Post a reply

Speed it up ...

Postby Monique

While most of the snooker press is busy with the WC draw and to a lesser extend with the anti-corruption measures, this http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/sport-fro ... -23006710/
went almost unoticed.

Barry Hearn: Speed it up for the World Championship


by Lee Reynolds, Daily Mirror 22/03/2011

BARRY HEARN will lean on Crucible snooker refs next month, urging them: “Stamp out the snail-paced potting.”
The draw for the first round of next month’s world championship was made yesterday at Wembley Stadium and snooker supremo Hearn made a plea for quick-fire matches.
He said: “I am saying to the players that while I am not looking to put shot-clocks in, be aware that the public must be entertained.
“There is a limit on pace of play they must be aware of.
“I want to see the game flow. We are a sport and an entertainment. Fans need value for money.
Advertisement - article continues below »

“I am saying to the referees and officials, ‘Use your own judgment, there are no strict or hard and fast rules, but I want to see games move.
“I don’t want to see players taking three minutes over a shot. If players get a warning, I expect them to realise this is a brave new world and react in the right way.”

Snooker is desperate to put on a Sheffield super-show after Neil Robertson’s triumph 11 months ago was clouded by the John Higgins “frames for cash” affair.
Higgins was cleared but served a disrepute ban.
In the draw, Australian defending champion Robertson has been handed a tough test against Bristol’s rising star Judd Trump.
Ronnie O’Sullivan will take on eccentric Welshman Dominic Dale while world No.1 Higgins is up against Steve Davis’s conqueror in the qualifiers, former semi-finalist Stephen Lee.


Read more: http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/sport-fro ... z1HKeBVll3


bold added by me.

I haven't seen the result of the WSA questionnaire about canevassing the miss rule but from what I heard the players were in favour of a status quo. On this forum many of us agreed that if common sense and discretion were used by the refs, no changes would be needed (some having serious doubt about the feasibility of this though).
So maybe this is it?
Last edited by Monique on 22 Mar 2011, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Speed it up ...

Postby Wildey

and ill tell Barry Hearn to mind his own buisness put on Touurnaments and let people who understand the game to impliment rules.

i will be writing a E Mail to Mr Hearn to tell him to keep his nose out of stuff he hasent a clue About <ok>

Re: Speed it up ...

Postby randam05

buck sake, this isnt even a joke!

GO WILD! GO WILD! Tell him what ya think! :D

Barry hearn = a sometimes hammer.

Re: Speed it up ...

Postby Monique

Have you READ the article? There is no hard rule. There is no shot-clock. There is no suggestion to any change of the rules. There is however an encouragement to the refs to use their common sense and discretion, something they have been afraid to do before. May I remind you that deliberate slow play is actually deemed ungentlemanly conduct by the rules as they are now (Section 4.1.a)?
When a player gets to an average shot time of 57 seconds as Ebdon was against Carter at some point in the round 1 of the Masters I find that very hard to justify... I also remember Jannie's comment about a certain McLeod vs King match that was going at funeral pace: "This is not sexy snooker despite the two fine physiques at the table". I don't think anyone would put Janie's love and commitment for the game in doubt. But there are limits to the limits.

Re: Speed it up ...

Postby Wildey

randam05 wrote:buck sake, this isnt even a joke!

GO WILD! GO WILD! Tell him what ya think! :D

Barry hearn = a sometimes hammer.

i do not want referees to feel this sort of pressure if a player takes their time they arent players and they dont fully understand the difficulty of the sport hence the Miss Rule shambles.

Re: Speed it up ...

Postby randam05

Monique wrote:Have you READ the article? There is no hard rule. There is no shot-clock. There is no suggestion to any change of the rules. There is however an encouragement to the refs to use their common sense and discretion, something they have been afraid to do before. May I remind you that deliberate slow play is actually deemed ungentlemanly conduct by the rules as they are now (Section 4.1.a)?
When a player gets to an average shot time of 57 seconds as Ebdon was against Carter at some point in the round 1 of the Masters I find that very hard to justify... I also remember Jannie's comment about a certain McLeod vs King match that was going at funeral pace: "This is not sexy snooker despite the two fine physiques at the table". I don't think anyone would put Janie's love and commitment for the game in doubt. But there are limits to the limits.


