O' Sullivan

dnme

Am I the only one who thinks that O' Sullivan is the most obnoxious pr1ck ever?

Tuesday, he was so arrogant with the BBC interviewer threatening to stop the interview, stating that he didn't find this years tournament exciting and that his own incredible performance on that day was merely "acceptable". He was so arrogant and set himself on a pedastal high above everyone else.

Today he told the referee that he (the ref) needed glasses, live on BBC during a match. The ref had correctly called a "touching ball" which O'Sullivan was not happy with.

He has a great gift but his attitude towards others is so awful, patronising and insulting. That ref today should have cautioned him. Snooker authorities are so terrified of upsetting him in 90's Schumacker-esqe kinda way.

I personally wouldn't miss the fcuker from the game.

Right let the onslaught begin ....

Squiggle

Totally agree with you. He's absolute scum of the highest order and I'm delighted Selby beat him. O' Sullivan's talent, which is in considerable abundance, is far outweighed by his obnoxious behaviour and, other than ability, he is everything you don't want in a sportsman . His press interview after the China Open in March 08 showed him up to be the proper knacker that he is. I honestly can't think of a worse ambassador in any sport. Good riddance to the príck if he walks away from the game as he has threatened in the past.

syngindub

He was getting down to play some shots against Selby and looked like he'd basically given up the ghost. Admire the guy when he's on form and brilliant to watch but the other side of him is unbearable to watch. Doesn't seem to have any fight in him when things aren't going his way.

Pighead

syngindub wrote: »

He was getting down to play some shots against Selby and looked like he'd basically given up the ghost. Admire the guy when he's on form and brilliant to watch but the other side of him is unbearable to watch. Doesn't seem to have any fight in him when things aren't going his way.

Nah, I wouldn't agree with that. Thought he tried his best last night on every shot. Just one of those nights when he was missing a few. His safety last night was impeccable. Turning point of the match was obviously Selby winning the final two frames of the second session. If it had of gone 10-6 there Ronnie would have been home and dry I'd say. Plain fact of the matter is that Selby is a really really good player. Ronnie lost to a really good player, these things happen.

As for the poster who called him "scum" ? What an absolutely ridiculous comment.
Moany? Yes. Annoying? Yes Childish? Yes. Brattish? Yes. Scum: Stop being stupid.

petes

Personally I think he adds to the game. Wouldn't call him scum now to be fair.

Pighead

Personally I'm willing to put up with his annoying moaning and general lack of enthusiasm for the game as when he's on song he's an absolute joy to watch. Nobody like him. Even his tetchiness can make good viewing. That spat with the ref yesterday was fun.

This break is from way back but it's probably second only to his classic five minute 147 in terms of sheer genius at work.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

zack01

Totally agree, calling him scum and a knacker is a bit out of order,yes he can act very immature at times, yes he seems to give up very easily and as I mentioned in a previous thread he doesn't seem to any fight in him when he's trailing in a match.
Some players and I will use Selby as a prime example just dig in and grind out results, they tend to make it happen because they have belief in their game.
Ronnie in a few matches this season tended to give up too easily, one or two come to mind
1. He trailed John Higgins by 6 or 7 frames at one stage in their semi final in the UK only to come back and force a deciding frame but concede while only needing one snooker in the final frame.
2.In the recent China Open he practically rolled the black ball over the hole for his Chinese opponent to win the match.
3.Even last night in the frame that Selby won to go 12-11 ahead he only needed one snooker on the blue.

Of course his best ever was conceding the match halfway through a frame against Hendry a few years back.

Now don't for a minute think I am condoning his behaviour,i am a great fan of snooker not just Ronnie.We all know Ronnie suffers greatly with depression,he has a lot of issues of the table.I played in Ilford Snooker Club from 1988-1992 in Essex and it was a real hotbed of talent, at the time Ken Doherty and Mark King were the best players until Ronnie arrived on the scene.He made an instant impact and always in his corner was his dad.For the next four years until Ronnie turned pro they were inseparable.
We all know of course what happened his dad then but that had a really big effect on Ronnie's mental state and still does.

How he became so succesful at snooker with no one to guide amazes me,the only real father figure he's had in recent years is Ray Reardon.

Before everyone jumps on the I hate Ronnie campaign, just remember what he has given the game, remember all those times his play just left you breathless.
Now think of the game without him, yes it will continue to thrive, just look at the talent in the four semi finalists left in this years worlds.
All genius's are flawed,they have a dark side as such.
But Ronnie gives back to the game too, only this week he completed his search throughout the UK for the next great young snooker talent, he had offered to mentor this young player and practice and coach him, and he's not being paid a penny for this.
Tell me has Hendry ever done that?

Again I will agree that his behaviour sometimes has been dissappointing but it's up to the governing body to deal with that.

Look at Alex Higgins and the carry on he got up to in his career, yet all people say is that he made the game!
Snooker is bigger than any one individual, but we do need the Ronnies, let's just hope he can return next year a stronger person and give us some more of the magic.

This is only my opinion.

