I thought it was a decent programme, although it needed to be longer to properly explore the issues.

Fair play to Lee Doyle for having the guts to front up and put the WPBSA's side in the absence of its chairman. Even he had to admit that the game has been mismanaged over the years.

But Steve Davis's contribution was the most interesting. He was right that the WPBSA's various competiting roles and effective monopoly position in running ranking events is holding the sport back, not individual personalities.

He spoke of the new players' union as being a possible springboard for change and wrestling away some of the power the governing body has.

So what happens next?

One of two things. Remember, it is the players and nobody else who have the voting power.

Firstly, they will listen to Davis, understand that a governing body that has to be a members' club can't also be the game's prime promoter and the WPBSA as we know it now will be broken up.

Or, they will decide that they are happy with how snooker is right now, trust the WPBSA board to deliver any change that is needed and stick with how the sport has historically been run.

All my experience in snooker tells me that they will do the latter.

But sometimes desperate times lead people to defy expectations.

I think the coming months may deliver a few surprises.


Anonymous said...

The Newsnight piece a few months ago was far better imo.

Donal said...

Here's the link to listen to it again:


Dave H said...

I've deleted the posts containing personal abuse. Lee Doyle does not deserve this: argue with what he said by all means but please do not get personal.

Anonymous said...

Why then have you not deleted the other personal abuse that is on there,one can only guess at your motive.

Anonymous said...

i agree with Anon 11.49 ,you seem to instigate personal abuse by the nature of some of you posts.

Anonymous said...

Lee Doyle was disapointing but at the same time his "BOSS" should have been there to answer questions.

and anon 11.49 and 11.54 this blog sais it how it is Regarding the running of the sport and the incompitance of how it is being run it does not persanally abuse individuals.

Lee Doyle is a small cog in the engine and does not deserve to be Abused for having the Guts to even be there last night.

Anonymous said...

Personal abuse of any sort is unexceptionable and there should be no place for it on this or any other blog and to allow it to continue is irresponsable as it detracts from fair comment.Hopefully someone will take notice.

Dave H said...

I try to police the comments on here as fairly as possible, a bit like new House of Commons Speaker John Bercow, albeit without the embarrassing right wing past.

It's nonsense to say I instigated abuse of Lee Doyle bearing in mind I wrote 'Fair play to Lee Doyle for having the guts to front up and put the WPBSA's side'.

Anonymous said...

Does anyone think that Lee Doyle should be on the board when he manages so many top players ? Some of his decisions may be influenced by this and he may be put in a position where he has to put his players interests in front of lower ranked players . It may be impossible for him to have an impartial view at times.

Anonymous said...

In answer to your question of 1.52pm, I think at best there is a head-on conflict of interests. No manager is going to come up with the suggestion of limiting fields, reducing prize money etc when he is taking a cut of 20 % from some of those players. So how can he possibly have the best interests of snooker at heart?

The best interest of his clients and his business perhaps. But not of snooker in general.

As for what he said last night, his claims regarding AIG and Manchester United sounded good; that United were losing £14 million.

What he didn’t say was that United would continue to wear AIG so they wouldn’t have to scrap their new kit already produced by Nike, and therefore still bringing in millions in shirt sales, or, more importantly, that United had signed a world record £80 million four-year shirt sponsorship deal with American insurance giant Aon to kick in for 2010 to replace AIG.

I'll repeat that. A world record £80 million four-year shirt sponsorship Never let the real facts get in the way of a plausible excuse.

Hardly the equivalent of seeking a new sponsor for the Grand Prix after losing Royal London watches.

As for his excuse about schedules, tournament calendars and broadcasters, he might have noted that the US Open was shown over five days by Sky due to rain delays. Like Wimbledon, postponed football and the likes, broadcasters will accommodate sports - if they are considered big enough.

But it wasn't just him who's argument was weak. The BBC Phillip Studd might have noted before he mentioned the 'Paul Hunter effect' that snooker was in decline before Paul Hunter took ill. And, he might also have noted that during the 60's and 70's when there was death and carnage on race tracks, Formula 1 was always quick to herald another star.

If the sad death of Paul Hunter has put snooker where it is today - and the man from the Beeb thinks that - then it's in a sorrier state than we might have believed.

jamie brannon said...

Where were you on this show, I thought you were going to be on?

Anonymous said...

the WSA is one big conflict of intrest as was pointed out by Steve Davis.

it needs segragating and moving on profesionally without the gentlemens club mentality.

Anonymous said...

what a shame bbc is aloud to dictate dates of tournaments. Would it not be better to set the dates of the tournaments and let them observe at the dates and times this professional sport decides to hold its tournaments.

Anonymous said...

well it would help with covarage if major sporting events dont clash..

the BBC has responsabilities to other sports and they 2 have to do the same as snooker regarding staging of tournaments.

Anonymous said...

yes, BBC should really have moved the SPoTY to accomodate the UK final.

But wait a minute, BBC would have known that date way in advance.

Evidence I suspect that world snooker could only get Telford for particular dates.

Which kind of poo-poos Mr Doyle's argument that they have to fit in around broadcasters.

Anonymous said...

Having just heard the article on BBC iPlayer I have to say it was a wholly disappointing event.

Nothing was made of the current crop of "exciting" players such as Jamie Cope, Mark Allen, Ding Junhui, Liang Wenbo, Judd Trump et al. Instead the examples given were Ali Carter just because he's got a pilots licence, and Michael Holt just because he punches a few tables! Fair enough mentioning Paul Hunter because he should never be forgotten but harsh as it may sound, he's gone now and can't play a part in the game today.

Also Lee Doyle wasn't pressed hard enough on the issue of European tournaments and why the World Snooker website doesn't even mention other snooker tournaments that exist.

Steve Davis and the newspaper reporter (sorry, forgotten his name) should have been given more air time because they were the ones speaking more sense.

Obviously the real gem would've been Hendon v Walker but hopefully this will manifest itself in a podcast, assuming the dinner loving exec isn't a chicken!

Anonymous said...

he might be out eating his chicken in a basket at the time of the podcast lol

Anonymous said...

did you laugh at your own 'joke' because you didnt expect any laughs from anyone else (even out of sympathy)?

Anonymous said...

and you do expect laughs out of sympathy of being the saddo you are.

Anonymous said...


jamie brannon said...

I was asking about you Dave I thought you were going to be on, understand if it's a private matter.

Anonymous said...

Dave decided not to be involved when Rodney Walker declined.

Anonymous said...

Dave was having dinner with Rod that night (maybe)

Anonymous said...

I see Selby explains why he wasn't on the show on his website blog. he airs a few views too

Dave H said...

Great spot - see post above