Stephen Lee

Was Stephen's ban overly long?

In light of Binghams ban, Ronnie's comments and time served is there any desire for a review of the ban?

Bring him back.

He won't do it again, as im sure he's learnt his lesson.

Cloud Strife wrote:Bring him back.

He won't do it again, as im sure he's learnt his lesson.

He got himself in rubbish days after being cleared of a separate betting matter. More trustworthy near a bakery than a snooker table.

Not that fussed either way.

I'd rather have him back than Quinten Hann, I guess.

SnookerFan wrote:Not that fussed either way.

I'd rather have him back than Quinten Hann, I guess.

Like saying you'd prefer Chlamydia to AIDS.

Pink Ball wrote:

SnookerFan wrote:Not that fussed either way.

I'd rather have him back than Quinten Hann, I guess.

Like saying you'd prefer Chlamydia to AIDS.

I probably would, to be fair.

I'd love to see that Rolls Royce cue action back again.

Pink Ball wrote:

Cloud Strife wrote:Bring him back.

He won't do it again, as im sure he's learnt his lesson.

He got himself in rubbish days after being cleared of a separate betting matter. More trustworthy near a bakery than a snooker table.

Christ, who snake hissed on your chips? You seem triggered.

he should enter the world seniors.

Cloud Strife wrote:

Pink Ball wrote:

Cloud Strife wrote:Bring him back.

He won't do it again, as im sure he's learnt his lesson.

He got himself in rubbish days after being cleared of a separate betting matter. More trustworthy near a bakery than a snooker table.

Christ, who snake hissed on your chips? You seem triggered.

I dunno who snake hissed on them but I know Lee ate them.

Lee and Kyren have already been discussing a comeback

Badsnookerplayer wrote:Was Stephen's ban overly long?

In light of Binghams ban, Ronnie's comments and time served is there any desire for a review of the ban?

seperate issues Bingham been banned for betting Lee got banned for cheating

Badsnookerplayer wrote:Was Stephen's ban overly long?

In light of Binghams ban, Ronnie's comments and time served is there any desire for a review of the ban?

Comparing Bingham's (admittedly stupid) offence to Lee's is silly. Bingham tried to profit by betting on snooker matches, but didn't manipulate any results. Lee actively manipulated a great number of matches for financial gain, cheating snooker fans greatly in the process.

The only thing in common between the offences is that they involved betting. One charge sheet was far greater than the other, end of.

Pink Ball wrote:

Badsnookerplayer wrote:Was Stephen's ban overly long?

In light of Binghams ban, Ronnie's comments and time served is there any desire for a review of the ban?

Comparing Bingham's (admittedly stupid) offence to Lee's is silly. Bingham tried to profit by betting on snooker matches, but didn't manipulate any results. Lee actively manipulated a great number of matches for financial gain, cheating snooker fans greatly in the process.

The only thing in common between the offences is that they involved betting. One charge sheet was far greater than the other, end of.

Yeah, but Twitter wants to be angry about it.

But (unfortunately) they won´t be seeing like that. That it would be just a matter of if inviting him back. They won´tbe seeing it like that because it probably wouldn't work like that.

Just have a scores of players out there but still don´t overdo it. Don´t invite just anyone back.

Well Stephen Lee is not just anyone. But legally it could be too difficult and it wouldn´t quite fit the bill.

I can´t quite remember how Stephen Lee ACTUALLY was. I have now carefully watched those centuries from Ronnie from the last week. It was all about the recovery potting. Some cracking stuff. The cue ball QUITE never were it actually should had been but he every time pulled a great recovery pot. It was not that obvious. Like someone like Alex Higgins used to play. But everyone does that. Unless I think I do remember a player called Stephen Hendry.. Where the cue ball used to be exactly there where it always should had be.

How was Stephen Lee then?? Or who is Mark Selby?? How they are or were playing and to break-build?

Personally I am all about physically working really hard. Lengthy walks and doing some weight lifting also. That way you don´t need to eat every vegetable or a fruit on a day in order to stay healthy and fit. Because there is so much calories burning either way. Perhaps Stephen Lee could be missing that thing also, and will do everything he can to get back, and to be back even stronger. And there´s always someone doing it even better and having even a better fitness. The great thing about this era. Stephen knows he don´t need to be the top dog or that he isn´t the top dog, regarding the fitness. Which always makes you feel really well.

The modern top players are some really serious thinkers. They just aren´t accustomed to thought and the reality that suddenly the carpets starts to fly in real life. Like in the 90s or the 00s. Or was it just a sheer power of the man? Which created the illusion. And Stephen Lee probably went a bit off and did some daft things. Perhaps he still should get forgiveness. But I am afraid the times are changing soon. Listen, every player out there are just doing their duty and working hard. Gaining some big moneys also. They need to do that now that they are still relatively young. Or do they think that they will be having those super bodies and the brains still while they are a 100 years of old?? Or that they can still earn and gain some money while they are that old?

I just don´t know him. So I can´t really say anything about it. Sometimes you just need to admit that. But certainly there are already too many players out there. Just don´t co-operate with them. That´s the only way to have some real progress.

I have also think a lot about this new era of so called innovations. Obviously every time an innovation happens where everyone sees that now there´s something new, it must be an accident. Because no-one really want´s to reveal his or her weapons. They wan´t to hide those. Not to reveal. So if we think now there´s something really innovative now it always is an accident and no-one does that on purpose. So how would Stephen Lee fit that bill then? I read that there was a signature "Liam Highfield, a Doctor" underneath a one youtube video.. Well, YEAH, that´s the way it then just is. Just hopefully they will NOW be keeping on playing like that, so there won´t any new major drops of numbers anymore. So we all and even I can keep on working with them. No more any major drops of number or bobsleighing down the rankings. If there are some youtube videos that makes you feel sick then just don´t watch those videos or the footages.

Those are at least some of the questions I can think regarding Stephen Lee´s possible return.

Stephen Lee should at the least serve out his ban in full and if I had my way he would never be allowed back on the tour.

Pink Ball wrote:Comparing Bingham's (admittedly stupid) offence to Lee's is silly. Bingham tried to profit by betting on snooker matches, but didn't manipulate any results. Lee actively manipulated a great number of matches for financial gain, cheating snooker fans greatly in the process.

The only thing in common between the offences is that they involved betting. One charge sheet was far greater than the other, end of.

Yeah they were different. Lee was a parakeet while Bingham bet on himself to lose just for fun...

So basically:

Bet on other peoples games and be honest in inquiry = 6 months suspended
Bet on your own games and be dishonest in inquiry = 3 months ban + 3 months suspended.
Fix games & bet on them = 12 years.(unless you are Quinten Hann who gets 8 years)