Pighead

zack01 wrote: »

Ronnie in a few matches this season tended to give up too easily, one or two come to mind
1. He trailed John Higgins by 6 or 7 frames at one stage in their semi final in the UK only to come back and force a deciding frame but concede while only needing one snooker in the final frame.
2.In the recent China Open he practically rolled the black ball over the hole for his Chinese opponent to win the match.
3.Even last night in the frame that Selby won to go 12-11 ahead he only needed one snooker on the blue.

Agree with most of your post but I actually think people exaggerate his non fighting attributes. In the big tournaments he generally gives it 100% in each and every frame. Just because there are no fist pumps or outward shows of disappointment doesn't mean he's not trying.

In the Higgins match people give out about him quitting in the final frame when only needing one snooker yet neglect to mention the fact he fought like a tiger to take the match to a deciding frame. If he's such a quitter surely he would have thrown the towel in at 9-2 down or whatever it was?

In last nights match he actually needed two snookers with three balls remaining. I think most of the players on tour would have conceded at that stage. Only Ebbo, Davis and maybe Murphy would have kept going.

dr.bollocko

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcdvGzHB8Dk

He can act the tool alright. But always exciting to watch. Certainly a more interesting player than Selby IMO.

dnme

zack01 wrote: »

We all know Ronnie suffers greatly with depression,he has a lot of issues of the table.I played in Ilford Snooker Club from 1988-1992 in Essex and it was a real hotbed of talent, at the time Ken Doherty and Mark King were the best players until Ronnie arrived on the scene.He made an instant impact and always in his corner was his dad.For the next four years until Ronnie turned pro they were inseparable.
We all know of course what happened his dad then but that had a really big effect on Ronnie's mental state and still does.

zack01, thanks for the reply. However, I think suffering from depression or the situation with his father is no excuse for treating people like crap. He constantly bites the hand that feeds.
I suffer from depression, I deal with it in various ways but I always maintain respect for others.

chapelizod

It wasn't players like Cliff Thorburn and Terry Griffiths who made snooker a mainstream TV sport—it was the likes of Alex Higgins and Jimmy White.

I disagree strongly with that. Thorburn and Griffiths played a huge part in snooker's rise in popularity. Why? Because of the contrast in styles and personalities on show when these two were pitted against the likes of Higgins and White. It was this contrast that fascinated the public. A sport filled with Alex Higgenses would not have generated the same interest. Higgins had a deep rivalry with both Griffiths and Higgins back in the day. Higgins met Griffiths in a couple of Masters Finals. And Thorburn beat Higgins in the 1980 world final. Those 2 openly disliked each other.

The same goes for the rivalries that arose between Davis and Higgins and Davis and White. Davis and Higgins were opposite sides of the same coin, Davis who played like a living textbook and Higgins who played on pure instinct. And as Barry Hearn recently said, each one wanted to be a little bit more like the other. Higgins resented Davis's clean cut and corporate rise to success, while Davis probably craved some of Higgins's popularity. Again, it was this contrast, and not Higgins alone, that caught the attention of the general public.

ReacherCreature

OP, I agree somewhat but not totally. O' Sullivan is a ticking timebomb, you just don't know when he'll explode.

The man has immense ability -- I think that if he was a guy like Hendry, Higgins etc. he'd have won every trophy known to the snooker world twice over. He's just a perfectionist: he probably demands a huge amount out of himself and wouldn't be happy with certain frames (even to you or me a century break with brilliant play would be sub par to him).

I agree with the poster above, the game needs its personalities like Alex Higgins, White, and O' Sullivan to upset the balance of the game. A championship full of Hendry's and Davis's would make for a somewhat 'boring' media report. Although to the fans, we could do without them.

That's the thing with O' Sullivan, I'm a fan of his playing ability, he's phemononal and pulls off shots I wouldn't expect. When he's on top form he's damn exciting to watch. When he flips he brings a bad name to the sport and has everyone think they're all the same. It's a shame really.

Mental Mickey

Isn't he a manic depressive??

FlawedGenius

Only because he is the greatest natural talent to ever play, Ronnie would be hated. His mad side is what people love aswell.
Hes a spoiled child that practically wasted his career like Alex Higgins did.

Omega28

If u take Ronnie outta snooker you havent got much left. Ratings would go lower and lower, you wouldnt get any sponsors, the game would be alot worse.

Fair enough we all know the way he acts, hes a twat at times but thats Ronnie. He spices things up, I think its great for the game.

I think Scum is way over the top, he's done alot for this sport and will continue to do alot more.

Go down to your local snooker hall and ask any young inspiring player who is there favourite player? Who they love to watch? Who they want to be? I bet they won't Dott, Murphy or Ebdon, It'll be Ronnie. These young players are the future for our sport and they all want to be one man, Snooker needs him, end of.

zack01

Snooker will survive without Ronnie,he's not the the main man anymore.
Just look at the crowds at the snooker this week. Steve Davis would be more popular than Ronnie.
On this seasons form he's not the best player quite a bit.
Yes agreed snooker needs characters and Ronnie is quite a character, he's given fans great entertainment over the years and I hope he continues to do so but there are other players well capable of doing that.

