the shot as well, nowt like doing things twice is there

Sorry but I just still can't get over how these 'higher' people can decide what is the right shot and what is the wrong shot, that cannot be their job to decide or the sport will be in the graveyard very quickly.

Bourne wrote:Sorry but I just still can't get over how these 'higher' people can decide what is the right shot and what is the wrong shot, that cannot be their job to decide or the sport will be in the graveyard very quickly.

If you went to a venue and had presumably paid to see a professional match that break off, for example, is not what I want to see.........for starters.

Secondly, playing like that is bastardising the rankings...............helping out a mate. Its wrong on many levels. Poor timing before a big champs I agree, but perhaps that was for a reason, to give a message across the board that no more is this sort of thing in any way acceptable.

i dont understand two questions

one is what would have happened if ding didnt say anything to the authorities after the match ?

the other is if he let the authorities know he was ill before the match what would have happened ?

because if they would have told him sorry you cant play with the illness as you likely to lose or whatever then this just opens up a can of worms it just so silly

Exactly, there are so many holes in this decision it's unreal. Players will literally be scared to turn up and play if they're not well now, because they'll be hounded out of the game by these authorities stamping their mark down, which will lead to more withdrawals, snowballing into god knows what state.

and going by that and sonnys comments saying o sullivan has always been prone to playing like he did against bingham because of being a manic depressive well if that an excuse for ronnie playing like he does when he tries to lose throwing his toys out the pram that in itself opens up a contradictory can of worms with this stupid shitty rule

surely ronnie is ill so to speak before the matches if people siting his manic depression therefore one way or another this rule is rubbish

Bourne wrote:Exactly, there are so many holes in this decision it's unreal. Players will literally be scared to turn up and play if they're not well now, because they'll be hounded out of the game by these authorities stamping their mark down, which will lead to more withdrawals, snowballing into god knows what state.

theres no holes at all in the decision however the bullocks about if he was ill to tell the authorities is a load of rubbish.

it doesn't matter how ill he was that shot was wrong so making a big deal out of feeling unwell is confusing the issue.

wild but according to snookerfans post ding was fined because he didnt inform the authorities of his illness before match it nothing to do with any shot he played

And again who is wild or anyone else to tell Ding that it's the wrong shot, whereas as there are dozens of similarly rash shots in a BO7 match anyway.
Trial by youtube, that's all this is.

jojo wrote:i dont understand two questions

one is what would have happened if ding didnt say anything to the authorities after the match ?

the other is if he let the authorities know he was ill before the match what would have happened ?

because if they would have told him sorry you cant play with the illness as you likely to lose or whatever then this just opens up a can of worms it just so silly

thats why making a meal out of this illness just makes everything look stupid.

what if ding had told them before the match he wasn't well but carried on playing would that then justify the shot he played ? NO it would not.

if he wasn't well he either plays on in a proffesional manner or he withdraws from the match at 2-0 or 3-0 down.

you cant have a situation where many on here feel acceptable that if in a small tournament players feel snake hissed off and plays those shots then say ohhhh by the way i was ill thats why.

the right decision has been reached timing of it a bit on the rubbish side.

He's damned if he tries to complete the match but not compete to his best
He's damned if he withdraws halfway through
He's damned if he doesn't play the match at all

I'm firmly in the belief that matches should take place wherever possible, especially with this silly bye rule we have today where no replacements are allowed.

Bourne wrote:And again who is wild or anyone else to tell Ding that it's the wrong shot, whereas as there are dozens of similarly rash shots in a BO7 match anyway.
Trial by youtube, that's all this is.

when a man robs a bank its triel by CCTV you would next say thats wrong as well.

yes other players gets away with it because its not filmed so what ding wasn't doesn't make it right he gets away with it because he got caught out on film.

wild i dont understand what you saying so you saying ding was fined because of his shot selection ?

or for not informing the authorities of his illness before the match like snookerfan says

Wild wrote:

Bourne wrote:And again who is wild or anyone else to tell Ding that it's the wrong shot, whereas as there are dozens of similarly rash shots in a BO7 match anyway.
Trial by youtube, that's all this is.

when a man robs a bank its triel by CCTV you would next say thats wrong as well.

yes other players gets away with it because its not filmed so what ding wasn't doesn't make it right he gets away with it because he got caught out on film.

OK but then they have to be consistent ... and i'm certain that they won't be, judging by what they've let by in comparison with Ding's 'misdemeanour'

jojo wrote:wild i dont understand what you saying so you saying ding was fined because of his shot selection ?

or for not informing the authorities of his illness before the match like snookerfan says

being ill part of the statement is confusing the issue.

who cares if he informed them or not that should not be part of the issue at all.

theres plenty of that rubbish gone on at PTC Events and not only by profesionals either.Ding was unlucky and just got caught out on film but hey crimewatch UK Makes a living out of catching people on film thats life.

but that is the whole issue so this shot selection stuff is bull

ding was fined not because of his shot selection but because he didnt report to the authorities before the match he was ill

so i dont know whats confusing the issue

where does it say anything about trial on youtube ? it doesnt on your original post nor snookerfans post