Topic locked

carrying on for snookers

Postby Smart

Seen it a couple of times I think in Allen/Stevens and Dott/Carter.

I see it this way.

Guy needs snookers and in many cases the balls have landed in such a scenario that gaining the foul points is unlikely, however they continue the frame to break up the rhythm and flow of the other player.

Its slightly naughty but legal all the same.......................

What I also notice in every game at the Crucible (where players are sat together i.e. 1st to QF)........Allen likes a chin-wag/banter.

Interested to see the "cut off point" for this banter............................where does it stop, with a place in the next round at stake.

He bantered with Stevens for a long time in that match then there was the playing on thing which annoyed Stevens. He has bantered with Bazza but now taken 5 on the spin....................is banter over..... :chin:

Discuss or javelin........................I'm on Stella, come on !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :happy:

Re: carrying on for snookers

Postby Roland

One of the best exponents of carrying on for snookers as a rhythm breaker is Dotty. I remember back to that match in the UK against Robin Hull in 2006. Hull won a frame fluent style and was looking very good and dangerous. Dotty made the frame last another 2o minutes or so and completely knocked Hull out of his rhythm so even though Hull won the frame, Dott won the match 9-1.

Match play at its best :bowdown:

It's not slowing down the match classic style, he could still have done it with a shot clock but it was a classic rhythm knocker.

Re: carrying on for snookers

Postby Smart

Sonny wrote:One of the best exponents of carrying on for snookers as a rhythm breaker is Dotty. I remember back to that match in the UK against Robin Hull in 2006. Hull won a frame fluent style and was looking very good and dangerous. Dotty made the frame last another 2o minutes or so and completely knocked Hull out of his rhythm so even though Hull won the frame, Dott won the match 9-1.

Match play at its best :bowdown:

It's not slowing down the match classic style, he could still have done it with a shot clock but it was a classic rhythm knocker.


:hatoff:

Re: carrying on for snookers

Postby snooky147

In Graeme's game with Mark Allen last year they both bantered right down to the final frame. And during each others breaks you could hear them say good shot. It's not to every players liking though.

Re: carrying on for snookers

Postby Casey

I think playing on for more than 12 penalty points is pretty poor - snooker + free ball on the red!

Re: carrying on for snookers

Postby vodkadiet

There should be a limit on playing on for snookers. If a player needs more than 16 points worth of snookers to tie he shouldn't be allowed to continue. The way the rule is now a player can carry on if he is 100 points behind with just the colours left.

Re: carrying on for snookers

Postby wheelsofsteel

vodkadiet wrote:There should be a limit on playing on for snookers. If a player needs more than 16 points worth of snookers to tie he shouldn't be allowed to continue. The way the rule is now a player can carry on if he is 100 points behind with just the colours left.


Any player trying that would be fined at a later date for ungentlemanly conducy by the Barry Stazi

Re: carrying on for snookers

Postby Smart

I thought today it was MASSIVE disrespect to Hendo. Lets get the perspective right here.

Hendo is probably in his last Crucible appearance

Hendo is trailing 11-4

Selby is knocking in tons for fun

Its the last frame of the session

Selby needs 5 snookers(??????) and carries on.

IS THIS HOW A 7 TIME CHAMP SHOULD BE TREATED.......?

I think Selby has somewhat been more of a C U Next Tuesday than he wanted to. For me that was distasteful viewing......totally disrespectul.

Selby :blush: :grrr: :blush: :grrr:

Re: carrying on for snookers

Postby GJ

smart sticking up for hendo

rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl

Re: carrying on for snookers

Postby onlyevertonjon

The game is called snooker, so why not play for snookers. Give it a go. I have seen both Hendry and Ronnie only needing one snooker and giving up on the frame. Frames are hard to come by so scrap for them!

I take Vodka's point though that at the moment it is strange to think a player can play on needing something like 25 snookers. If you say 16 points in snookers needed as a cut off point does that mean a player cant come back to get "a bit potting practise"?

I'm all for seeing attempts like Selby's today! It was different.

Re: carrying on for snookers

Postby onlyevertonjon

Smart wrote:I thought today it was MASSIVE disrespect to Hendo. Lets get the perspective right here.

Hendo is probably in his last Crucible appearance

Hendo is trailing 11-4

Selby is knocking in tons for fun

Its the last frame of the session

Selby needs 5 snookers(??????) and carries on.

IS THIS HOW A 7 TIME CHAMP SHOULD BE TREATED.......?

I think Selby has somewhat been more of a C U Next Tuesday than he wanted to. For me that was distasteful viewing......totally disrespectul.

Selby :blush: :grrr: :blush: :grrr:



He won the frame. Hendry had chances to nail the last red a few times. He should have also been attempting to move the yellow away from the blue.

Re: carrying on for snookers

Postby Roland

Any arguement against Selby carrying on for snookers there is clearly wrong because he proved it and won the frame.

If it was the second to last frame then fair enough. If they were finishing off tonight I doubt he would've done it either. But with the balls lying good and facing an 11-5 overnight lead barring snookers, what the hell? Go for them. It probably won't pay off but if you're as good at laying them as him then there's an outside chance of 12-4 so may as well have a pop. And it worked.

Disrespectful? Pah. And I would say that with ANY player in these circumstances. The circumstances are the key thing here.

Re: carrying on for snookers

Postby onlyevertonjon

Sonny wrote:Any arguement against Selby carrying on for snookers there is clearly wrong because he proved it and won the frame.

If it was the second to last frame then fair enough. If they were finishing off tonight I doubt he would've done it either. But with the balls lying good and facing an 11-5 overnight lead barring snookers, what the hell? Go for them. It probably won't pay off but if you're as good at laying them as him then there's an outside chance of 12-4 so may as well have a pop. And it worked.