Selby has to one of the best players in the world now and has the upper hand over Ronnie in recent matches.
You said take Ronnie out of snooker and the ratings will drop, I wouldn't think so, do you really think less people are going to watch the snooker over the next five days now that Ronnie is out?

Pighead

zack01 wrote: »

Snooker will survive without Ronnie,he's not the the main man anymore.
Just look at the crowds at the snooker this week. Steve Davis would be more popular than Ronnie.
On this seasons form he's not the best player quite a bit.
Yes agreed snooker needs characters and Ronnie is quite a character, he's given fans great entertainment over the years and I hope he continues to do so but there are other players well capable of doing that.

Selby has to one of the best players in the world now and has the upper hand over Ronnie in recent matches.
You said take Ronnie out of snooker and the ratings will drop, I wouldn't think so, do you really think less people are going to watch the snooker over the next five days now that Ronnie is out?

Would disagree with nearly all of that! Of course the ratings are gonna drop from here on in now that Ronnie is gone. It's a no brainer. Everybody knows Ronnie O'Sullivan. Non-snooker fans tune in to see what he's gonna do next. He's unpredictable and very good to watch in a sport which doesn't attract too many floating voters. Can you honestly see many people staying in to watch Robertson V Carter today?

And as for your point that there's other players who are quite capable of being characters, who are they? Selby is the worst jester in the history of jesters. There hasn't been a more inappropriate nickname since Eddie "The Eagle" Edwards. Robertson tries to be a bit of a jack the lad character but it comes across as forced. You say that Davis was the most popular player this week and that is probably true. But what does that say about the sport? He's 52 and is on his last legs. There are no characters coming through and you can be guaranteed ratings will drastically drop when O'Sullivan finally decides enough is enough.

dnme

zack01 wrote: »

I'll ask you a question? I'm heading over to the semi's and final tomorrow if I got you a ticket for the final and Dott and Carter were in it would you watch it?

Of course, and I would hope for a neck and neck match that went all the way, as I do with all matches. What makes snooker exciting for me is those type of matches regardless of who is playing. I love when they get into long drawn out frames of safety and the odd mistake. Seeing constant 100+ breaks and one sided matches is boring to me.

Myrddin

Pighead wrote: »

Would disagree with nearly all of that! Of course the ratings are gonna drop from here on in now that Ronnie is gone. It's a no brainer. Everybody knows Ronnie O'Sullivan. Non-snooker fans tune in to see what he's gonna do next. He's unpredictable and very good to watch in a sport which doesn't attract too many floating voters. Can you honestly see many people staying in to watch Robertson V Carter today?

And as for your point that there's other players who are quite capable of being characters, who are they? Selby is the worst jester in the history of jesters. There hasn't been a more inappropriate nickname since Eddie "The Eagle" Edwards. Robertson tries to be a bit of a jack the lad character but it comes across as forced. You say that Davis was the most popular player this week and that is probably true. But what does that say about the sport? He's 52 and is on his last legs. There are no characters coming through and you can be guaranteed ratings will drastically drop when O'Sullivan finally decides enough is enough.

So what are you saying? Snooker has no future once Ronnie decides to quit? Honestly some of the replies & blind faith in OSullivan here are quite amazing. Theres NO other sport in the world, where the leading "ambassador" for the sport would get away with what he does. Imagine Lewis Hamilton just pulled into the pits and quit a race half way through because he couldnt catch a rival, imagine Manchester United foregoing any extra time because they reckoned they couldn't beat their opposition, imagine David Haye leering at a female interviewer after a fight and muttering profanities under his breath and laughing...I mean the man is pathetic sometimes.

Its clear in his eyes he gets ZERO enjoyment from the game anymore. Only this year he stated that he hasnt played "good" snooker in over 18 years. It may be just me, but I find it incredibly difficult to get enjoyment watching him as time goes by, given the fact that its such a chore to him to play. Yes he can be exciting, unpredictable, fiery etc, and every sport needs people like that. But what a sport needs more, is for the people who play it professionaly to actually want to play it, and moreso fully enjoy it. Yes White, Higgins (Alex), etc were in a similar vein to Ronnie, but you can see those guys enjoyed the sport, and thats what made the difference. Its the equivalent of Michael Schumacher turning around today and saying "Yeah, I havnt drove well for the last 15 years".

I used to love watching Ronnie, and he was my favourite snooker player up until the Masters this year. But after all his matches while being interviewed, it became clear to me that he has fallen out of love with the sport, and is a REALLY bad loser.

No other characters in the game, Ive seen some stupid comments on boards over the years but that ranks among the best of them. Pighead, you claim Selby is "the worst Jester...", have you actually met him & seen what goes on behind the scenes? And to slate a players character because of his nickname, well that says a lot to me. Robertson tries to be a jack the lad? Again, where are you going with this? Robertson & Selby are the two next biggest stars in the game. They always convey plenty of emotion, derive great satisfaction from the game & demonstrate top level skill (notice anything here that Ronnie doesnt do anymore?).

