Various snooker news – 22 May 2019

Worldsnooker has published an updated version of the 2019/20 provisional calendar

They also have published this article about Ronnie, by Phil Yates, including Stephen Hendry’s views.

First came the question, then came the look, withering in the extreme. Jimmy White had been asked whether he would gladly trade his popularity for a world title. “Are you sure, mate?” said the Whirlwind. “Of course I would.”

By Phil Yates

Over the years the snooker gods have bestowed the golden gift of adulation on a select few but it always came at a price. Popularity and sustained success were never compatible. You could have one but not the other.

Until now, that is. The Rocket has broken the mould. As Stephen Hendry, deeply admired and genuinely respected but never loved by a legion of fans, put it: “Ronnie O’Sullivan is the only player in history to be dominant and popular at the same time.”

While Hendry – and Steve Davis before him – ruled the roost for a decade, O’Sullivan has been on top of the game’s popularity charts and regularly lifting trophies for a quarter of a century and counting. Throughout, there has been one constant; his unique ability to melt away the innate instinct of British sports enthusiasts to root for the underdog.

When O’Sullivan is the man in the arena he is guaranteed to receive the overwhelming bulk of support, regardless of opponent. For that session, forget cheering on the nearly man. Ronnie must take precedence.

Hendry often encountered hostile receptions, especially at Wembley Conference Centre where he nevertheless triumphed in six Masters, including five in a row. “The crowd could be tough to deal with at times but I learned to use them and the way they behaved towards me as strong motivation,” said the seven-time world champion.

“Maybe Steve and I weren’t interesting enough. All we did was practise and win. What people would read about us didn’t help in creating a character.

“In the early part of his career, Ronnie was seen as a bad boy like Jimmy and Alex Higgins but he’s always been a different class of player to them. It doesn’t seem to matter how many titles he gets his hands on, nobody wants him to stop winning or entertaining.”

Snooker fans in continental Europe, China and North America might find the premise of this piece difficult to fathom. Why, they might wonder, would being the best serve to dilute acclaim? Why indeed, yet Brits have traditionally been drawn to inspiring the plucky underdog, not pushing the game’s leading force to even greater heights. It is their trait to be intimidated by sporting superstardom.

In common with two of his sporting heroes, Tiger Woods and Roger Federer, O’Sullivan’s star has never waned whatever the controversy, although Hendry does contend that can be a negative if things are not going well.

“There’s always a weight of expectation on his shoulders, it does create a pressure of its own,” added the Scot, who was commentating for ITV when O’Sullivan equalled his record of 36 ranking titles at the Tour Championship in March. “When 95% of a crowd want you to win and you suddenly start to miss a few, it can make you feel uncomfortable, as if you are letting folks down.

“But Ronnie will never know what it’s like to have a crowd against him, it doesn’t matter who he’s playing or where it is. It would be interesting to see how he would react if the crowd did ever turn but that’s just hypothetical. It will never happen.”

Of course, Hendry is spot on. O’Sullivan’s army of supporters will never switch allegiance or be silenced. He is a real champion and the People’s Champion – simultaneously.

Personally, I believe that popularity isn’t linked to success – although becoming known of course is. I believe that popularity is mainly linked to how much the “popular person” is someone the audience can relate to emotionally. So the Mr and Mrs Perfect have no chance because we, viewers are not perfect, and we can’t relate to such image. The sportspersons who show little emotion, don’t allow us to embark with them on their sporting journey either. It’s that simple really, and the “Politically Correct” obsession in nowadays sport isn’t helping. I’m not advocating for the sports authorities to tolerate outrageous, violent or disrespectful behaviours. But accepting a modicum of criticism, expressed emotions – even negative – and opinions – even controversia l-  without jumping at the players as soon as someone on social media feels “offended” would be a positive move in my eyes. There are people nowadays on social media who are just looking to be offended by about anything.

Finally the “Goat Debate” vas reignite on twitter by Alan McManus, David Hendon and Hector Nunns

It’s extremely difficult to compare completely different eras, and this is about as right as it can be in my opinion. Neil Robertson’s inclusion, despite him being the only one in there with just one World title, is justified both by his overall record and by taking into consideration how much more difficult it has been for him moving from Australia as a penniless teenager.

Inevitably there were people saying that Judd Trump should be there. For me it’s definitely too early to tell whether he belongs to that bracket or not. Why him and not Shaun Murphy, Ken Doherty or Peter Ebdon? Just because his victory in Sheffield is fresh in the memories?

Inevitably as well there were people coming up with Paul Hunter who would “surely” have been a multiple World Champion by now had he lived. Sorry guys, but nobody knows how many World titles Paul would have won, or even if he’d ever been World Champion at all. His showing at the Masters was impressive, but otherwise his performances in long format competitions wasn’t great: at the Crucible, he only got past round 2 once, losing to Ken Doherty in the semi-finals in 2003 from well ahead, and at the UK championship, in eleven participations he only reached the QF or best three times, his best being a SF in 1998. With such record nobody would suggest he’d be World Champion for sure if he was still alive.

Finally the trio asked people who would go out of the above list if it were to include Jimmy White. For all I love Jimmy, I’m not sure that he deserves the inclusion. Why him and not Ding for instance?


One thought on “Various snooker news – 22 May 2019

  1. Of course it’s a common obsession with sports fans to debate ‘the greatest’, and come up with lists, etc. I’ve tried without success to restrain myself, but ultimately it doesn’t really get anywhere. Actually, I’m not swayed by ‘personality’ as much as others. For me, Ronnie’s attraction is more to do with his range of skills, which is greater than anyone. It’s a marginally better debate to ask about aspects such as cue action, safety, termperament, etc.

    If we compare different eras, then in the future I believe someone will come along who can play all the shots that Ronnie can (perhaps having learned by watching him), but with a better pot success rate, and better winning percentage (10 World titles?). So at best we are saying ‘greatest so far’, which just brings back the time element that we were trying to exclude.

    Davis and Hendry were greater in terms of solo dominance, Ronnie greater in terms of longevity. Can we ‘measure’ those aspects against each other? Probably not. I’m tempted to quote ‘Merchant of Venice’, but it’s considered a terribly politically incorrect play these days…

Comments are closed.