Speed it up ...

vodkadiet wrote:

Monique wrote:Robertson was slower than usual against Dott but both players were very tired and very tense and he never contemplated a straightforward ball for minutes...

How was Robbo tired?

He had an easy draw and won his matches with something to spare. He had a tough match with Gould but that was on the middle Saturday. After that he was on holiday until the final.

Please don't make silly statements that cannot be backed up with any truth.

He was tired. They all are at the end of the WC, there is high tension and it's a long tournament. Dott of course was even more tired and he was affected by what had hit his management. But they both were tired. I was there, I saw them close-up, spoke to them.

Monique wrote:

vodkadiet wrote:

Monique wrote:Robertson was slower than usual against Dott but both players were very tired and very tense and he never contemplated a straightforward ball for minutes...

How was Robbo tired?

He had an easy draw and won his matches with something to spare. He had a tough match with Gould but that was on the middle Saturday. After that he was on holiday until the final.

Please don't make silly statements that cannot be backed up with any truth.

He was tired. They all are at the end of the WC, there is high tension and it's a long tournament. Dott of course was even more tired and he was affected by what had hit his management. But they both were tired. I was there, I saw them close-up, spoke to them.

If Robbo was tired against Dott, then you can at least double that for Ebbo when he played Ronnie.

I'm split on this,I can see where Hearn is coming from. However I honestly feel you may have just more rolling into packs or rolling up to lose balls rather than intelligent safety play if players think they are going to get hurried up.

Monique hasn't made up the rules, (as she has shown with 4.1a) and I'm sure we can all remember Fergal O'Brien being told the "cameras knock off at 5pm", (or something like that) and to get a move on by Mr. Chamberlain.

One thing I'm certain of is BH didn't need to go to press with it.

As for 2005, I love Peter Ebdon but when you have people walking out during the match then that is BAD for the sport no matter what anyone else tries to claim.

onlyevertonjon wrote:I'm split on this,I can see where Hearn is coming from. However I honestly feel you may have just more rolling into packs or rolling up to lose balls rather than intelligent safety play if players think they are going to get hurried up.

Monique hasn't made up the rules, (as she has shown with 4.1a) and I'm sure we can all remember Fergal O'Brien being told the "cameras knock off at 5pm", (or something like that) and to get a move on by Mr. Chamberlain.

One thing I'm certain of is BH didn't need to go to press with it.

As for 2005, I love Peter Ebdon but when you have people walking out during the match then that is BAD for the sport no matter what anyone else tries to claim.

Better a few of the crowd walk out than the player himself!!

If 'fans' were walking out of that match, my gripe would be with them rather than Ebdon. I would be pretty sure that those fans were die hard supporters of one Ronnie O'Sullivan...

Tubberlad wrote:If 'fans' were walking out of that match, my gripe would be with them rather than Ebdon. I would be pretty sure that those fans were die hard supporters of one Ronnie O'Sullivan...

And they wouldn't have left if Ronnie was winning either ...

Tubberlad wrote:If 'fans' were walking out of that match, my gripe would be with them rather than Ebdon. I would be pretty sure that those fans were die hard supporters of one Ronnie O'Sullivan...

Ot just poor guys who badly needed the loo and couldn't see the end of the frame coming any time soon

Monique wrote:

Tubberlad wrote:If 'fans' were walking out of that match, my gripe would be with them rather than Ebdon. I would be pretty sure that those fans were die hard supporters of one Ronnie O'Sullivan...

Ot just poor guys who badly needed the loo and couldn't see the end of the frame coming any time soon

They were so excited about the match, they wet themselves ?

The problem as I've said is that you dont know what frame you're going to get - and that in itself slows play down - take the 1985 world final, final frame, 68 minutes, and neither player was playing slowly.

The problem is that with this, which I agree isnt really professional is that it will force referees to 'suddenly get tough' - unless a clock was available to show how long a player was taking, then its impossible to implement. - Like I've said, if I warn a player for deliberate slow play, then truly, I am telling him that I think he is cheating - and remember that the sort of resources available to the armchair viewer is not available to the referee as in we know watching average shot times, but a referee doesnt. I'd hate to be in the position of warning a player for slow play when they're not playing unduly slowly and putting pressure on them hasnt helped. I think its forgotten sometimes that these are 32 player's livelihoods, and its the biggest tournament of them all.

Its hard to define hence why when interpeted and enforced its so inconsistent, -looking at the Meo match, when enforced against Reynolds, Meo forged four frames ahead, which in turn resulted as the winning scoreline.

Tubberlad wrote:If 'fans' were walking out of that match, my gripe would be with them rather than Ebdon. I would be pretty sure that those fans were die hard supporters of one Ronnie O'Sullivan...

I believe if Ronnie, (not that it would happen) was going that slow that people would still have walked out. The commentators even thought a word was needed with Peter Ebdon. I was in full agreement. I loved last years WC final cos I thought it was going to finish at 3, so I have no problem with slow, drawn out affairs.

I dont want to take this off topic of what has been said today though!!