Mark Allen is another up & coming lad from Northern Ireland, he's a superb aggressive player & demonstrates all the qualities of the two lads above. Ding is another developing character, its great to see the change in him from the last 2/3 years when he was the shy/silent lad who has gradually endeared himself to the crowd. Its early days for Judd Trump, but I could imagine in a few years he will match Ronnies match play skill and probably take his crown.

Snooker is going to be going through a re-birth over the next year or two, which is fantastic news. Regarding Ronnie, if he lightened up a bit & realised that all great champions have to accept that their game softens as the years go by, then Im sure he would find some satisfation. Despite what Ronnie feels, he HASN'T got the monopoly on diminishing skill. How does Stephen Hendry feel after being 7 times world champion that he's lucky to see the second round these days? Same goes for every great champion in every sport. Relax Ronnie, you have nothing to prove, take some enjoyment from knowing you will go down in history, but realise that its no shame to lose. Stop setting the bar so high that your fighting yourself as well as your opponent, thats why your not being as successful today.

zack01

Great post Enter Now
well said

dnme

I have to say folks, I'm enjoying this thread and taking on board most peoples opinions. I do reckon though that snooker would be alive and well without any one individual. Snooker is so much bigger than the sum of its parts.

All I'm saying is that I don't like ignorance and arrogance especially when it comes from those most privilaged. I don't like to see the authorities pussy-footing around any individual for fear of ratings loss, that = bull****.

irishthump

zack01 wrote: »

Snooker will survive without Ronnie,he's not the the main man anymore.
Just look at the crowds at the snooker this week. Steve Davis would be more popular than Ronnie.
On this seasons form he's not the best player quite a bit.
Yes agreed snooker needs characters and Ronnie is quite a character, he's given fans great entertainment over the years and I hope he continues to do so but there are other players well capable of doing that.

Selby has to one of the best players in the world now and has the upper hand over Ronnie in recent matches.
You said take Ronnie out of snooker and the ratings will drop, I wouldn't think so, do you really think less people are going to watch the snooker over the next five days now that Ronnie is out?

It's amazing is'nt it? For once, O'Sullivan is'nt the focus of attention at this years World Champiomship so he just has to go and draw attention to himself by throwng all his toys out of the pram.

And to be honest, I'm sick and tired of hearing about the guys "issues". I know depression is a serious topic but the trouble is O'Sullivan has been pandered to too much over the years. If in the beginning he had been given a proper slap on the wrist for his behavior, then we would be a defferent story.

Genius? Maybe.
Greatest player ever? Probably not.
Pri*k? Without a shadow of a doubt, yes!

Pighead

EnterNow wrote: »

So what are you saying? Snooker has no future once Ronnie decides to quit?

I'm saying once Ronnie calls it a day there is nobody in line to take up the mantle of crowd puller. You can deny it if you want but 90% of the column inches in newspapers are thee because of something Ronnie did or said. If Ronnie doesn't play, snooker gets very very limited media coverage.

EnterNow wrote: »

Its clear in his eyes he gets ZERO enjoyment from the game anymore. Only this year he stated that he hasnt played "good" snooker in over 18 years. It may be just me, but I find it incredibly difficult to get enjoyment watching him as time goes by, given the fact that its such a chore to him to play. Yes he can be exciting, unpredictable, fiery etc, and every sport needs people like that. But what a sport needs more, is for the people who play it professionaly to actually want to play it, and moreso fully enjoy it. Yes White, Higgins (Alex), etc were in a similar vein to Ronnie, but you can see those guys enjoyed the sport, and thats what made the difference. Its the equivalent of Michael Schumacher turning around today and saying "Yeah, I havent drove well for the last 15 years".

I used to love watching Ronnie, and he was my favourite snooker player up until the Masters this year. But after all his matches while being interviewed, it became clear to me that he has fallen out of love with the sport, and is a REALLY bad loser.

Who gives a fiddlers whether he's enjoying himself or not. Are you saying you're gonna enjoy a 5 minute 100+ Ronnie break less because deep down you know he's not in love with the game? Bulldust. Do yourself a favour and ignore all the sideshow rubbish that goes along with Ronnie and just enjoy him doing what he does best ie potting spherical balls into pockets with remarkable speed, skill and style.

EnterNow wrote: »

No other characters in the game, Ive seen some stupid comments on boards over the years but that ranks among the best of them. Pighead, you claim Selby is "the worst Jester...", have you actually met him & seen what goes on behind the scenes? And to slate a players character because of his nickname, well that says a lot to me. Robertson tries to be a jack the lad? Again, where are you going with this? Robertson & Selby are the two next biggest stars in the game. They always convey plenty of emotion, derive great satisfaction from the game & demonstrate top level skill (notice anything here that Ronnie doesnt do anymore?).

Mark Allen is another up & coming lad from Northern Ireland, he's a superb aggressive player & demonstrates all the qualities of the two lads above. Ding is another developing character, its great to see the change in him from the last 2/3 years when he was the shy/silent lad who has gradually endeared himself to the crowd. Its early days for Judd Trump, but I could imagine in a few years he will match Ronnies match play skill and probably take his crown.

