Selby's 6 minute shot time - ever justified?

When Selby took over 6 minutes to play his shot against Robertson recently and then once he finally played the shot it was a poor shot anyway, is there any shot anyone can think of that would justify over 6 minutes? I mean, even in a deciding frame of the WC that has gone down the a black ball finish with a player being angled and the black out in the middle of the table so if he misses the match is over, even in that instances I'm sure the BBC would be bringing up that shot time graphic once it gets past each minute taken and eventually even one of the commentators would most probably say "this is getting a bit silly now, he really needs to make his mind up and play the shot"

I understand the the above is the most extreme example and even in that instance I would think that over 6 minutes would just be ridiculous so I still can't understand how he even thought it was in any way acceptable to leave his opponent, the crowd in attendance and the people at home waiting over 6 minutes? has anyone seen anyone take longer than that ever? I understand he does it as gamesmanship and done a proper number on Ronnie in WC 2014 but even by his standards this was really taking the Michael I think.

Typically amoral shot by Selbo

I think he later said that the shot didn't merit that amount of time but he had a brain freeze where he couldn't see a shot.

I'm not sure whether it was a good or bad shot has any relevance on the justification on the length of time taken. I don't think it was gamesmanship and obviously nor did the ref otherwise he would have been warned.

Interesting though this shot is highlighted as there are some here who make out as if he takes this amount of time on every shot when he isn't a particularly slow player overall

Although i think if you havent seen a better shot in half that time there probably isn't one

It was a disgusting episode

SteveJJ wrote:I think he later said that the shot didn't merit that amount of time but he had a brain freeze where he couldn't see a shot.

I'm not sure whether it was a good or bad shot has any relevance on the justification on the length of time taken. I don't think it was gamesmanship and obviously nor did the ref otherwise he would have been warned.

Interesting though this shot is highlighted as there are some here who make out as if he takes this amount of time on every shot when he isn't a particularly slow player overall

SteveJJ wrote:I think he later said that the shot didn't merit that amount of time but he had a brain freeze where he couldn't see a shot.

I'm not sure whether it was a good or bad shot has any relevance on the justification on the length of time taken. I don't think it was gamesmanship and obviously nor did the ref otherwise he would have been warned.

Interesting though this shot is highlighted as there are some here who make out as if he takes this amount of time on every shot when he isn't a particularly slow player overall

A 6 minute brain freeze is a long one, maybe he needs to see a doctor, he plays snooker everyday for hours on end for years and he then had a brain freeze where he can't work out a shot to play, it's funny how none of the other players have 6 minute brain freezes while at the table, even Hamilton and Lawler would get to 3 minutes and think to themselves 'I really need to play a shot now' if after 3 minutes, even 2 minutes you can't see a shot then it's either you take on a pot or it has to be the old fashioned hit and hope, no?

Referee should have intervened. 6 minutes over a shot is in no way acceptable. I don't recall ever actually seen a referee warn a player over taking too long. You wonder how long would they let it go. If a player can take 6 mins can they take 7 mins or 10 mins.

It's clearly ridiculous and unfair. Think Robertson once after a foul by Dott looked at the situation for 5 mins and then told Dott to play again.

Dragonfly wrote:Referee should have intervened. 6 minutes over a shot is in no way acceptable. I don't recall ever actually seen a referee warn a player over taking too long. You wonder how long would they let it go. If a player can take 6 mins can they take 7 mins or 10 mins.

It's clearly ridiculous and unfair. Think Robertson once after a foul by Dott looked at the situation for 5 mins and then told Dott to play again.

Agreed, ref should have had a word. Andre wouldn't have stood for that.

No - he’d have (sensibly) sat down after 3

HappyCamper wrote:the infamous six minute shot was against higgins not robertson, no?

Yep you are correct. It was the quarter finals of the Northern Ireland Open 2019. Higgins eventually won the match against Selby.

Dan-cat wrote:

Dragonfly wrote:Referee should have intervened. 6 minutes over a shot is in no way acceptable. I don't recall ever actually seen a referee warn a player over taking too long. You wonder how long would they let it go. If a player can take 6 mins can they take 7 mins or 10 mins.

It's clearly ridiculous and unfair. Think Robertson once after a foul by Dott looked at the situation for 5 mins and then told Dott to play again.

Agreed, ref should have had a word. Andre wouldn't have stood for that.

I wasn't there reffing so don't really know how I would act.

It cast a shadow over our great game.

Pink Ball wrote:It cast a shadow over our great game.

