So the World Cup is underway in Bangkok and need not apologise if not all of yesterday’s snooker was of the standard we are used to seeing on our television screens.
This happens in World Cups in every sport. You get top teams but also minnows and that is part of the fascination. I’d rather it this way than the cosy closed shop of the World Team Cup of the 1980s.
The five frame format is about right for the group phase but day one didn’t convince me that the alternate shot doubles is a good idea.
It’s very stop-start. Snooker players depend on getting into a rhythm and keeping it to play well, but this is impossible under the doubles format.
It will be interesting to see how the big hitters – England, Scotland and Wales – fare with it today.
The other thing I find odd is the fact that teams don’t receive any points for actually winning a match.
All they get is a point for each frame won, which is a little like basing the football World Cup purely on goals scored.
But whatever the format of any event you will never get everyone to agree it’s the right one.
The main thing is that the World Cup has returned with players for once representing not themselves but their countries.
There was a good win yesterday for Australia over the Thailand A side and surprise victories for Brazil over Belgium, Pakistan over Ireland and Poland over Hong Kong.
Northern Ireland could go a long way too, with Mark Allen and Gerard Greene comfortably beating India.
Today’s matches include England v Brazil in a World Cup match that, for once, England are hot favourites.
52 comments:
Dave,
I've not actually seen much of the WC yet myself but regarding the Alternate Shot game for the doubles...we used to have an end-of-year-tournament here in Holland using the Alternate Shot gameplay.
While indeed this doesn't cater for high breaks or the most interesting game/matchplay in relation to what we're used to seeing on TV, it does make for interesting play...at least imho.
What we had was a very relaxed atmosphere simply because hardly anyone could get any sort of rhythm going. The gameplay itself perhaps suffered a little bit but I'm pretty sure all players loved the actual feel.
Of course, this was amateur level to begin with but I'd be very interested to hear the top players' views on the Alternate Shot play.
If WS would possibly allow some banter during the Doubles Matches, it might make it more attractive still???
I am no advocate of changing the actual game of snooker per se but as a break from the routine...why not?
Cheers,
Jurgen.
I just noted that the players aren't allowed to talk to their teammates during the doubles frame (Neil Robertson was warned by the ref). Why is that? What's the point of team play if your not permitted to discuss your strategy?
Im not a fan of alternate doubles myself. It might work in a decider where tension plays a bigger role and the result is the issue rather than quality.
I suppose the logic behind the scoring system is to keep the match "alive" until all frames have been played, although from a spectator, and indeed gambling point of view, the interest tends to go once a team reaches 3.
re comment at 8.41- I would of thought some brief discussion before a play takes there shot should be allowed - although it should be done away from the table before the player comes to table.
I think the biggest flaw in the format is the lack of a bonus point for winning a match- knowing all the frames are each worth a point helps the 'dead' frames to keep interest but a bonus point for actually winning the match would give a proper sense of a match rather than the sense i get of 'playing five frames out of the 20 we will play.
with this format a team could easily lose 2 matches and get through ahead of a team who has only lost one match.
My final surprise in light of previous alleged problems with round robins is that groups were not all made up of 4 teams to enable the final matches of each group to be played simultaneously (as in footballs world cup)
I agree. I seemed a real shame that the teammates couldn't talk to eachother.
They are allowed to talk as much tactics as they want while waiting there turn.Should be sufficient.
"Scottish double" has it's points too, and there were afew matches with high brakes.
Don't forget that this event goes down very well with wievers in "minniw" countries, that managed to qualify.
Great for the sport and great for Eurosport.
Certainly the Brazilian clearance showcased the doubles format very well
thought alternate doubles was a stroke of genius. forces the teams to actually be teams. the beauty is going to be pairs that don't like each other. the constant dirty looks in the doubles frame will be pure hilarity!!
Wales just made a 97 break in the doubles so if you good your good no matter what format they use.
That clearance was fantastic, and has been the only decent part of the alternate shots in the doubles so far.
I'm not a fan of it. It just doesn't feel or look right.
The fact that Ebbo and Ronnie has once been team mates really puts a smile on my face!
Imagine them alternating...
Yes, I imagine it wasn't Nigel Bond's presence that harmed the team spirit that year!
Countries where snooker is only developing are playing just poorly. And leading countries, perhaps, are playing poorly so that no one can accuse them of impoliteness and taking advantages. I don't see any reason why we should be that happy.
Except for the one- perhaps - that this tournament is a good thing for development of snooker in future. But for the average fan like me this is not enough to enjoy all these matches right now.
Quite fancy Northern Ireland to win this. The format lends itself to be won by a more less fancied team, although still a very good one.
The Republic of Ireland team is past their best.
The World Cup is a good idea and I think the way Hearn has structured the tour has pleased the players - i.e lots of PTC's and opportunities to play smaller tournaments all the time.
However, would anyone agree with me that this has not bee inspirational to the supporters? PTC's are of little interest to the fans and even the ranking events in various parts of the world with a handful of spectators in the audience.
