Post a reply

Statement from Bazzer

Postby Smart

World Snooker Statement26th June 2012


Following recent conjecture about the World Snooker Players Contract, we would like to make clear that the contract has been put in place in order to protect the interests of the game of snooker for the benefit of the players, broadcasters, sponsors, promoters and most importantly the fans.




Much like those in Golf and Tennis, the contract lays out to the players what is expected of them as professional sportsmen.




98 of the 99 professional tour players have signed the contract.




Under the terms of the contract, players can choose which events they would like to take part in. However, players may be penalised if they enter events and withdraw from them without a valid reason. This is mirrored across all sports.




World Snooker allows for wild cards in certain events outside of the UK in order to give local players opportunity and experience in world class events and to develop talent in important markets. Wild cards are only available to amateur players from the host country or region, and they are selected in conjunction with World Snooker, the WPBSA, the National Governing Body and the Promoter of the event.

Re: Statement from Bazzer

Postby Matt_2745

Occurred to me when I was driving home from work yesterday, are they saying that Hendry has signed it then? He's still one of the 99 technically and I can't see why he would sign it at all.

Re: Statement from Bazzer

Postby Skullman

Well as he hasn't resigned his membership, he might have to still sign the contract. He might just enter the Worlds. Anyone know if Parrott, Wallace etc need to sign?

Re: Statement from Bazzer

Postby Smart

Skullman wrote:Well as he hasn't resigned his membership, he might have to still sign the contract. He might just enter the Worlds. Anyone know if Parrott, Wallace etc need to sign?


The best way is to get up a list of the 99 players and see if we can work out who has and hasnt signed. I think it might be a bit complicated a job for me to do though. :pal:

Re: Statement from Bazzer

Postby SnookerFan

Smart wrote:
Skullman wrote:Old news. Snooker Fan have you logged in as Smart by mistake?


Its clearly dated 26th June, thats only hours ago. :wave:



That's the mistake I've made on here before. A news story will be three hours old, and won't have been posted on here. But I get in trouble because everybody has already discussed it on Twitter. rofl

Re: Statement from Bazzer

Postby Smart

SnookerFan wrote:
Smart wrote:
Skullman wrote:Old news. Snooker Fan have you logged in as Smart by mistake?


Its clearly dated 26th June, thats only hours ago. :wave:



That's the mistake I've made on here before. A news story will be three hours old, and won't have been posted on here. But I get in trouble because everybody has already discussed it on Twitter. rofl


S/fan <cool>
Smart <cool>

Re: Statement from Bazzer

Postby Muppet147

Smart wrote:
SnookerFan wrote:
Smart wrote:
Skullman wrote:Old news. Snooker Fan have you logged in as Smart by mistake?


Its clearly dated 26th June, thats only hours ago. :wave:



That's the mistake I've made on here before. A news story will be three hours old, and won't have been posted on here. But I get in trouble because everybody has already discussed it on Twitter. rofl


S/fan <cool>
Smart <cool>


:limp:

Re: Statement from Bazzer

Postby Smart

Muppet147 wrote:
Smart wrote:
SnookerFan wrote:
Smart wrote:
Skullman wrote:Old news. Snooker Fan have you logged in as Smart by mistake?


Its clearly dated 26th June, thats only hours ago. :wave:



That's the mistake I've made on here before. A news story will be three hours old, and won't have been posted on here. But I get in trouble because everybody has already discussed it on Twitter. rofl


S/fan <cool>
Smart <cool>


:limp:

twitter lover :zzz: :weeds: :zzz: :weeds:


   

cron