Ronnie's Comments on Hearn/ World Snooker

Dan-cat wrote:Ronnie is a flag-bearer for snooker, despite what comes out of his gob at times.

Flag-bearer on the table no doubt. But nothing constructive off it.

gallantrabbit wrote:If he said Wilson should not have played yesterday then I agree. That's a glaring error by WS. But O'sullivan NEVER focuses on the positives of Hearn's reign. He's a berk.
Don't see Federer belly-aching about 128s in THE biggest events of the year...

That's exactly what Ronnie said.

Also said that Wilson should've got a 96 hour rest, which was at the very least optimistic. But surely they could've squeezed him in on Tuesday?

gallantrabbit wrote:Don't see Federer belly-aching about 128s in THE biggest events of the year...

A point I think that we often forget on this site is that Federer isn't a snooker player.

96 hrs is an exagerration, but then O'sullivan exagerrates in droves.

SnookerFan wrote:

gallantrabbit wrote:Don't see Federer belly-aching about 128s in THE biggest events of the year...

A point I think that we often forget on this site is that Federer isn't a snooker player.

I believe he isn't. But in terms of superstar status you'd probably agree that he's a notch or three ahead of Ronnie and bellyaches in comparison about 5% in comparison to Ronnie.

gallantrabbit wrote:

SnookerFan wrote:

gallantrabbit wrote:Don't see Federer belly-aching about 128s in THE biggest events of the year...

A point I think that we often forget on this site is that Federer isn't a snooker player.

I believe he isn't. But in terms of superstar status you'd probably agree that he's a notch or three ahead of Ronnie and bellyaches in comparison about 5% in comparison to Ronnie.

He plays a more popular sport, I'll give you that. So will have more fans worldwide.

I'll have to take your word for anything else. I didn't even know there was tennis on at the moment, until MDG mentioned Federer during the CoC final the other day.

Ronnie has certainly stirred up this discussion.

I tended to agree with Barry in his early days of taking over when he said he had got bored of seeing the same old faces on TV, the protected top 16, who could coast for two years effectively under the old protected ranking system.

We now have loads of invitational events where the best performers/top ranked get places - the three ITV events for a start, and the masters and the Shanghai.

Really it's the Home Nations that he's talking about, the bargain basement end of the sport, played out in Leisure centres, and I guess the UK, and the smaller ex-PTC events that he doesn't play anyway.

I really liked The Trafford Centre, and was disappointed it didn't get more fans turn out.

Though, that was more for the surrounding things than the venue itself.

'The reason top players are losing so much, is the demotivated attitude caused by having to play qualifiers in sub standard leisure centres, from what I see, a lot of the top players souls are slowly being chipped away at' Ronnie

Interesting point.

Brave Bunny I'm a Ronnie fan, I don't always agree with everything he says (that would be madness!)

I'm a Ronnie fan too. If he ever came up to me and said "jump", my one and only response would be "how high, Ronnie? How high?".

I'm an unashamed fanboy, and proud of it.

Dan-cat wrote:'The reason top players are losing so much, is the demotivated attitude caused by having to play qualifiers in sub standard leisure centres, from what I see, a lot of the top players souls are slowly being chipped away at' Ronnie

Interesting point.

Brave Bunny I'm a Ronnie fan, I don't always agree with everything he says (that would be madness!)

I don't understand the part about having to play qualifiers.

I can understand that a person's opinion on the venue is their opinion, so won't question that. If he hates the leisure centres, he hates the leisure centres.

But, I never understood his criticism of 'numpties'. I mean, that's sport. You play a wide variety of opponents. You can't be playing Higgins and Selby in every match.

I've never quite got the lowest-ranked playing the highest-ranked in the first round of these things.

Dan-cat wrote:I've never quite got the lowest-ranked playing the highest-ranked in the first round of these things.

It's to incentivise the rankings. Want to avoid the top boys first up? Well then improve your ranking and you won't have to play them in the first round. That is Hearn's logic.

It's abit of a catch 22 though. If you're ranked number 128 in the world how are you meant to imprve that if you're getting Ronnie or Selby in the first round all the time?

Dan-cat wrote:'The reason top players are losing so much, is the demotivated attitude caused by having to play qualifiers in sub standard leisure centres, from what I see, a lot of the top players souls are slowly being chipped away at' Ronnie

Interesting point.

Brave Bunny I'm a Ronnie fan, I don't always agree with everything he says (that would be madness!)

I'll say a prayer for their poor chipped souls.

Cloud Strife wrote:

Dan-cat wrote:I've never quite got the lowest-ranked playing the highest-ranked in the first round of these things.

It's to incentivise the rankings. Want to avoid the top boys first up? Well then improve your ranking and you won't have to play them in the first round. That is Hearn's logic.

It's abit of a catch 22 though. If you're ranked number 128 in the world how are you meant to imprve that if you're getting Ronnie or Selby in the first round all the time?

Well quite it's a bit perverse. So we get these piss-poor early TV rounds in the UK where the Ashley Cartys of the snooker world gets stuffed 6 nil while Ronnie attempts to get 147s in the last three frames.

Dan-cat wrote:I've never quite got the lowest-ranked playing the highest-ranked in the first round of these things.

That's only for one tournament so it seems alright to me

Chalk McHugh wrote:

Dan-cat wrote:'The reason top players are losing so much, is the demotivated attitude caused by having to play qualifiers in sub standard leisure centres, from what I see, a lot of the top players souls are slowly being chipped away at' Ronnie

Interesting point.

Brave Bunny I'm a Ronnie fan, I don't always agree with everything he says (that would be madness!)

I'll say a prayer for their poor chipped souls.

well I know... but also don't World Snooker want to inspire great performances?

gallantrabbit wrote:If he said Wilson should not have played yesterday then I agree. That's a glaring error by WS. But O'sullivan NEVER focuses on the positives of Hearn's reign. He's a berk.
Don't see Federer belly-aching about 128s in THE biggest events of the year...

That's because only in the Grand Slams, 4 tournaments, you start from round one. At the Master 1000s (which takes up most of the tour) the top 8 get a second round bye, same with ATP 500 and ATP 250. With Snooker it's not like that. A flat 128 draw and the top 8-16 have to play from the very first round.

UK, Masters and Worlds should all start from round one ofc but some leeway should be given for the Home Nations, German Masters, tournaments that aren't huge events in comparison to the BBC Triple Crown events, ITV events and the China events.

Just peeves me. If Ronnie were able to utter one positive word I wouldn't mind so much as some of his points are valid. But he is totally off board with Hearn for what reason I have no idea as he's made him an awful lot richer in recent years. Spoilt child.

One thing that is stupid is having the first round of Chinese or German tournaments played in Leisure Centers. The top players should be through to the venue in them not for their own sake but because the people in those countries shouldn't be missing out on top players because they lost in a cubicle a month earlier.

For the UK Championship given the longer matches and the status of the event it should have a 64 player draw. Then you'd be able to have all the matches in the one place and have best of 17 quarters and semis. The English/Scottish type events are awkward because the only places that can accommodate so many matches aren't really going to be the best places for Snooker.

KrazeeEyezKilla wrote:One thing that is stupid is having the first round of Chinese or German tournaments played in Leisure Centers. The top players should be through to the venue in them not for their own sake but because the people in those countries shouldn't be missing out on top players because they lost in a cubicle a month earlier.

For the UK Championship given the longer matches and the status of the event it should have a 64 player draw. Then you'd be able to have all the matches in the one place and have best of 17 quarters and semis. The English/Scottish type events are awkward because the only places that can accommodate so many matches aren't really going to be the best places for Snooker.

Basically what you've described are his main points of contention

KrazeeEyezKilla wrote:One thing that is stupid is having the first round of Chinese or German tournaments played in Leisure Centers. The top players should be through to the venue in them not for their own sake but because the people in those countries shouldn't be missing out on top players because they lost in a cubicle a month earlier.

For the UK Championship given the longer matches and the status of the event it should have a 64 player draw. Then you'd be able to have all the matches in the one place and have best of 17 quarters and semis. The English/Scottish type events are awkward because the only places that can accommodate so many matches aren't really going to be the best places for Snooker.

That's what Ronnie's been saying

Ronnie O’Sullivan

@BarryHearn 5 hours ago

Ronnie has been offered the opportunity to meet with the players forum to put across his views. He has refused to meet. I think that sums up Ronnie very well. I would love to hear specific not vague criticisms in order to consider and answer. Alas - he can’t be bothered.

Good stuff Barry Hearn. Top bloke.

Matt Selt weighs in on this issue.

https://twitter.com/MattSelt/status/1062043676518596608

SnookerFan wrote:Matt Selt weighs in on this issue.

https://twitter.com/MattSelt/status/1062043676518596608

Good gag Selty.

Chalk McHugh wrote:Good gag Selty.

Though he's obviously being sarcastic, it can be hard to tell with Selt sometimes.

Ronnie has moaned since he became a pro. He used to moan about quitting when he lost matches but when his father was released from prison and he (Ronnie) got some counselling he switched his 'anger/attention seeking' to the sport itself.

I think he's a troubled soul. He should thank the snooker God above that he was blessed with such talent because deep down he's a sad soul. I can't think of any other super-talented sportsman that has moaned as much as Ronnie!

I think this is a reason why some snooker fans will never consider him the greatest of all time. Yes, the greatest break builder, yes, the most natural talent the game has ever seen, but the greatest of all time probably needs a bit more class, a bit less of the "look at me, I'm moaning cos I love the attention." I don't think Ronnie is a bad person, he just shows his character flaws or his desire for attention too much. There's a reason why Steve Davis is so highly respected. He didn't moan, insult, crave the attention.

If any player deserves to beat Hendry's seven WC titles it's Ronnie but a large part of me kinda wishes he'd just shut up and quit the sport. If you don't like Hearn's dictatorship style (!) then quit. Ronnie is very wealthy, he doesn't need Hearn or snooker and he's said he had placed Hearn on 'mute' on Twitter, so he cannot see his replies and said there would be "no point" talking to Hearn.

Hearn is not going to listen to Ronnie. The sport is bigger than any player, even Ronnie. Hearn knows that so I expect Ronnie to get fined for his latest outburst and then it will be forgotten about until Ronnie has to play in another crappy venue!

The reason why Ronnie will never be the greatest (in my opinion) is he comes over ungrateful. Was he ever grateful for his talent, for playing pro snooker? Not really. Seems bitter which is weird given how successful he is. As I say, a troubled soul.