BetVictor German Masters Last 16 !!!!!

Last week Wilson beat Zhao on the way to the semi finals. Looks like Zhao is returning the favour 3 0 up and motoring.

Neil Robertson 2-0 up on The Michelin Man.

Wildey wrote:Apparently some players think if its in a Snooker required stage you shouldn't be allowed to play for Snookers in a Game called Snooker


some Players aren't the sharpest tool in the box

Who said that?

Wildey wrote:Apparently some players think if its in a Snooker required stage you shouldn't be allowed to play for Snookers in a Game called Snooker


some Players aren't the sharpest tool in the box

A while ago there was some chat about introducing a rule where if a player needs more than a certain number of snookers (might have been 3) then they lose the frame. I don’t think the idea was much more than a casual suggestion rather than discussed officially.

But to end a frame at just one snooker required would indeed be ridiculous. It’d completely ruin the game. And it’ll never happen.

Prop wrote:

Wildey wrote:Apparently some players think if its in a Snooker required stage you shouldn't be allowed to play for Snookers in a Game called Snooker


some Players aren't the sharpest tool in the box

A while ago there was some chat about introducing a rule where if a player needs more than a certain number of snookers (might have been 3) then they lose the frame. I don’t think the idea was much more than a casual suggestion rather than discussed officially.

But to end a frame at just one snooker required would indeed be ridiculous. It’d completely ruin the game. And it’ll never happen.

Have I missed something? Has this been suggested?

SnookerFan wrote:

Prop wrote:

Wildey wrote:Apparently some players think if its in a Snooker required stage you shouldn't be allowed to play for Snookers in a Game called Snooker


some Players aren't the sharpest tool in the box

A while ago there was some chat about introducing a rule where if a player needs more than a certain number of snookers (might have been 3) then they lose the frame. I don’t think the idea was much more than a casual suggestion rather than discussed officially.

But to end a frame at just one snooker required would indeed be ridiculous. It’d completely ruin the game. And it’ll never happen.

Have I missed something? Has this been suggested?

Foulds mentioned it in comms just now. Where he got it, I’m not sure, but there’s very little chance of it happening. The same idea in slightly different iterations has been thrown around carelessly for a while - Foulds talking about it today is nothing new.

Just too easy for Robertson at the minute

Prop wrote:Have I missed something? Has this been suggested?

Foulds mentioned it in comms just now. Where he got it, I’m not sure, but there’s very little chance of it happening. The same idea in slightly different iterations has been thrown around carelessly for a while - Foulds talking about it today is nothing new.[/quote]

Just sounds like commentator waffle.

Surprised it was from Foulds though, he's usually sensible with it. He was talking about the UK Championship being devalued yesterday. Suggesting it should be longer matches.

4-1 Smurph.

Robertson thrashes The Michelin Man 5-0.

SnookerFan wrote:Robertson thrashes The Michelin Man 5-0.

fun fact the michelin man's real name is 'bibendum'.

D4P wrote:Could be heading for a CoC final rematch...

Ha.

You said CoC.

hope they put the murphy v zhao match on the main table. easily the tie of the round.

slessor with breaks of 97 and 130 to kill off williams

D4P wrote:

HappyCamper wrote:hope they put the murphy v zhao match on the main table. easily the tie of the round.

You'll get Judd v Georgiou. And you'll like it.

actually come to think of it i'm going to a gig tonight so it's of no matter to me