Thats exactly my point! Robertson and Selby are two of the biggest stars of the game yet they have as much charisma as a wet lettuce. Don't get me wrong I love watching Selby, Robertson, Allen, Williams, Ding etc play and to be honest I'm so sad I'd probably sit down and watch a best of 17 between Dominic Dale and Nigel Bond but it's not the likes of me that snooker needs to be aiming at to secure a positive future.

It needs kids to watch and be captivated by a star player who will take their breath away and make them want to pick up a cue and play the game. Jimmy, Alex and Ronnie have been that player at various stages of the past 30 years. There is nobody coming through that has that X-Factor that can attract interest from not just within the snooker community

ReacherCreature

If u take Ronnie outta snooker you havent got much left. Ratings would go lower and lower, you wouldnt get any sponsors, the game would be alot worse.

I'm not entirely sure the game wouldn't survive without O' Sullivan. Entertainment and media wise he's a draw to the game but people do support other players and will continue to support him. Television still will show it and the sport will grow. One man won't bring about the downfall. If he left he'll be missed obviously but it can go on.

Fair enough we all know the way he acts, hes a twat at times but thats Ronnie. He spices things up, I think its great for the game.

How? I'd rather see news about a promising young player or that a certain legend retires etc. than hear about his ridiculous on/off-screen activities, it's a joke sometimes. I don't get how it's great for the game, like what if one of these upcoming players idolise him, do they look at him to the point of doing the same things he done 'cos Ronnie did!'?

I think Scum is way over the top, he's done alot for this sport and will continue to do alot more.

I agree with this.

Omega28

I have to totally agree with PIGHEAD.

I love watching Selby and the likes but if Ronnie leaves Snooker I wouldn't like to see what would happen to the game.

I'v been watching and playing snooker since I was a child and I love the game so much, I'll always watch it no matter what. But lets all be honest the game won't draw the ratings the way Ronnie does, It could be a Carter vs Dott final this yr, imagine that as a final! That couldn't be a worse final for the sport!

The game would obviously survive without Ronnie but it would'nt be the same in my opinion. My friends only tune in to watch Ronnie, they certainly wouldn't tune in to watch Dott, ebdon etc It would lose alot of interest and the game would survive but it would be struggle to fill arenas.

Every Ronnie watch is totally sold out weather or not its a 1st round or fianl. You could flick into a 1st round match between dott, ebdon, ding etc and u might have a handful of ppl, says it all, who else is going to fill them seats that keep the game alive? I can see but a handful and when they quiet then what? Were lucky to have Ronnie, and the game was lucky to have Higgins, white and Hendry.

In 30 yrs time who will be thinking of when we think of snooker?! Well I can honestly say now it wont be Selby, Ding, Dott, Ebdon etc it'll be players like Ronnie, White, Higgins, that made the game what it is, if they didn't exist the game wouldn't be half as popular, they fill seats, and its all about filling seats and entertaining and they go beyond that. Ronnie may be a nut and do some mad and stupid things but snooker needs him

zack01

Dylanmc111, you hav'nt a clue what your talking about, in fact in all your snooker posts past and present have been complete nonsense.
Surprises me really, for a man who once claimed to know all there is to know about the game!

Omega28

Zack u really need to smell the roses and realise snooker needs Ronnie, I actually cant even have a conversation with u cause u talk total rubbish so good luck.

zack01

Your dead right, what a boring w'end is in store for the sell out crowds at the cruicble, don't even know why I'm going over, the standard will be crap!

Squiggle

We're not going to get consensus here about O Sullivan ! Don't get to hung up on my use of the the word "scum " earlier. Scum/ scumbag/tosser/príck etc to me would be a general description of an undesirable individual , so basically they are dysphemisms for contemptible people. Alex Higgins is another who falls in to that category, as indeed would anybody who head butts an official or threatens to have an opponent shot. Give me Jimmy White in his prime any day over these pair of tossers . Today's game needs people like him - a brilliant natural player and a gracious gentleman on top of that. I will never have time for O'Sullivan because, for me anyway, the fact that he is such a tool will always outweigh his brilliance on the table - I wouldn't cross the road to see the guy play tbh.

walshb

Apart from being a great player, the chap has no discernible qualities. He is so uninteresting, boring and unlikable. Pathetic.

Myrddin

Dylanmc111 wrote: »

Zack u really need to smell the roses and realise snooker needs Ronnie, I actually cant even have a conversation with u cause u talk total rubbish so good luck.

Snooker needs Ronnie? Strange, considering the modern game is what, 40/50 years old? How on earth did it get by without him I wonder. Even stranger to think that the Davis/Taylor final pulled in 16 MILLION viewers, DESPITE not having Ronnie there.

zack01 wrote: »

Your dead right, what a boring w'end is in store for the sell out crowds at the cruicble, don't even know why I'm going over, the standard will be crap!

