Post a reply

The absence of Ronnie

Postby SnookerFan

How do people feel about this? I've spoken to a few people and it seems the prevailing opinion is that the tournament won't be the same without Ronnie.

I don't see why people feel this way. I mean, like most people I can take or leave shot clock snooker. But is Ronnie really that vital to this tournament? I get that he's popular, and wins it most years. But surely the fact he's not in it, and somebody else having the opportunity to shine gives this tournament an edge it hasn't had in recent years.

We got Judd Trump there, who is close to Ronnie in levels of speed and popularity. And the humerous site of Ebdon trying to fit his thinking time of each shot into a matter of seconds.

Or is the Premier League really just an excuse to show Ronnie to the masses?

Re: The absence of Ronnie

Postby Wildey

Ronnie is 37 in December how long will this Line of "not the same without Ronnie" be wheeled out.

The Sport Moves on with or without him wont make a great deal of Difference either Way.

Re: The absence of Ronnie

Postby Skullman

I don't know about past Premier Leagues, but last season Ronnie wasn't any more exciting than the other players until it reached the knock out stages (imo). There's Judd, Ding and Allen still in it. It's not like they're boring players. Plus there is Ebdon whose performance in the PL could be interesting.

People have to get over Ronnie. Even though he's signed the contract for this season, I have feeling he won't be playing in most of the rankers and he may choose to do a Hendry at some point in the forseeable future.

Re: The absence of Ronnie

Postby SnookerFan

janddk wrote:I only bother to watch it when Judd's playing, anyway. I won't miss Ronnie particularly.


There you go Wild. The new breed of fans.

People thought snooker couldn't survive without Higgins, then without Jimmy, then without Ronnie. Give it five years people will be saying snooker wouldn't survive without Judd.

Re: The absence of Ronnie

Postby Wildey

SnookerFan wrote:
janddk wrote:I only bother to watch it when Judd's playing, anyway. I won't miss Ronnie particularly.


There you go Wild. The new breed of fans.

People thought snooker couldn't survive without Higgins, then without Jimmy, then without Ronnie. Give it five years people will be saying snooker wouldn't survive without Judd.

Theres always someone Else Around the corner and that will continue to be the case..

i was a Hendry Fan do i miss him ? DO I buck

Re: The absence of Ronnie

Postby SnookerFan

Wild WC wrote:
SnookerFan wrote:
janddk wrote:I only bother to watch it when Judd's playing, anyway. I won't miss Ronnie particularly.


There you go Wild. The new breed of fans.

People thought snooker couldn't survive without Higgins, then without Jimmy, then without Ronnie. Give it five years people will be saying snooker wouldn't survive without Judd.

Theres always someone Else Around the corner and that will continue to be the case..

i was a Hendry Fan do i miss him ? DO I buck


That's really two separate questions.

Re: The absence of Ronnie

Postby Wildey

SnookerFan wrote:
Wild WC wrote:
SnookerFan wrote:
janddk wrote:I only bother to watch it when Judd's playing, anyway. I won't miss Ronnie particularly.


There you go Wild. The new breed of fans.

People thought snooker couldn't survive without Higgins, then without Jimmy, then without Ronnie. Give it five years people will be saying snooker wouldn't survive without Judd.

Theres always someone Else Around the corner and that will continue to be the case..

i was a Hendry Fan do i miss him ? DO I buck


That's really two separate questions.

are you blind ?

now that was a question can you see a question mark there ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? here is some more to help you understand them

when i said DO I buck can you see a question mark anywhere ? hmmmmm ive just asked another question

are you now getting the idea ?

Re: The absence of Ronnie

Postby Skullman

Getting a grammar lesson from Wild rofl

You've hit a new low SnookerFan <laugh>

Re: The absence of Ronnie

Postby SnookerFan

Skullman wrote:Getting a grammar lesson from Wild rofl

You've hit a new low SnookerFan <laugh>


rofl rofl

To be fair, he makes so many mistakes, I can be forgiven for assuming the missing question mark was accidental.

Re: The absence of Ronnie

Postby Wildey

SnookerFan wrote:
Skullman wrote:Getting a grammar lesson from Wild rofl

You've hit a new low SnookerFan <laugh>


rofl rofl

To be fair, he makes so many mistakes, I can be forgiven for assuming the missing question mark was accidental.

thats why second guessing me just makes people look stupid <ok>

Re: The absence of Ronnie

Postby Sickpotter

My enjoyment of snooker has never hinged on any one particular player so it won't bother me at all.