Oh agreed monique, totally agreed.

But as wild has just said, the refs dont need to be under this pressure, and also one ref may have a completely different opinion to another, then arguements can arise and unfair rules and so on. There was nothing wrong before was there? Really!? Come on, its been fine! Just leave it.

Re: Speed it up ...

Postby Bourne

Barry, assuming you said this (mirror <doh> ), STFU <ok>

Re: Speed it up ...

Postby Wildey

Mon

ive read it all and i do not like the fact Buisness Men or Chairmen are interfering in the Rules and whats happening on the Table thats the responsability of the WPBSA which Barry has sod all to with.

Alan Chaimberlain together with Players Steve Davis and Jason Ferguson should be the only people to even start to coment on things like this.

Re: Speed it up ...

Postby Monique

randam05 wrote:
Monique wrote:Have you READ the article? There is no hard rule. There is no shot-clock. There is no suggestion to any change of the rules. There is however an encouragement to the refs to use their common sense and discretion, something they have been afraid to do before. May I remind you that deliberate slow play is actually deemed ungentlemanly conduct by the rules as they are now (Section 4.1.a)?
When a player gets to an average shot time of 57 seconds as Ebdon was against Carter at some point in the round 1 of the Masters I find that very hard to justify... I also remember Jannie's comment about a certain McLeod vs King match that was going at funeral pace: "This is not sexy snooker despite the two fine physiques at the table". I don't think anyone would put Janie's love and commitment for the game in doubt. But there are limits to the limits.


Oh agreed monique, totally agreed.

But as wild has just said, the refs dont need to be under this pressure, and also one ref may have a completely different opinion to another, then arguements can arise and unfair rules and so on. There was nothing wrong before was there? Really!? Come on, its been fine! Just leave it.


No it's not been fine. It has been abused by some players, and some people who are involved in the game for a long time like Phil Yates for instance do think that something must be done. He was one who suggested a shot-clock. Now I'm of the opinion that IF the refs were indeed enforcing the rules, then there is no need for a shot-clock. But they should enforce the rules and up to now they didn't because they were afraid to do so.
Wild was the one to call for the refs to use their common sense with the miss rule and I agree. But there is also a risk of different interpretations depending on the person. This is no different. The refs will need guidance and guidelines but I for one certainly trust their judgement and integrity.

Re: Speed it up ...

Postby Wildey

another thing Barry ZIP IT Regarding entertainment.

whats entertaining to some isnt to others...

some thinks Rugby is entertaining well the best way to watch Rugby is when its over as far as im concerned.

i like a player taking time over some shots it adds to the tension and drama.

Re: Speed it up ...

Postby randam05

I agree wild, Rugby is blooming awful to watch. And also agree that I like players taking time! I mean its not every frame you see a player take longer then two minutes is it? Infact you barely see it in a whole match.

Re: Speed it up ...

Postby Monique

randam05 wrote:I agree wild, Rugby is blooming awful to watch. And also agree that I like players taking time! I mean its not every frame you see a player take longer then two minutes is it? Infact you barely see it in a whole match.


And that's OK and I never think the refs would jump at the players if they take 2 or 3 minutes over a very difficult shot, and that might happen a couple of times per frame. That's not the spirit. BUT when you get to an average time of 57 seconds then it does mean that the player takes a considerable amount of time on most shots and that can't be necessary. It's not about punishing the players for taking thinking time where needed, it's about punishing them for taking systematically a lot of time unecessarily for the sole purpose to frustrate their opponent.
I do appreciate a good safey battle and I don't mind waiting for the player to come up with a creative solution to a difficult situation, but when a player contemplates a straightforward ball for more than a minute before going for it, yes, I have a problem. Especially when it happens ball after ball...

Re: Speed it up ...

Postby PLtheRef

Hmmm, as a Referee this is a hugely difficult one,

Refs are already reluctant to warn for slow play - as this is basically calling a player a parakeet - even though that may be far from the original intention - its the same in football for diving and in cricket for ball tampering- and has been seen before in snooker. - A match went very close a few years ago, 8-7 or 8-8 and the referee warned 1 player but not the other for slow play - even though he was just as guilty. The result was that the player penalised was thrown by it, and eventually lost 13-9 clearly affected. Thats why refs are reluctant to introduce it now.