Zack, you would be much better off staying home & watching Eastenders mate, far more interesting

Squiggle wrote: »

We're not going to get consensus here about O Sullivan ! Don't get to hung up on my use of the the word "scum " earlier. Scum/ scumbag/tosser/príck etc to me would be a general description of an undesirable individual , so basically they are dysphemisms for contemptible people. Alex Higgins is another who falls in to that category, as indeed would anybody who head butts an official or threatens to have an opponent shot. Give me Jimmy White in his prime any day over these pair of tossers . Today's game needs people like him - a brilliant natural player and a gracious gentleman on top of that. I will never have time for O'Sullivan because, for me anyway, the fact that he is such a tool will always outweigh his brilliance on the table - I wouldn't cross the road to see the guy play tbh.

Couldnt agree more. Jimmy White managed to captivate the snooker world for years & all the while being a 100% professional and very likeable chap into the bargain.

walshb wrote: »

Apart from being a great player, the chap has no discernible qualities. He is so uninteresting, boring and unlikable. Pathetic.

Its amazing what fans choose not to see isnt it?

Pighead - I do appreciate what your saying & I do agree snooker needs more characters/fun/fire/versatility, I just dont feel Ronnie deserves the praise which is gifted to him. I still believe he is the most gifted player on the circuit, and while Selby continues to beat him, its clear OSullivan is the more gifted player when he gets going. Hes fast, fluent & fearless sometimes (much like Robertson) - but its coming much more infrequently for him.

I stand by what I said about not being able to enjoy watching him if hes not enjoying it himself, maybe thats just the way I am but if he would prefer to stack shelves in a warehouse then maybe he chose the wrong career. Didnt Ronnie recently state he bearly puts in any practice time these days? I mean theres a thing to say to fans through the media. He wont practice, but continually whines about his game in EVERY interview he gives.

Ronnie hates the spotlight, but cant seem to live without it Its a shame, he can be a properly stunning player when he's feeling positive.

Horse_box

Lads saying that the ratings will drop if Ronnie leaves is a bit presumptuous. I think at this stage that if Ronnie were to leave, other young players like Robertson, Selby, Allen, Maguire and a few more would start to come in to their own and really become characters in the game.

O'Sullivan is always the centre of attention at the main events. If the media didn't have him to focus on all of the time they would soon find some other charismatic players who would flourish in the spotlight

chapelizod

Ronnie burst onto the scene in 1993 and in my opinion has played a key role in keeping the game popular. He'e been around for nearly 2 decades. Before him, there was White, and before White, Higgins. Before Higgins, there was very little, snooker was a back room game which had not captured the general public's attention. If Ronnie drops out and someone in the same vein does not come along to replace him, snooker's popularirty will dip, there is no doubt about it.

Selby is the worst jester in the history of jesters. There hasn't been a more inappropriate nickname since Eddie "The Eagle" Edwards.

Couldn't agree more! Although he's a great snooker player (albeit an extremely boring one to watch), the guy lacks charisma.

irishthump

Folks,

Let's get one thing straight here... No one player, whether it be Higgins, O'Sullivan, or whoever is responsible for the modern day popularity of snooker.
Yes, snooker WAS a backroom sport throught the 50's and 60's. But it was the emergence of colour television that brought about the modern resurgance in the game.
Sure, colourful charcters can help, but the game stands up on it's own merits as an excellent spectator sport which could have been created for TV.
And while we're at it, it's amazing how the highest ratings ever for snooker (the '85 final) was for a match between 2 guys who were by no means colourful characters in the game. Taylor, was a popular figure because of his exhibition repertoire but Davis has been described as having little, if any, personality at all!

One more thing, to mention Jimmy White in the sme breath as Higgins and O'Sullivan annoys me a little. Jimmy White was always an absolute gentleman on, and off, the table. He never moaned about losing once, even when he had more right than anyone!

Pighead

EnterNow wrote: »

Snooker needs Ronnie? Strange, considering the modern game is what, 40/50 years old? How on earth did it get by without him I wonder. Even stranger to think that the Davis/Taylor final pulled in 16 MILLION viewers, DESPITE not having Ronnie there.

irishthump wrote: »

Folks,
And while we're at it, it's amazing how the highest ratings ever for snooker (the '85 final) was for a match between 2 guys who were by no means colourful characters in the game. Taylor, was a popular figure because of his exhibition repertoire but Davis has been described as having little, if any, personality at all!

Ah c'mon lads. 1985 was the absolute zenith of snookers popularity. Higgins and White ensured the sport was enjoying record audiences. And don't forget that the final attracted pretty average viewing figures which steadily declined throughout the opening session as Davis robotically surged into an 8-0 lead.

It was the fact that Taylor amazingly got it back to 9-7 that got people talking and got them switching back on. Throughout the Sunday excitement spread and word of mouth ensured more and more viewers were tuning in. They were tuning in to see if the fat smiley Irishman could dethrone the unbeatable gingerman.