Disrespectful? Pah. And I would say that with ANY player in these circumstances. The circumstances are the key thing here.



My argument is dont miss when you are in! <laugh> <laugh>

Re: carrying on for snookers

Postby wheelsofsteel

Sonny wrote:Any arguement against Selby carrying on for snookers there is clearly wrong because he proved it and won the frame.

If it was the second to last frame then fair enough. If they were finishing off tonight I doubt he would've done it either. But with the balls lying good and facing an 11-5 overnight lead barring snookers, what the hell? Go for them. It probably won't pay off but if you're as good at laying them as him then there's an outside chance of 12-4 so may as well have a pop. And it worked.

Disrespectful? Pah. And I would say that with ANY player in these circumstances. The circumstances are the key thing here.


stop stating the obvious

FFS this is championship hard-core snooker where winning is all that matters

so just the same as Murphy dobbed Maguire in for not having chalk, and Ebdon got underneath Ronnie's skin, and Dott did the same to Ebdon, and Hendry never passed up on making a ton when his opponent hadn't potted a ball in frames. and Bond came back against Thorburn by grinding him in to the cloth, all is fair in love and snooker.

Hendry let himself down by just going through the motions when Selby was deadly serious

Re: carrying on for snookers

Postby onlyevertonjon

wheelsofsteel wrote:
Sonny wrote:Any arguement against Selby carrying on for snookers there is clearly wrong because he proved it and won the frame.

If it was the second to last frame then fair enough. If they were finishing off tonight I doubt he would've done it either. But with the balls lying good and facing an 11-5 overnight lead barring snookers, what the hell? Go for them. It probably won't pay off but if you're as good at laying them as him then there's an outside chance of 12-4 so may as well have a pop. And it worked.

Disrespectful? Pah. And I would say that with ANY player in these circumstances. The circumstances are the key thing here.


stop stating the obvious

FFS this is championship hard-core snooker where winning is all that matters

so just the same as Murphy dobbed Maguire in for not having chalk, and Ebdon got underneath Ronnie's skin, and Dott did the same to Ebdon, and Hendry never passed up on making a ton when his opponent hadn't potted a ball in frames. and Bond came back against Thorburn by grinding him in to the cloth, all is fair in love and snooker.

Hendry let himself down by just going through the motions when Selby was deadly serious



Its not even questionable today what Selby did.

Re: carrying on for snookers

Postby Roland

wheelsofsteel wrote:
Sonny wrote:Any arguement against Selby carrying on for snookers there is clearly wrong because he proved it and won the frame.

If it was the second to last frame then fair enough. If they were finishing off tonight I doubt he would've done it either. But with the balls lying good and facing an 11-5 overnight lead barring snookers, what the hell? Go for them. It probably won't pay off but if you're as good at laying them as him then there's an outside chance of 12-4 so may as well have a pop. And it worked.

Disrespectful? Pah. And I would say that with ANY player in these circumstances. The circumstances are the key thing here.


stop stating the obvious

FFS this is championship hard-core snooker where winning is all that matters

so just the same as Murphy dobbed Maguire in for not having chalk, and Ebdon got underneath Ronnie's skin, and Dott did the same to Ebdon, and Hendry never passed up on making a ton when his opponent hadn't potted a ball in frames. and Bond came back against Thorburn by grinding him in to the cloth, all is fair in love and snooker.

Hendry let himself down by just going through the motions when Selby was deadly serious



:bowdown:

Re: carrying on for snookers

Postby Smart

Well I just feel Hendo was being taken the snake hiss outta there, and Selby really didneee need to go to that extreme. Win at all costs I suppose and his ranking conversion suggests he needs to play these sort of tactics. :redneck:

Re: carrying on for snookers

Postby PLtheRef

Hmm, I can see both sides to this,

I do agree with Smart in that in Stephen's last match, and what he's done for the game of snooker that it was a tad disrespectful. There is the unwritten rule that all players are aware of, and Mark will have known that going for 5 snookers. On the other hand, Mark is perfectly entitled to do it, and though it was the final frame, it should never get to a stage where a player feels obliged to concede a frame due to the difference in points. Mark won the frame today, and Stephen

That said, it sends out a message to all of Mark's opponents in the remaining stages

Re: carrying on for snookers

Postby Casey

I don't think what he did was wrong.

However say someone makes an 80 break and the opponent plays on for snookers and gets them. It really devalues what the player did with that break. Imagine if every player continued when needing 4 snookers....

What I would say is that if Selby was super serious in trying to get the snookers he shouldn't have touched Hendry, that was inappropriate.

Re: carrying on for snookers

Postby Smart

Casey wrote:I don't think what he did was wrong.

However say someone makes an 80 break and the opponent plays on for snookers and gets them. It really devalues what the player did with that break. Imagine if every player continued when needing 4 snookers....


I'm looking beyond the 5 or 4 snookers. Selby should of seen the bigger picture, i.e. this could be Hendos swan song appearance, and he had this stupid rubbish going on. Selby has done win at all costs before and here he shows it again. Perhaps his record or lack of it is getting to him, rofl

Re: carrying on for snookers

Postby GJ

i agree with rexy

rexy sticking up for hendo should say it all

he is seeing the bigger picture

rexy :hatoff:

Re: carrying on for snookers

Postby GJ

I think alot of people have missed the bigger picture here

Selby knows he had the match in the bag and what he did in the circumstances was make hendo look rather silly and given its likely to be hendos final crucible match it was in bad taste by selby.

Normally i wouldnt be against carrying on for a few snookers but blackening hendos final appearance shows selby lacks that extra bit of class

hendo :hatoff: