ROS timeout

It'll be the one Ding and Judd fell foul of i.e. not participating in a televised event without the thumbs up from World Snooker. It'll be down to money, it can't be anything else.

to be honest whod even want to watch a meaningless exhibition match which is on at the same time as a proper ranking event ??

Idiot fans I guess.

I think we are all disappointed however at the end of the day it is his choice. I’m sure that when he does return, whenever that is, they’ll be a right old song & dance made of it in the media which should grab plenty of people’s attention & plenty of publicity for the game too.

Sonny wrote:http://www.ronnieosullivan.tv/?p=848

Yeah good for you Ronnie, you tell that evil rubbish Barry where to stick it

Sonny, I can't and don't want to delete every post I don't agree with and I can't prevent people to post whatever they want unless it's rude or insulting. Leaving it there doesn't mean that me, Grove or Ronnie agree with it. No more than you agree with everything that is posted on this place unless you are right schizophrenic.

You will believe whatever you want, but the truth is that you don't know the facts, don't know what is in players contract and what the problem is. Neither do I actually.

Your opinion is that it's about money, but that's only an opinion. Mine is that it's about choices in life and the schedule and yes, the actual obligation to play in some events. I hope this can be clarified at some point. Until then it's all only opinions.

That's one way of looking at it John. It's just the way he's going about it that's winding folk up. He's trying to take on World Snooker and Barry Hearn. Why not just sign the contract and have a breather? Why does he have to be different? It's attention seeking. If he had a case there would be other pros not signed up to play in events, there would be rumblings of discontent and a movement brewing of a breakaway tour. It's not happening, it's only one player. He happens to be the best and has got hold of the World Trophy and he's using it as a weapon. If he thinks Hearn will back down then he's obviously got to think again.

Monique wrote:

Sonny wrote:http://www.ronnieosullivan.tv/?p=848

Yeah good for you Ronnie, you tell that evil rubbish Barry where to stick it

Sonny, I can't and don't want to delete every post I don't agree with and I can't prevent people to post whatever they want unless it's rude or insulting. Leaving it there doesn't mean that me, Grove or Ronnie agree with it. No more than you agree with everything that is posted on this place unless you are right schizophrenic.

You will believe whatever you want, but the truth is that you don't know the facts, don't know what is in players contract and what the problem is. Neither do I actually.

Your opinion is that it's about money, but that's only an opinion. Mine is that it's about choices in life and the schedule and yes, the actual obligation to play in some events. I hope this can be clarified at some point. Until then it's all only opinions.

That wasn't a dig at the site, only some of the comments. It shows up the idiocy of some of the so called "snooker fans" who are nothing of the sort.

Anyway I didn't think there was an obligation to play in a fixed number of events?

We'd need to see the contract first to fully understand his decision.
By trying to read between the lines, it seems that once he signs the contract he is fully committing himself to the tour & would need written permission from the WSA to play in anything else that is not sanctioned by the WSA & would have to fully commit himself to every WSA tournament that is scheduled. We know he doesn't want to do this because he's told everyone this.
I certainly don't feel it is about money. The fella doesn't need it….
The guy has been telling us since Jesus was a small boy that he needs a break. This way, he's getting it. He won't have to qualify for the World's so what's stopping him from signing the contract just before the entry closure date for that? Nothing from what I can make out.
You can look at it that he's holding Barry Hearn to ransom, though I personally don't believe that is his motivation. I'd be disappointed if he wasn't being genuine here. If you wanted to be harsh, you could say he’s manipulating the rules here to suit himself. I’m sure Barry Hearn has pointed this out to his legal guru’s if indeed this is the case.
It does look like the contract is open ended, by which I mean there is not a set date for submitting your signature on the contract, so this way he is getting his break.
If anything, his appeal will rise because at the end of the day, the guy is something else with a cue in his hand.

Witz78 wrote:

Wild WC wrote:if he has freedome to do what say Higgins cant then he is going against whats in the contract.

Higgins has signed plus taking a break with family thats not breaching the contract.

there needs to be consequences for not signing not signing when you feel like it there should be a deadline he needs to sign it by first ball of wuxi seems fair to me.

the MILLION DOLLAR question has to be


WHAT THE HELL IS IN THE CONTRACT ????


surely someone can find out

Well Basicly Play Snooker for WSA not for anyone else unless WSA Sanctions it.

seriously it really is that simple god knows what monique going on about it dont need einstine to work that out.

if he wants a break from the game signing is not a issue hes free to do that.