Don't for one second think that 18 million tuned in because of Davis or Taylors personalities. It was the David and Goliath story and Taylors amazing comeback that drew them in. You need a story or some high drama to draw the viewers in. Unfortunately there's nobody about bar Ronnie that can provide that in the current game.

dnme

My god what have I started ? :rolleyes:

KrazeeEyezKilla

It's not just the personalities, Snooker needs interesting stories behind it as well. Davis two wins this year were great stories even if the matches themselves were pretty slow. The Hendry-White finals in the early 90's was a rivalry that Snooker could do with today. Selby and O'Sullivan is the closest I can think of today. The fact that Ronnie clearly doesn't like him adds something to their matches.

walshb

I really really am struggling to find a connection between Ronnie and charisma. Seriously, what leads anyone to think that this sulk, drip and bore has charisma? Jeez, Muhammad Ali has charisma, Usain Bolt has Charisma, but ****ing Ronnie O'Sullivan

BTW, apart from being so unlikable, he is both a sore loser AND a sore winner

He ticks all the boxes, and not many are positive.

Paul Hunter, Taylor, White were some who had that bit of charisma.

Myrddin

Pighead wrote: »

Don't for one second think that 18 million tuned in because of Davis or Taylors personalities

Oh we didnt. The point being made was that 16 million people watched the final DESPITE it not having anyone remotely interesting in it. What made it interesting was the game itself, not the players in this case.

That being said, if its a Carter/Dott final, I probably wont be watching it. Carter/Dott/Ebdon/Maguire (Shaun) are all players the game can do without. Nobody wants to see slow, dull boring frames all the time. People want theatrics, and with OSullivan there is a chance they will get that. Although when was Ronnies last great triumph? His 147 in '08?

If Ronnie smiled and had some enthusiasm for the game & more importantly the people who support him, Id have all the time in the world for him. Until that day, Ill continue to think of him as a pathetic, whining idiot who doesnt know how lucky he is.

aDeener

EnterNow wrote: »

Oh we didnt. The point being made was that 16 million people watched the final DESPITE it not having anyone remotely interesting in it. What made it interesting was the game itself, not the players in this case.

That being said, if its a Carter/Dott final, I probably wont be watching it. Carter/Dott/Ebdon/Maguire (Shaun) are all players the game can do without. Nobody wants to see slow, dull boring frames all the time. People want theatrics, and with OSullivan there is a chance they will get that. Although when was Ronnies last great triumph? His 147 in '08?

If Ronnie smiled and had some enthusiasm for the game & more importantly the people who support him, Id have all the time in the world for him. Until that day, Ill continue to think of him as a pathetic, whining idiot who doesnt know how lucky he is.

please tell me that is supposed to be shaun murphy and not steven maguire you are referring to as i particularly like the latter and despise the former

Myrddin

aDeener wrote: »

please tell me that is supposed to be shaun murphy and not steven maguire you are referring to as i particularly like the latter and despise the former

Sorry ha, yeah Shaun Murphy. I like Steven Maguire too. Murphy is an arrogant self important pratt. There I said it

zack01

Guys,when I said I did'nt know why I was bothering going over to the snooker this w'end because the standard would be crap, I was being sarcastic to that fool Dylanmc111 and all the other so called snooker fans who think Ronnie is the so called superstar and saviour of the game.

I got here yesterday afternoon to the cruicble,and right from the first frame of snooker I saw to the buzz in the pressroom I hav'nt heard one mention of Ronnie.
You see guys there is a tournament on here at the moment and just because 'the games most exciting player' gets knocked out it does'nt mean that everbody stops watching it.Maybe just the fools that can't see beyond Ronnie knock off the tv and don't bother watching any more but there are four players here this w'end who deserve to be here, not on their name but by the great snooker, will and determanation that they have showed in the last two weeks.

Just because they don't split reds open at the first attempt and make 5 min maximums doesn't mean that they don't deserve the acknowledgement.

When this tournament ends Monday night,real snooker fans will not be looking back and grieving for Ronnie' quarter final loss, no they will be congradulating a possible new first time world champion or indeed congradulting a player (Dott) who has overcome desparate personal problems to come back against all the odds and win a second world title.
Just because snooker players fo not smile or crack jokes at the table doesn't mean that they are not good people, yes there were plenty of characters in the game years ago but circumstances change, the players now are playing for their livlehood,are playing to survive and earn valuable ranking points so that they can keep their pro ticket.

You only have to look at the standard of snooker and how much it has improved with faster cloths, tighter pockets, stronger competition to realise how tough it is.

For those of you that are under the illusion and believe me it is an illusion that snooker cannott survive without Ronnie you are fooling yourselves.
Snooker will continue to enjoy it's revival with or without Ronnie, the new improved calendar will be a great success and under the leadership of Barry Hearn players will be rewarded for their efforts, and Ronnie will be a part of it because he needs snooker more than it needs him. I 've always sung his praises as a player and have ofter been left speechless by his play lets just see if he has it in him as a man to sort his temprement out and come back and fight for success next season, you can be sure that Higgins Murphy Williams etc will be!

No matter who wins this weekend the real winner will be snooker, again the viewing figures have been remarkable the crowds have been amazing and as covered by Celtic Fc in another post the snooker will stay at the cruicble for a few years yet.
Is that thanks to Ronnie?

I don't think so!!