No, just made him look a bit silly.

Ref should’ve stopped the match.

Scooper wrote:Ref should’ve stopped the match.

He can't. At most in that situation he would have given Selby a word, but that is not a warning. A warning only comes if he did something similar again after being told not to do it.

I don't think a one off incredibly long shot time is worth getting worked up about. His freezing excuse is pretty plausible, especially given that when you're in that sort of situation the pressure to see a good shot is just going to mount and mount making it harder to un-freeze. Sure, maybe the ref should have said something just to help the player snap out of it, but I always though the slow play rules were more about consistent slow play rather than on any single shot.

Prop wrote:

McManusFan wrote:I don't think a one off incredibly long shot time is worth getting worked up about. His freezing excuse is pretty plausible, especially given that when you're in that sort of situation the pressure to see a good shot is just going to mount and mount making it harder to un-freeze. Sure, maybe the ref should have said something just to help the player snap out of it, but I always though the slow play rules were more about consistent slow play rather than on any single shot.

Yep. If it was true gamesmanship we’d have seen hints of it elsewhere in the match. Selby looked a bit of a tit for taking so long, but it was innocent enough in my eyes.

Incidentally I watched that clip on YouTube today of Ebdon O’Sullivan. 5 minutes for a 12. Cueball cleaned every shot. Comms calling it out. Even Hazel and Parrot in the studio being mixed in mid-frame to poor scorn on it. Blatant dark arts. That’s the kind of thing that’s actually dishonourable.

Yeah - I think Selby is a genuine sportsman. Just think he got caught up in the moment.

Badsnookerplayer wrote:

Prop wrote:

McManusFan wrote:I don't think a one off incredibly long shot time is worth getting worked up about. His freezing excuse is pretty plausible, especially given that when you're in that sort of situation the pressure to see a good shot is just going to mount and mount making it harder to un-freeze. Sure, maybe the ref should have said something just to help the player snap out of it, but I always though the slow play rules were more about consistent slow play rather than on any single shot.

Yep. If it was true gamesmanship we’d have seen hints of it elsewhere in the match. Selby looked a bit of a tit for taking so long, but it was innocent enough in my eyes.

Incidentally I watched that clip on YouTube today of Ebdon O’Sullivan. 5 minutes for a 12. Cueball cleaned every shot. Comms calling it out. Even Hazel and Parrot in the studio being mixed in mid-frame to poor scorn on it. Blatant dark arts. That’s the kind of thing that’s actually dishonourable.

Yeah - I think Selby is a genuine sportsman. Just think he got caught up in the moment.

I think you are being generous there, when a player slows the game down so much to try and effect his opponent as notably he did in the 2014 WC final then it does cross the line at times from 'a gameplan' or 'tactics' to gamesmanship, I think Jimmy did comment a few years later something about Selby "deliberately taking a minute and a half over a basic shot even when he knows what he is going to play"

Obviously this is an issue that people will have different views on which is fair enough.

A professional snooker player who takes 6 minutes for a shot that was not that complicated is either trying to play mind games or has brain damage. Six minutes is ridiculous. The ref should have told Selby to stop taking the snake hiss. It was disrespectful to his opponent and the people watching.

Imagine a Selby vs Ebdon best of 35. Could take some time. Wonder what the viewing figures would be for that!!

Holden Chinaski wrote:A professional snooker player who takes 6 minutes for a shot that was not that complicated is either trying to play mind games or has brain damage. Six minutes is ridiculous. The ref should have told Selby to stop taking the snake hiss. It was disrespectful to his opponent and the people watching.

I agree, but believe that the referee was at fault here, not Selby. Some players will try any form of gamesmanship to get the edge - it's up to the referees to be tougher on them, and I feel a lot are too 'matey' to come down hard on them. World Snooker must realise this is a problem - why else would they consistently post the shot-times? If it is an effort to name and shame it clearly hasn't worked; next step is to ensure the referees start to enforce slow-play rules.

At least Selby has a laugh about it in the interview afterwords. Hard to imagine the clown doing that!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jg-_bAe_Xo

Oh. Leo was the ref.

There's a shock.

SnookerEd25 wrote:Oh. Leo was the ref.

There's a shock.

Should have had his watch tested.

Holden Chinaski wrote:A professional snooker player who takes 6 minutes for a shot that was not that complicated is either trying to play mind games or has brain damage. Six minutes is ridiculous. The ref should have told Selby to stop taking the snake hiss. It was disrespectful to his opponent and the people watching.

Exactly my thoughts.