As far as i am aware the player is sent the contract and asked to sign it, with no copy supplied and to send it back. Hopefully someone copied one and we'll get a lookie at one point.

John From London Town wrote:I think we are all disappointed however at the end of the day it is his choice. I’m sure that when he does return, whenever that is, they’ll be a right old song & dance made of it in the media which should grab plenty of people’s attention & plenty of publicity for the game too.

yes its his choice and if that what he wants then do it.

what i object to is his right to sign whenever he feels like it and can play introduce a contract signing window that all players must adhere to otherwise their season is over.

Wild WC wrote:

Witz78 wrote:

Wild WC wrote:if he has freedome to do what say Higgins cant then he is going against whats in the contract.

Higgins has signed plus taking a break with family thats not breaching the contract.

there needs to be consequences for not signing not signing when you feel like it there should be a deadline he needs to sign it by first ball of wuxi seems fair to me.

the MILLION DOLLAR question has to be


WHAT THE HELL IS IN THE CONTRACT ????


surely someone can find out

Well Basicly Play Snooker for WSA not for anyone else unless WSA Sanctions it.

seriously it really is that simple god knows what monique going on about it dont need einstine to work that out.

if he wants a break from the game signing is not a issue hes free to do that.

Once again, wild, have you seen the contract? NO. So you don't know what's in it, and neither do I claim I do.
So would you please stop to state things as if they were facts when it's only your opinion on what might be in there without actually knowing anything.

Yes we need to see the contract to draw reasonable conclusions. The rule about World Snooker sanctioning televised events is fair enough I think. Judd v Ding last year showed what could happen without the rule. Once again for me it's not what he's doing, taking a well earned rest, it's the way he's gone about it - conflict aimed at the real saviour of snooker; not Ronnie, Barry.

Sonny wrote:Yes we need to see the contract to draw reasonable conclusions. The rule about World Snooker sanctioning televised events is fair enough I think. Judd v Ding last year showed what could happen without the rule. Once again for me it's not what he's doing, taking a well earned rest, it's the way he's gone about it - conflict aimed at the real saviour of snooker; not Ronnie, Barry.

it beggers belief doesent it

this answer the question why he wanted Simon Cowell involved.

Grove Snooker ‏@grovesnooker

“@david_lfc8: @grovesnooker will ronnie still be able to defend his world title ?”it will b good if the public decides.

Grove Snooker wants a x factor style phone vote

Grove have been on the warpath with Hearn since he was voted in so this is nothing too surprising really. But what does that mean? Let the public decide?

Sonny wrote:Grove have been on the warpath with Hearn since he was voted in so this is nothing too surprising really. But what does that mean? Let the public decide?

they seem to think no ronnie ticket sales down

TBH ive seen no evidence of that in the countless events Ronnie not bothered with.

some Ronnie fans are fed up with him because the game overides him.

Sonny wrote:Grove have been on the warpath with Hearn since he was voted in so this is nothing too surprising really. But what does that mean? Let the public decide?

I really don't think there's anything deep there worth wondering about there.

There are more people that are fans of Ronnie than aren't, no matter what the fanboys like to claim. I take that comment as nothing more than somebody who wants Ronnie to play, and thinks opening it up to a public vote proves some point to Hearn or would encourage Ronnie to play when he doesn't want to.

I think good on Ronnie!

If theres something in the contract he doesnt like or stuff hes being forced to do, then no way he should sign it.

Who knows what the contract says but players should have the freedom to pick and choose when and if they play. If Ronnie wants to turn up to UK, masters and Worlds only then thats fine with me. He will prob have to qualify with all the points he will lose but thats up to him! it should be his choice!

I think Ronnie should stick to his guns or barry will have the whole game in his back pocket.

Sonny wrote:Yes we need to see the contract to draw reasonable conclusions. The rule about World Snooker sanctioning televised events is fair enough I think. Judd v Ding last year showed what could happen without the rule. Once again for me it's not what he's doing, taking a well earned rest, it's the way he's gone about it - conflict aimed at the real saviour of snooker; not Ronnie, Barry.