Agree with everton on this that ebdon v ronnie match had a bad feel to it and i never felt the same way about last years final or even the 2006 final that ebdon was in agianst dott.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bT_UwJYYUHI

im sorry but that is too funny half the time he was just wondering around not even looking at his next shot

Exactly, look at the field in this year's tournament, players who you'd arguably call 'slow' are Ebdon, Harold and McLeod. 3/32, a tiny minority. It's the same right through the tour, a tiny minority are what you'd call proper grinders or bores or whatever, just like a tiny minority of matches involve questionable tactics from these players. It hasn't been a problem in the past so I don't know why Hearn is trying to address it when there's nothing to fix.

Wild wrote:

PLtheRef wrote:The problem as I've said is that you dont know what frame you're going to get - and that in itself slows play down - take the 1985 world final, final frame, 68 minutes, and neither player was playing slowly.

The problem is that with this, which I agree isnt really professional is that it will force referees to 'suddenly get tough' - unless a clock was available to show how long a player was taking, then its impossible to implement. - Like I've said, if I warn a player for deliberate slow play, then truly, I am telling him that I think he is pint pulling - and remember that the sort of resources available to the armchair viewer is not available to the referee as in we know watching average shot times, but a referee doesnt. I'd hate to be in the position of warning a player for slow play when they're not playing unduly slowly and putting pressure on them hasnt helped. I think its forgotten sometimes that these are 32 player's livelihoods, and its the biggest tournament of them all.

Its hard to define hence why when interpeted and enforced its so inconsistent, -looking at the Meo match, when enforced against Reynolds, Meo forged four frames ahead, which in turn resulted as the winning scoreline.

yes you could actually warn a player for taking time over a shot and the other player not warned for taking more time over a easier shot.

Hence why its so tough to call, other than the Meo example I've not known a ref warn a player for slow play - in a clocked event such as 147 and dare I say it powersnooker, then such rigorous insistence would work - at the end of the day its also down to an interpetation, without a clear guideline - Barry hasnt said if you see a player take more than a minute then you warn him - which makes it really dangerous as what Jan would call too long may be different to what Michaela would say using that as an example. The only way I could see it working at all - and this is a way which would be difficult to attach to this kind of situation is to bearing in mind the tournament in question is to have a set time - which in event turns this into a shot clock which is unacceptable for this sort of situation.

To be honest, watching through Ebdon's break, it does look slower than normal, but Ronnie didnt make any protestation to either Colin Brinded, or Michael Ganley, secondly, Peter had trailed 8-2 in that match and was by then a frame adrift - and obviosuly determined. Putting ourselves in Peter's shoes, what would we have done differently - finally, Ronnie's complaint only emerged after he'd been beaten and that he'd had little issue with Peter's pace when he was several in front.

Bourne wrote:Exactly, look at the field in this year's tournament, players who you'd arguably call 'slow' are Ebdon, Harold and McLeod. 3/32, a tiny minority. It's the same right through the tour, a tiny minority are what you'd call proper grinders or bores or whatever, just like a tiny minority of matches involve questionable tactics from these players. It hasn't been a problem in the past so I don't know why Hearn is trying to address it when there's nothing to fix.

in addition only the final last year had a curtailed session

we have rory and david the stoke jabber so im sure there willbe a few curtailed sessions this year

the so called rules are negotiable and open to interpretation not every referee will interpret the same way

leave the rules alone as they are the ebdon match against o sullivan was compelling pure drama proper snooker fans were hooked couldnt take their eyes off it funny how dire hard ronnie lovers like monique advocating what hearn saying

if all the rules were applied like they should be ronnie would have been in a lot more bother with the authorities for all hes done in the past and in ways continues to do i dont hear ronnie fanatics complaining that the rules should be applied

leave the game as it is applying this rule will eventually kill the game proper snooker fans love and just for the record my boyhood hero was jimmy white who played like a whirlwind knocking in regular frame winning breaks in just a few minutes when in full flow

im an all weather traditional snooker fan not jumping on anything and everything for the benefit of my favourite player over the love of the game

Can i ask as my views were similar to monique how am i favouring my favourite player over the game of snooker as a whole when i disagreed with robbo's suddetn change of pace of play ?

cheers

gj i wasnt talking about you i was talking about monique i know you a mature one not blinkered can speak honestly monique on the other hand it like someone stuck a pin up his bottom when anything might be suggested for anti ronnie or pro ronnie either directly or indirectly

Ebbo was deliberately slowing Ronnie down to gain an advantage, So what? There was no rush to finish the match was there?

Robbo slowed Dott down to gain an advantage. Infact Robbo was slower overall than Ebbo. Robbo had a lot of 20/25 breaks that took 5 minutes. Who is counting?

Snooker fans who want shot clock snooker have Thursday evenings in the autumn, Power snooker, and the other thing that Bond won(cannot think of the name of it), if they want drivel.

Hearn can butt out when he isn't needed.

Hearn has been listening to the open line of this Eurovison song contest dross from 1981.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgWBvdoTbS0

Maybe he was going down memory lane, as his charge Mr Steve Davis won his first world title about 2 weeks after this won the Eurovision.

Just a theory?