ROS is a genius on the table and it will be a shame to lose that talent but there are plenty of other talented players to watch.

Re: The absence of Ronnie

Postby PLtheRef

I think that it shouldn't make any difference at all. Because Ronnie's chosen not to take part in any event shouldn't mean it's diminished. It will be good for the league too. Ronnie's over dominance in the Premier League is probably personally one of the reasons why I've not usually been interested in the League with him not in it, it almost makes it a competition with four stand out favourites.

Re: The absence of Ronnie

Postby Andy Spark

SnookerFan wrote:
janddk wrote:I only bother to watch it when Judd's playing, anyway. I won't miss Ronnie particularly.


There you go Wild. The new breed of fans.

People thought snooker couldn't survive without Higgins, then without Jimmy, then without Ronnie. Give it five years people will be saying snooker wouldn't survive without Judd.

Who is Judd? At this stage you really can't compare Judd to the likes of Ronnie or Alex Higgins. It's a bit like trying to compare the footballer Theo Walcott with Diego Maradona or George Best. Snooker can survive without Ronnie but his retirement would be very sad for snooker because he is one of those special people in sport/games that comes with a great mthology. Chess had Bobby Fisher, poker had Stu Ungar and snooker had Alex Higgins and now still has Ronnie O'Sullivan.

Re: The absence of Ronnie

Postby SnookerFan

Andy Spark wrote:
There you go Wild. The new breed of fans.

People thought snooker couldn't survive without Higgins, then without Jimmy, then without Ronnie. Give it five years people will be saying snooker wouldn't survive without Judd

Who is Judd? At this stage you really can't compare Judd to the likes of Ronnie or Alex Higgins. It's a bit like trying to compare the footballer Theo Walcott with Diego Maradona or George Best. Snooker can survive without Ronnie but his retirement would be very sad for snooker because he is one of those special people in sport/games that comes with a great mthology. Chess had Bobby Fisher, poker had Stu Ungar and snooker had Alex Higgins and now still has Ronnie O'Sullivan.


What you babbling on about now? I said; "Give it a few years", I didn't say Judd's achievements were already comparable to Ronnie.

Re: The absence of Ronnie

Postby Wildey

Andy Spark wrote:
SnookerFan wrote:
janddk wrote:I only bother to watch it when Judd's playing, anyway. I won't miss Ronnie particularly.


There you go Wild. The new breed of fans.

People thought snooker couldn't survive without Higgins, then without Jimmy, then without Ronnie. Give it five years people will be saying snooker wouldn't survive without Judd.

Who is Judd? At this stage you really can't compare Judd to the likes of Ronnie or Alex Higgins. It's a bit like trying to compare the footballer Theo Walcott with Diego Maradona or George Best. Snooker can survive without Ronnie but his retirement would be very sad for snooker because he is one of those special people in sport/games that comes with a great mthology. Chess had Bobby Fisher, poker had Stu Ungar and snooker had Alex Higgins and now still has Ronnie O'Sullivan.

if Ronnie Retires who will miss him hes been in semi retirement for the last 3 years and nobody has really noticed.

its just a natural evolution the World moves on

Re: The absence of Ronnie

Postby Monique

Every sport moves on, yes. But the "semi retired" still won 5 events last season, including the WC, more than any other player.. More than most in their entire career. And he will be missed, just like Hendry, Higgins and Williams. All four of them have "marked" their era.

Re: The absence of Ronnie

Postby Wildey

Monique wrote:Every sport moves on, yes. But the "semi retired" still won 5 events last season, including the WC, more than any other player.. More than most in their entire career. And he will be missed, just like Hendry, Higgins and Williams. All four of them have "marked" their era.

so what :shrug:

you never look back or id be missing Alex Higgins and Cliff Thorburn

Re: The absence of Ronnie

Postby Monique

Well some do obviously. It's only to look at the success of the Snooker Legends or the Senior Championship.
But, whatever, Ronnie is still around, so don't write him off just yet. He might not play in everything, that doesn't mean he won't win a few more.

Re: The absence of Ronnie

Postby Wildey

Monique wrote:Well some do obviously. It's only to look at the success of the Snooker Legends or the Senior Championship.
But, whatever, Ronnie is still around, so don't write him off just yet. He might not play in everything, that doesn't mean he won't win a few more.

not writing him off at all hes still top of his game lets not forget last time he played he won the World Title but i think snooker is more flexable now than its ever been with more players capable of filling the void.