I just had a short conversation with Sarah Mount and she doesn't understand all the fuss and the raging around Ronnie's decision. She has read the contract obviously, and she had read it thoroughly as she manages players and she told me that the contract is a rather complex document, with a lot of conditions and restrictions about what players can do or not do. So in her view, if a player is taking a break from competitive snooker, it's a perfectly logical decision not to sign it as there would be no benefits to sign it but quite a lot of limitations to what they could possibly do during their "break time". Especially as they can sign back in any time they want, so why would they?
And I invite anyone who doubts this post to double check with Sarah.

If Hearn did agree with certain sponsors and Tournament organizers that the World number 1 and or World Champion then that’s fair enough. Most spots around the World have a similar agreement.
However I am with Monique’s last statement – Ronnie will sign the contract in time for the next event he wants to enter. Simple really.

Monique wrote:

Sonny wrote:Yes we need to see the contract to draw reasonable conclusions. The rule about World Snooker sanctioning televised events is fair enough I think. Judd v Ding last year showed what could happen without the rule. Once again for me it's not what he's doing, taking a well earned rest, it's the way he's gone about it - conflict aimed at the real saviour of snooker; not Ronnie, Barry.

I just had a short conversation with Sarah Mount and she doesn't understand all the fuss and the raging around Ronnie's decision. She has read the contract obviously, and she had read it thoroughly as she manages players and she told me that the contract is a rather complex document, with a lot of conditions and restrictions about what players can do or not do. So in her view, if a player is taking a break from competitive snooker, it's a perfectly logical decision not to sign it as there would be no benefits to sign it but quite a lot of limitations to what they could possibly do during their "break time". Especially as they can sign back in any time they want, so why would they?
And I invite anyone who doubts this post to double check with Sarah.

tell sarah from me i do not really care what she sais the situation is very wrong if a player is welcomed back at will.... just sign the bucking thing and buck off to blackpool on the big dipper for 6 months if that what he wants.

Wild, what's your problem with him not signing it? We all knew he would take a break, he will sign it when he is ready to play again.

I don't see how him not signing it now makes any difference what so ever to fans.

BREAK MEANS bucking BREAK IT DO NOT MEAN buck OFF AND PLAY SHITTY CRAP FOR CASH.

Casey wrote:Wild, what's your problem with him not signing it? We all knew he would take a break, he will sign it when he is ready to play again.

I don't see how him not signing it now makes any difference what so ever to fans.

HE SHOULD NOT BE ALOUD TO SIGN IT WHEN HE FEELS LIKE IT

SIGN IT NOW OR buck OFF AND DO SOMETHING ELSE THE USELESS bucking hammer

What Ronnie wants to do in his break is his business, he is doing the right thing by not entering the tournaments rather than entering and pulling out.

Again, what difference does it make to fans if he doesn't sign it?

Casey wrote:What Ronnie wants to do in his break is his business, he is doing the right thing by not entering the tournaments rather than entering and pulling out.

Again, what difference does it makes to fans if he doesn't sign it?

Difference it makes is he can do what the buck he likes by not signing it then be aloud to do World Snooker stuff when he feels like it.

it makes no different to me persanally but on principle its very wrong that hes aloud to do that im absalutly gobsmacked by the sheer stupidness of that situation and people cant see it

If he isn't entering the tournaments, he isn't entering them - end of! I don't see how him earning money in the meantime is 'doing' World snooker - it's not like his Exbo's are competing with World snooker.

Move on.

Casey wrote:If he isn't entering the tournaments, he isn't entering them - end of! I don't see how him earning money in the meantime is 'doing' World snooker - it's not like his Exbo's are competing with World snooker.

Move on.

dont see it do you

Wild you are bang out of order. Go and have a beer, a walk, whatever and come back when calmed down.
You really can't accept that you don't know everything do you? Or that you are wrong about things at times? Sarah is a players manager and the Mount team is quite efficient and respected. They have read and studied the contract, you have never even seen it. She knows what she's talking about, you don't.

Monique wrote:Wild you are bang out of order. Go and have a beer, a walk, whatever and come back when calmed down.
You really can't accept that you don't know everything do you? Or that you are wrong about things at times? Sarah is a players manager and the Mount team is quite efficient and respected. They have read and studied the contract, you have never even seen it. She knows what she's talking about, you don't.

Give Wild alcohol when he's in a bad mood? Good suggestion.