Myrddin

Well said Zack. Id love to experience a big crucible game, maybe next year! Its not looking good for the Jester, if he's knocked out then all my hopes lie with the Thunder

zack01

Strange mornings play, Selby had a great chance to get to 13-11 in what would have been a great clearance.
Selby got it all to do tonight but he's well capable of winning four frames on the bounce and bringing it level again.

Having a bite and then back in for Robertson and Carter, really can't see Roberston being caught, he's a good match player and won't be making too many mistakes. Mind you I was talking to Ken earlier on and he reminded me he was in the same position against Paul Hunter in 2003 only to come back and win 17-16.
No pressure on Carter so nothing to lose really.

The tournament organisers have a few of the old boys Thorburn,Virgo etc on standby to entertain the crowd should the match finish after two or three frames.

Myrddin

zack01 wrote: »

The tournament organisers have a few of the old boys Thorburn,Virgo etc on standby to entertain the crowd should the match finish after two or three frames.

I was actually wondering what would happen in this case. Be great to see Virgo back on the table, been a while since Big Break used to air

Myrddin

Great to see some emotion from Robertson there in his post match interview. Hazel was hinting that he has had a difficult journey over the years being in the UK on his own etc. He said basically his folks cleaned themselves out, then he cleaned himself out down to his last 500 pounds and was about to head home - and his eyes welled up. Brilliant, gave him a real human touch.

I hope he wins it. Comparing that to "I dont get the credit I deserve" Dott, come on Neil!!!

zack01

He was brilliant, he would be a worthy and deserving world champion.

FlawedGenius

I dont like Dott(little hun pr1ck) but I think hel win it, has the experience. Robertson hasnt had any real tight matches so he could get a fright if he goes behind.

Myrddin

FlawedGenius wrote: »

I dont like Dott(little hun pr1ck) but I think hel win it, has the experience. Robertson hasnt had any real tight matches so he could get a fright if he goes behind.

I think you could describe his match against Gould as "tight", he was faced with a mammoth comeback. The other point of view is that having aside form gould, a relativlyeasy path so far, he might be fresher going in. He looked very shaky though in the final frames against Carter, I hope he can knuckle down and do the business one more time. I really dislike Dott (he has small man syndrome).

Pighead

zack01 wrote: »

I got here yesterday afternoon to the cruicble,and right from the first frame of snooker I saw to the buzz in the pressroom I hav'nt heard one mention of Ronnie.
You see guys there is a tournament on here at the moment and just because 'the games most exciting player' gets knocked out it does'nt mean that everbody stops watching it.Maybe just the fools that can't see beyond Ronnie knock off the tv and don't bother watching any more but there are four players here this w'end who deserve to be here, not on their name but by the great snooker, will and determanation that they have showed in the last two weeks.

zack01 you seem to be missing the point here. the fools that can't see beyond Ronnie knock off the tv and don't bother watching any more as you put it make up the majority of the audiences. Whether you like it or not the game is actually relying on these "fools" to come out and attend the tournaments.

zack01 wrote: »

Just because they don't split reds open at the first attempt and make 5 min maximums doesn't mean that they don't deserve the acknowledgement.
When this tournament ends Monday night,real snooker fans will not be looking back and grieving for Ronnie' quarter final loss, no they will be congradulating a possible new first time world champion or indeed congradulting a player (Dott) who has overcome desparate personal problems to come back against all the odds and win a second world title.

zack you seem to be of the opinion that as long as the "real fans" stay on board it will be enough to ensure that snooker will thrive in the months and years to come. It won't.

Like it or not, snooker needs the loud mouthed yobbo Ronnie fans, many of whom probably don't even know the basic rules of the game. Do you think Old Trafford is packed every second week with 75,000 real fans? Course it isn't. About 70% of them are spanners who couldn't name the starting 11 for Utd and who aren't really bothered what the result is. But they pay their money and ensure the stadium is packed to the rafters every fortnight which in turn ensures that Utd are a succesful brand.

zack01 wrote: »

No matter who wins this weekend the real winner will be snooker, again the viewing figures have been remarkable the crowds have been amazing and as covered by Celtic Fc in another post the snooker will stay at the cruicble for a few years yet.
Is that thanks to Ronnie?

I don't think so!!

This is the World Championships, the absolute pinnacle of the snooker calender. I'd be very worried if attendances weren't pretty good to be honest. But do you not understand that this tournament is only 3 weeks out of the whole season. What about the other five ranking tournaments? How are they gonna pull in the punters if Ronnie decided to call it a day?

You obviously have a great interest of the sport zack so I'm sure you'll remember how poor attendances were for the Grand Prix in Scotland last October once Ronnie was knocked out? Ronnies opening round match attracted 2000 people.

On the other side of the curtain Mark Allen played Jamie Cope and there was about 15 people in atatndance. Ronnie got knocked out in the first round. Attendances over the weekend in matches featuring Neil Robertson, Ali Carter and Ding Junhui attracted barely a couple of hundred.

Simple fact of the matter is that Ronnie puts bums on seats. I really don't undertsand how you can deny that. Maybe you're happier that the numbskull fans won't be around post Ronnie but you can bet your bottom dollar that Barry Hearn won't be sharing your views.