Post a reply

Barry Hearn – Positives and Negatives

Postby GJ

There is no doubting Barry’s enthusiasm for snooker and there appears to be a good vibe in snooker these days.

But there are some negatives about barry most importantly broken promises.

Mr Hearn made it crystal clear when he took charge there would be no changes to the majors and what do you know the uk format has been reduced from this season onwards.

The only plus side to the change in format is that all matches as far as im aware will be available on tv tables and no matches will be in cubicles.

But overall the uk championship the 2nd biggest event has been devalued big time with this change to the format.

So can Mr Hearn be trusted he said no changes to the majors and has done this to the uk championsip, so what could be next.


Discuss <ok>

Re: Barry Hearn – Positives and Negatives

Postby Witz78

the positives of the Hearn regime easily outweigh the negatives

for every alleged negative theres gonna be at least a dozen positives so ill happily cut Hearn a bit of slack on the odd thing

The UK reduction is just an easy way for his critics who didnt want him to get power and then had to eat humble pie, to finally have a pop at him

Re: Barry Hearn – Positives and Negatives

Postby Bourne

If you gave me the choice now of the Walker regime or the Hearn regime so far, it's still a no-brainer. Gota remember Bazza's only had just under 2 years in the job so he's barely dipped his toes in, i'm sure he has more big plans to come. The PTCs have been a massive boost and on the other end of the scale, the Worlds have remained the great show as he promised. And as for the UK, given the choice of BO17s with half the matches hidden away or all BO11s shown, i'd take the latter every time.

So for me I think Barry's on about an 7/10 so far but most disappointing is the way the rolling rankings have been rather rushed and badly thought through, they certainly aren't as rolling as they could be.

Re: Barry Hearn – Positives and Negatives

Postby GJ

Fair points lads as i said he has brought a good vibe to snooker

But Empty or broken promises are not a good sign and as hes an experienced business man , surely when he said no changes to the majors he would have had a plan in place and why bother saying no changes to the majors when he knew changes could happen.

Re: Barry Hearn – Positives and Negatives

Postby Bourne

And I still wonder why peeps go on about the UK being 'decimated' and 'torn apart' by this format change but before this happened, there were still a load of people who vehemently claimed the Masters, which has essentially the same format, was truly classed as the 2nd major <doh>

Re: Barry Hearn – Positives and Negatives

Postby GJ

Bourne wrote:And I still wonder why peeps go on about the UK being 'decimated' and 'torn apart' by this format change but before this happened, there were still a load of people who vehemently claimed the Masters, which has essentially the same format, was truly classed as the 2nd major <doh>



masters was always 3rd IMO <ok> :hatoff:

Re: Barry Hearn – Positives and Negatives

Postby Bourne

GJ wrote:
Bourne wrote:And I still wonder why peeps go on about the UK being 'decimated' and 'torn apart' by this format change but before this happened, there were still a load of people who vehemently claimed the Masters, which has essentially the same format, was truly classed as the 2nd major <doh>



masters was always 3rd IMO <ok> :hatoff:

Yeh same, maybe even lower than 3rd tbh. But i'm willing to give this new UK format a chance, a lot of muppets thought the World Open wouldn't work and it was a massive success.

Re: Barry Hearn – Positives and Negatives

Postby Tubberlad

Excellent idea GJ...

The positives

Rolling Rankings: It was always common sense to reward the players for the here and now. It now needs to take the next step and become fully rolling.

Increased Sponsorship: Each tournament, as far as I can remember, now has a sponsor, including the Welsh Open. Within his first month he had found a sponsor for both the Masters and The Welsh Open.

The PTCs: They have their detractors, but they now have TV and streaming coverage, and give players far more opportunities to play.

All round better atmosphere: there's simply far more enthusiasm around snooker these days.

German Masters: another fantastic, long overdue tournament in mainland Europe.

The World Open: In my opinion, the best tournament that's been introduced in a long time.

The Shootout: A very entertaining weekend, that left a very positive impression


The Negatives

Far too much emphasis on reducing matches: while I don't mind shorter formats, the Welsh Open reduction was... bizarre. The UK has been destroyed in my opinion, we need at least two marathon tournaments.

Premier League: it's now a ridiculous circus of a tournament.

Lack of new formats: I'd like to see something different than the tradition 'race to x amount of frames'... I'd like to see a sets tournament, for example.

Re: Barry Hearn – Positives and Negatives

Postby GJ

Bourne wrote:
GJ wrote:
Bourne wrote:And I still wonder why peeps go on about the UK being 'decimated' and 'torn apart' by this format change but before this happened, there were still a load of people who vehemently claimed the Masters, which has essentially the same format, was truly classed as the 2nd major <doh>



masters was always 3rd IMO <ok> :hatoff:

Yeh same, maybe even lower than 3rd tbh. But i'm willing to give this new UK format a chance, a lot of muppets thought the World Open wouldn't work and it was a massive success.



Fair point im more concened with the principle of him breaking the promise though and will the worlds be changed next :gag: :?