Re: Speed it up ...

Postby Wildey

randam05 wrote:I agree wild, Rugby is blooming awful to watch. And also agree that I like players taking time! I mean its not every frame you see a player take longer then two minutes is it? Infact you barely see it in a whole match.

exactly

but now refs will be weary if players are just on the minute mark regarding shots by making it public in a tabloid it will put players and refs under pressure...

i see no problam what so ever in time players takes these days and this speeding up everything is snake hissing my bucking head off.

Re: Speed it up ...

Postby randam05

Monique wrote:
randam05 wrote:I agree wild, Rugby is blooming awful to watch. And also agree that I like players taking time! I mean its not every frame you see a player take longer then two minutes is it? Infact you barely see it in a whole match.


And that's OK and I never think the refs would jump at the players if they take 2 or 3 minutes over a very difficult shot, and that might happen a couple of times per frame. That's not the spirit. BUT when you get to an average time of 57 seconds then it does mean that the player takes a considerable amount of time on most shots and that can't be necessary. It's not about punishing the players for taking thinking time where needed, it's about punishing them for taking systematically a lot of time unecessarily for the sole purpose to frustrate their opponent.
I do appreciate a good safey battle and I don't mind waiting for the player to come up with a creative solution to a difficult situation, but when a player contemplates a straightforward ball for more than a minute before going for it, yes, I have a problem. Especially when it happens ball after ball...


Okay 57 seconds average is pretty bad, but I dont think ive ever seen that, even though yiu said ebdon did against carter, it didnt seem like that long! And i rarely see anyone taking a minute over a straight ball dropping in for the black, NEVER. Even if they do its only going to be one of 4 players, ebdon, harold, lawler and wallace. Sowhats the deal? If every player was renouned for being slow then fair enough, but theres no more than 5 that are super slow.

Re: Speed it up ...

Postby jojo

now barry hearn i like barry hearn what he done for the game snooker fans owe him a big thanks he a genius when it come to the commercial side of things the marketing aspect the business side of things and the like

but this is stupid the man sounding a bit like sepp blatter ie powerful figure talking out his bottom

does barry hearn not realise sometimes what good for the goose is not good for the duck ? the ebdon v dott final was compelling watched every shot of it those red frogs who complain snooker should be speeded up should go stick it getting sick of hearing about shot clocks and speeding up snooker like twenty twenty cricket way things are going we going to be americanised playing snooker with a shitty baseball bat going to be a fast game like baseball

and another thing pal wild if you email barry hearn telling him to shove his new ideas where the sun dont shine put one in from me all those not in favour of what hearn been saying should put their names forward too

if hearn wants to speed up the game telling referees to use their so called judgement to speed up the game then he ruining some of the fine arts of snooker
Last edited by jojo on 22 Mar 2011, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Speed it up ...

Postby Wildey

PLtheRef wrote:Hmmm, as a Referee this is a hugely difficult one,

Refs are already reluctant to warn for slow play - as this is basically calling a player a parakeet - even though that may be far from the original intention - its the same in football for diving and in cricket for ball tampering- and has been seen before in snooker. - A match went very close a few years ago, 8-7 or 8-8 and the referee warned 1 player but not the other for slow play - even though he was just as guilty. The result was that the player penalised was thrown by it, and eventually lost 13-9 clearly affected. Thats why refs are reluctant to introduce it now.

1989 Tony Meo v Dean Raynolds there was no different in either player speed of play but Raynolds was warned and meo was left alone Meo won 13-9.

i have no problam if players are warned if it is exesively slow but it has to be fair and under guidlines but by having it public in a tabloid he has put them under pressure to act....

that sort of thing should be kept to a meeting between the refs and the WPBSA and not Put out in Public and definitly never by Barry Hearn.

Re: Speed it up ...

