The Eurosport and BBC alternative Crucible shows.

Iranu wrote:I didn’t realise Hendry was commentating before he retired.

Yeah, he did.

Maybe he was considering retirement for a while before he actually went through with it.

I really thought Judd was going to win when he went 10-7 ahead.

I always thought that the 2012 Shanghai Masters final was his worst defeat to Higgins. Judd was 5-0, 6-1 and 7-2 ahead in that match. He had three centuries, 80, 74 and four other breaks over 50.

SnookerFan wrote:I've just twigged that these are on the Red Button in the evenings as well. (7pm and 9pm tonight.)

Why they hell have I been filling my box up with them? Ha Ha.

They’re on a continual loop on the red button once finished on B2, until the kids programmes start the next morning

A lead commentator with a former pro expert summariser used to work well. Clive Everton and Jack Karnehm were great.

Nowadays the only qualification needed is to be a former player. Ability to commentate is not a necessary qualification.

Higgins and Williams have aged badly. Higgins looks okay in 2011 but not so much now. Ronnie is the only one from the class of 92 that has aged okay.
Hendry also looked fine until he decided to keep the beard.

Judds position play costed him a lot of frames.

That missed pink was unforgivable. Even worse than Ronnie's pink against Selby in '14.

Higgins' double to win the match was top quality.

I can remember being so gutted Higgins won that frame. I was stunned he played that double. Young Judd would clinch the UK Championship that year though and prove he has what it takes.

Juddernaut88 wrote:I can remember being so gutted Higgins won that frame. I was stunned he played that double. Young Judd would clinch the UK Championship that year though and prove he has what it takes.

That UK final against Allen was another great match.

mick745 wrote:A lead commentator with a former pro expert summariser used to work well. Clive Everton and Jack Karnehm were great.

Nowadays the only qualification needed is to be a former player. Ability to commentate is not a necessary qualification.

Check out this battle of the commentators (on the table) from 1984; listen also for an unfamiliar voice in the commentary box - Alex Higgins - whose style in the booth is as unorthodox as it was on the baize...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6tiFTbUJeDs

Got the Hunter and Doherty match on from the other day.

SnookerFan wrote:Got the Hunter and Doherty match on from the other day.

Watching that match always gets me close to tears :(

Juddernaut88 wrote:

SnookerFan wrote:Got the Hunter and Doherty match on from the other day.

Watching that match always gets me close to tears :(

What could've been...

Currently 15-11.

Paul messed a shot up, left the red on.

"They'll remember this match for the rest of their lives" - Clive Everton.

Thumping kick....

It's 16-16

That Ronnie vs Barry Hawkins final is on today.

Slightly overrated final that. Excellent standard by both, but there was only one winner. It was only really remembered because Barry Hawkins lost 18-12, when the 'experts' thought he'd lose by more

I'd have put the 2003 final over this.

SnookerFan wrote:That Ronnie vs Barry Hawkins final is on today.

Slightly overrated final that. Excellent standard by both, but there was only one winner. It was only really remembered because Barry Hawkins lost 18-12, when the 'experts' thought he'd lose by more

I'd have put the 2003 final over this.

If Mark Selby wins that 2013 with the exact same score line and stats, everyone calls it a rubbish final. It was a rubbish final.

Hawkins played very well but O’Sullivan was on planet ton that weekend and it was never a contest.

Pink Ball wrote:

SnookerFan wrote:That Ronnie vs Barry Hawkins final is on today.

Slightly overrated final that. Excellent standard by both, but there was only one winner. It was only really remembered because Barry Hawkins lost 18-12, when the 'experts' thought he'd lose by more

I'd have put the 2003 final over this.

If Mark Selby wins that 2013 with the exact same score line and stats, everyone calls it a rubbish final. It was a rubbish final.

Hawkins played very well but O’Sullivan was on planet ton that weekend and it was never a contest.

As I said somewhere else, the BBC pundits were bumming Ronnie the whole final, saying that was it was going to be a session to spare.

When that didn't happen, they had to act like Hawkins made it close when he hadn't really, just to make their previous waffle sound like expertise.

SnookerFan wrote:That Ronnie vs Barry Hawkins final is on today.

Slightly overrated final that. Excellent standard by both, but there was only one winner. It was only really remembered because Barry Hawkins lost 18-12, when the 'experts' thought he'd lose by more

I'd have put the 2003 final over this.

Disagree there. Not only was the 2013 final a very high standard, but Hawkins also played out of his skin and pushed Ronnie. Hawkins even took an early 3-2 lead in the match, which was the first time that Ronnie had trailed anyone throughout the entire tournament. It was essentially nip and tuck all the way until 7-7, at which point Ronnie started to pull away a bit. Hawkins stepped it up a gear and had a mini comeback to reduce things to 15-12, but Ronnie just pulled away again to win it.

Hawkins played brilliantly, and against any other opponent he could well have won the match. Ronnie had to play his absolute best to beat him.

The Ace wrote:

SnookerFan wrote:That Ronnie vs Barry Hawkins final is on today.

Slightly overrated final that. Excellent standard by both, but there was only one winner. It was only really remembered because Barry Hawkins lost 18-12, when the 'experts' thought he'd lose by more

I'd have put the 2003 final over this.

Disagree there. Not only was the 2013 final a very high standard, but Hawkins also played out of his skin and pushed Ronnie. Hawkins even took an early 3-2 lead in the match, which was the first time that Ronnie had trailed anyone throughout the entire tournament. It was essentially nip and tuck all the way until 7-7, at which point Ronnie started to pull away a bit. Hawkins stepped it up a gear and had a mini comeback to reduce things to 15-12, but Ronnie just pulled away again to win it.

Hawkins played brilliantly, and against any other opponent he could well have won the match. Ronnie had to play his absolute best to beat him.

Maybe I am remembering wrong.

Will possibly watch it at some point.

They probably wanted an O'Sullivan final win and the best one in 2001 was from an era already covered.