Re: Barry Hearn – Positives and Negatives

Postby Bourne

Yeh PL has really been poorly managed I gota say, for something that could be such a simple, fun, silly event has become too congested, complicated and unwatchable.

Re: Barry Hearn – Positives and Negatives

Postby Tubberlad

Bourne wrote:
GJ wrote:
Bourne wrote:And I still wonder why peeps go on about the UK being 'decimated' and 'torn apart' by this format change but before this happened, there were still a load of people who vehemently claimed the Masters, which has essentially the same format, was truly classed as the 2nd major <doh>



masters was always 3rd IMO <ok> :hatoff:

Yeh same, maybe even lower than 3rd tbh. But i'm willing to give this new UK format a chance, a lot of muppets thought the World Open wouldn't work and it was a massive success.

The Masters' importance as a tournament was always blown out of all proportion. Okay, it's a prestigious event and a must for the snooker tour, but it's repuation came from the fact that so many great finals have been played at the tournament. At the end of the day, it had zero effect on the World Rankings, and the best-of-11 format could never produce really hugely memorable games like a major tournament should because the format is too short.

The UK Championship has been raped, in my opinion. The best-of-17 matches were it's trademark, that's gone now.

Re: Barry Hearn – Positives and Negatives

Postby Tubberlad

Bourne wrote:Yeh and I think it's because of the fact the Masters is unranked that we get so many good matches, less pressure.

Oh yeah, exactly :hatoff:

Re: Barry Hearn – Positives and Negatives

Postby Wildey

theres no evidence at all to sugest short matches=new fans and yet that for some bizzare reasoning seems to be what is thought ?

there was a great article in snooker scene from dave hendon

ive scanned it for thoes who did not see it

It seems to have become a universal truth, commonly accepted, that in the 21st century, attention spans have been reduced.
There is so much to do, so much technology and choice, that modern life and all it has to offer is consumed in bite-sized chunks with sport no different to culture.
But is any of this actually true?
Films still manage to hold an audience for a couple of hours, sometimes longer as in the case of the Harry Potter series, which is actually one film longer than the books, or the Lord of the Rings trilogy.
What is interesting about these two behemoth franchises is that their films are mainly aimed at the young - the very group who are supposed to have the attention spans of your average gnat.
Yet, give them something meaningful that they can engage with and they will stick with it. J.K. Rowling's seven Harry Potter books are an example of this. The books got thicke^ in size - and more popular - with every release.
The television success stories of today have not made any concessions to length either, quite the opposite in fact.
The great phenomenon of the last few years is The X Factor, aimed at the very people who are supposedly incapable of sustaining their concentration longer than a few minutes.
In fact, the average X Factor
episode lasts close to two hours and keeps its audience throughout.
In America, the ultimate consumer society, television dramas often run for 20 or more episodes per season for several years, taking audiences the world over along on the ride.
All of which brings us to sport, and snooker in particular.
There have been attempts to quicken the pace of various sports and shorten their duration, most particularly in cricket first with limited overs matches played over a single day and then Twenty/20, a slog-fest that can be fitted into just a few hours.
Test matches over five days can peter out but they are recognised, as their name implies, as the ultimate test of strength and even the one­sided England v India series attracted huge crowds.
Tennis introduced the tie-break for understandable reasons, but there were few more compelling sporting encounters last year than the extraordinary battle at Wimbledon between John Isner and Nicolas Mahut, which Isner finally won 70-68 in the fifth set.
Golf recently experimented with a shortened Power Play version but nobody seriously thinks it will threaten the established four-round stroke play model which serves it so well week in, week out, all around the world.
No one wants to make football matches shorter
than 90 minutes although the penalty Shootout - sport's greatest endgame - is a uniquely dramatic and not greatly time consuming way of resolving deadlocks.
Snooker should resist too many attempts to artificially quicken up or shorten the test of skill, stamina and nerve that its biggest occasions demand.
There is no suggestion - at the moment - of shortening the World Championship but the UK Championship will this season be reduced from best of 17 frames to best of 11 up to and including the quarter­finals.
In the eyes of many, this diminishes its prestige. Indeed, when the final was reduced from best of 31 frames to best of 19 in 1993 the UK Championship became less like a close cousin of the World Championship and more like the circuit's other tournaments.
The shot clock was brought in by Sky for the Premier League and, as a one-off, is an interesting variant to distinguish the event.
However, in a ranking event, it would be far more controversial. There is not, generally, a problem with slow play. Referees have it within their discretion to warn players who they feel are taking too long over their shots.
Furthermore, if players are struggling for form, why would being made to speed up raise their standard of play?
If anything, it would be more likely to drag them down further.
Snooker is a game of great skill played in a high pressure environment. Sometimes players need a minute or so to study the table and clear their minds.
New or shorter formats have their place. Last season's Shoot-Out was great fun and the reduced amount of frames at the World and Welsh Opens still produced not unexpected winners in the form of Neil Robertson and John Higgins respectively.
But what many snooker fans most enjoy is the slow burning drama of longer matches where there is time for the balance of power to turn round, time for the player in front to crack psychologically and for the balance to shift in favour of his opponent.
Tension builds and this has created sporting drama of the highest order over the last three decades.
This simply cannot happen in a best of five or best of seven frames match.
Snooker at its best, like so much sport, and like the best film, television, theatre or book, becomes engrossing and draws its audience in.
Once there, many do not leave until the conclusion, however long it lasts.
The current circuit boasts a mix of formats, and that is as it should be, but snooker should not swallow the line that nobody can concentrate for longer than a few minutes anymore