Postby Wildey

jojo wrote:now barry hearn i like barry hearn what he done for the game snooker fans owe him a big thanks he a genius when it come to the commercial side of things the marketing aspect the business side of things and the like

but this is stupid the man sounding a bit like sepp blatter ie powerful figure talking out his bottom

does barry hearn not realise sometimes what good for the goose is not good for the duck ? the ebdon v dott final was compelling watched every shot of it those red frogs who complain snooker should be speeded up should go stick it getting sick of hearing about shot clocks and speeding up snooker like twenty twenty cricket way things are going we going to be americanised playing snooker with a shitty baseball bat going to be a fast game like baseball

and another thing pal wild if you email barry hearn telling him to shove his new ideas where the sun dont shine put one in from me all those not in favour of what hearn been saying should put their names forward too

if hearn wants to speed up the game telling referees to use their so called judgement to speed up the game then he ruining some of the fine arts of snooker

what Barry is doing has been fantastic i back him even with this issue because he has done great things but this has been very unprofesional on his part.

i like what i see i can enjoy a great painting or a fantastic Photo but i wouldnt dare tell the Artist how to paint or the Photografer how to take pictures.

Re: Speed it up ...

Postby Casey

I am saying to the players that while I am not looking to put shot-clocks in, be aware that the public must be entertained.


Makes sense, consistency of appliance might be an issue though. I have to say I smiled when he said he is not looking at shot clocks. :)

Re: Speed it up ...

Postby Wildey

Casey wrote:
I am saying to the players that while I am not looking to put shot-clocks in, be aware that the public must be entertained.


Makes sense, consistency of appliance might be an issue though. I have to say I smiled when he said he is not looking at shot clocks. :)

he should button it and mind his own buisness

Define entertainment because i dont find players rushing shots in case they be warned entertaining at all.

Re: Speed it up ...

Postby Monique

But it's NOT about having players to rush shots. It's about having the rules applied.

Re: Speed it up ...

Postby Wildey

Monique wrote:But it's NOT about having players to rush shots. It's about having the rules applied.

im not against that in principle however we all know how poor at appling rules snooker refs are in general. putting it in to a public tabloid increases the pressure on thoes refs and it could lead to total car crash at sheffield.

Re: Speed it up ...

Postby Monique

Wild it makes no sense to have rules if they are not applied. So either these rules are applied, and refs should be given appropriate guidance and support, or the rules can't be applied properly and in this case they should be amended or scrapped.
I don't think that abusive slow play is very common in snooker but it happens and I think we all know who are the (rare) ones who do it.
That must be adressed in a way or another IMO. The refs who work at the WC are experienced and I certainly don't question their integrity. So I don't think we would have a "car crash" when enforcing the rules.

Re: Speed it up ...

Postby Wildey

firstly its none of Barry Hearn's Business so he should mind his own.

secondary the rules are there its up to the refs to regulate them without the chief putting public pressure on them.

i just hope the refs and players wont feel the pressure of having to play quick for the sake of it.

Re: Speed it up ...

Postby GJ

I get what barry says and wild stop making a mountain out of a moel hill mate


what barry doesnt want is players taking 15 mins for a straight forward 10 break like ebdon did aginst ronnie in 2005 that wasnt hard snoomer it was pathetic gamesmanship at its worst

Re: Speed it up ...

Postby Bourne

Those are complete one-offs <doh>

Re: Speed it up ...

Postby GJ

Bourne wrote:Those are complete one-offs <doh>



he is giving a friendly reminder but as usual wild makes a huge fuss

if players dont do what ebdon did there will be no issue will there :?

Re: Speed it up ...

Postby Bourne

I get wild's point too though, every time a player goes over 1 minute for a shot they're going to feel pressured, so are referees, which leads to panic in the player's head and you'll get players messing it up. Every player takes a long time on shots. Maybe there needs to be clearer rules about what is acceptable and what's not, at the moment, I think it's absolutely fine.

Re: Speed it up ...

Postby jojo

totally agree with bournes last post players will feel under unnecessary pressure and the whole art form of snooker will change

dont want dictatorship in snooker they can buck off

leave the game exactly as it is bar maybe a few tweaks to the miss rule which has been discussed on this forum

i bet those agreeing with the views of hearn maybe never held a snooker cue in their hand

Re: Speed it up ...

Postby Monique

You are wrong about your last point. ;)
And in addition the rules of snooker AS THEY ARE NOW deem that kind of conduct as punishable. The only thing is to get the refs effectively punishing it. It does not make any sense to have rules and not apply them. If they can't be applied then they should be amended or scrapped. But if they stay they should be applied. Is it dictatorship to ask for the rules to be applied?