Barry Hearn should Take Heed different Formats does not mean Reducing Everything people and Snooker Fans can get their Heads Round some things Increasing.

Re: Barry Hearn – Positives and Negatives

Postby Casey

I really like Tubbs idea of Setplay :hatoff:

+'s -

PTC's
German Masters
World Open - loved the event
Sponsorship
More ranking events

-'s Jimmy White (1 time Master winner) getting a wild card for the Masters whilst others were overlooked
Lack of expenses set up for lower ranked players.

Re: Barry Hearn – Positives and Negatives

Postby Wildey

Casey wrote:I really like Tubbs idea of Setplay :hatoff:

+'s -

PTC's
German Masters
World Open - loved the event
Sponsorship
More ranking events

-'s Jimmy White (1 time Master winner) getting a wild card for the Masters whilst others were overlooked
Lack of expenses set up for lower ranked players.

yes i love the set play idea as i said mixing it up doesent meen everything short.

i think it was a bit stupid last season wanting different formats and making the welsh open early rounds in line with 12 PTC hardly inovation was it.

Re: Barry Hearn – Positives and Negatives

Postby Witz78

Jimmy had already been told before he went in the Jungle missing the UK that hed be getting a Masters spot after it in the wake of the publicity hed picked up whilst on ITV

Hearn only got partially into power in December 2009 when Jimmy was already in the Jungle and the decision had already been made re: the wildcard for the Masters, so he cant be "blamed" for that,

As it was i think it was a great idea though with Jimmys profile high again and snooker looking to tap into that, look at the audience and reception he got that night, ok, he performed miserably but the electric atmosphere and 2,000+ bums on seat gave Hearn an idea of where snookers future could eventually be heading under his guidance

Re: Barry Hearn – Positives and Negatives

Postby GJ

Tubberlad wrote:Haha I might start a poll about the sets idea... maybe not tonight though



it sounds good email it to the wsa muppets wont hold my breath though on them bringing it in as their obsessed with best of 7's

:?

Re: Barry Hearn – Positives and Negatives

Postby Wildey

yes they seem to think a interval is a bad idea for some reason weather its MSI or after the first session ......

for me a interval builds up tension to whats to come... best of 7s work in PTC Because of the nature of it quick turn around of matches but i like tension that intervals gives matches.

Re: Barry Hearn – Positives and Negatives

Postby Witz78

Wild wrote:yes they seem to think a interval is a bad idea for some reason weather its MSI or after the first session ......

for me a interval builds up tension to whats to come... best of 7s work in PTC Because of the nature of it quick turn around of matches but i like tension that intervals gives matches.


just think of the tension Rodney Walker gave us when he had 2 month intervals between tournaments then :D

Re: Barry Hearn – Positives and Negatives

Postby Wildey

Witz78 wrote:
Wild wrote:yes they seem to think a interval is a bad idea for some reason weather its MSI or after the first session ......

for me a interval builds up tension to whats to come... best of 7s work in PTC Because of the nature of it quick turn around of matches but i like tension that intervals gives matches.


just think of the tension Rodney Walker gave us when he had 2 month intervals between tournaments then :D

rofl

yes i was like a coiled spring

na seriously so far so good with only 2 negatives for me UK Obviously and following PTC Trend with the welsh (not gonna mention PS or BS as it should be called that was not a idea of Barry Hearn).

Re: Barry Hearn – Positives and Negatives

Postby Wildey

i dont mind what they did with the PL i never took it serious once sky took hold of it anyway its a snooker related entertainment on a thursday night.

winning it isnt that important a achievemant and never really has been.

Re: Barry Hearn – Positives and Negatives

Postby mishcka

Wild wrote:i dont mind what they did with the PL i never took it serious once sky took hold of it anyway its a snooker related entertainment on a thursday night.


But at least it was watchable, now it's just SOUP.

Re: Barry Hearn – Positives and Negatives

Postby Tubberlad

mishcka wrote:
Wild wrote:i dont mind what they did with the PL i never took it serious once sky took hold of it anyway its a snooker related entertainment on a thursday night.


But at least it was watchable, now it's just SOUP.

But I like soup :-(

Re: Barry Hearn – Positives and Negatives

Postby GJ

Dannyboy wrote:But what is the alternative? Do players want 20+ tournaments or 7?



I want a leader who doesnt tell blatant lies

:hatoff: <ok>