What people want to see is real major tournament action. As it is, we only have 3 major tournaments really, and all Hearn has done has downgraded one of those (the UK Championship). Instead, I agree with a comment Steve Davis made a few years ago like why not try to bring in some more 'major' events, a bit like golf or tennis, such as a super event in China or 4 majors in the year where ranking points are higher, prize money is more, and that are of far more interest to the public. Also, making the sport global is good but let's face it the main interest is in the UK and China, and that's where ALL the tournaments should be based. Thoughts?
@8.41: the fact that Neil was warned by the ref follows logically from the rules in which it's clearly stated that in 4-handed snooker (as doubles is officially called), players are not allowed to confer with their partner while it's their turn.
As a previous poster pointed out though, they are allowed to chat or talk tactics while their opponents are in play.
As I posted in my first post, I do think that for the Alternate Shot variety it might be handier to drop said rule, or at least not enforce it.
Btw, the rule exists to prevent the non-striker from providing tactical clues to his partner. E.g. imagine a situation where player A is snookered and wants to escape via 3 cushions, yet his partner sees a different/easier way out.
It could/would help his partner if he would now simply be allowed to say/mention/shout...hey, I see an easier escape.
Indeed, you can debate the rule but as it stands...conferring with a partner is indeed not allowed.
Hope this clarifies somewhat,
Jurgen.
Given the difficulty they seem to be having finding a home for the World Open, adding big tournaments to the calendar is easier said than done. I am sure more majors are in the pipeline in the next few years, if development continues.
I agree that a big tournament in China, with longer matches, would be an obvious step. I am sure that would be successful.
Adding bigger tournaments is as easy as adding any of the other tournaments. All they have to do is vastly increase the ranking points and prize money and it automatically becomes a bigger tournament. And it needs to be broadcast on the BBC or Sky Sports, Eurosport's no frills coverage is not the right place for a big tournament to be covered and wouldn't capture public imagination.
No doubt if these 'majors' materialised people would still spend all their time laying into the formats and moaning about the scheduling rather than just enjoying the snooker.
And the prize money is being produced out of thin air, is it? As I say finding other channels to show these big events isn't a simple task, as shown by the World Open still not having confirmation this year.
jamie brannon said...
Yes, I imagine it wasn't Nigel Bond's presence that harmed the team spirit that year!
------
nigel is a great guy and good company
I agree with 11.39, cut the prize money from all these silly PTC events and World Cups that are not inspiring anyone at home at all (I wonder what the viewing figures are like) and put them into BBC covered larger events. That's where the prize money comes from, and sponsorship will come if the events are in the UK with the public going to see them rather than in silly parts of the world like Bahrain, Brazil or Australia where noone is interested in snooker.
I'm concerned the game is being damaged by Hearn. Reducing the UK Championship and tons of small events is not capturing the imagination. It needs the big television arena for fans to get interested, Eurosport isn't the place for it in the UK. If he can plough a lot of money into a one frame silly event in Blackpool on Sky, why not make it into a full blown ranking event lasting a couple of weeks with best of 25 frame final - that's what the fans want to see.
Major tournament action required, the world cup and PTC's are a poor show for the fans - may be good for the players but it's switching the public off. Just as well he hasnt touched the worlds(yet)
The guys have a point. PTC's are good for the players but what about the supporters? There's nothing different other than a few lacklustre events on Eurosport with no real atmosphere surrounding them and a couple of folk in the audience.
Shaz
I agree with Betty.
That's good considering noone knows who Betty is. Well done.
Shaz
You're obviously watching different events to me, as over the last few years, most events in Britain (World Champs aside) have been played to empty arenas during the week. Last year, the World Open (a Hearn innovation) actually was played in front of a decent crowd.
You are being unrealistic about the BBC. They don't want to show any more events. They have even dropped one for the coming season.
Hearn has delivered an increase in "proper" ranking events. There is an extra one in Germany which was very successful last year, and we will see how Australia goes next week. Hopefully that will draw good crowds.
The PTCs are designed to give players more playing opportunities. If you remember, before Hearn came along, the players had nothing to do all year outside the 6 or 7 tournaments. With consistent match practice, you would expect the standard to improve, particularly of those who dont get to the latter stages of events regularly. This is good for snooker, and will improve the marketability of the sport, and help to deliver the "big" events that you want.
Hearn has been wonderful snooker. To think otherwise is, frankly, ridiculous.
It's not always all about the players, it's about the supporters and I agree that the World Open was great - so much so that he's decided to move it to some other part of the world - why?
There are some good comments made by some of the previous posters, Hearn has (by and large) been great for snooker these past 18 months, and the PTC's have been good for the players as there actually being professional snooker players- rather that then Rodney Walker's 6 rankers plus the Masters per year. However, changing the format of the UK Championship (when he promised he wouldn't) just to please the BBC presumably, was a bad idea. He could have easily kept the UK as it is and dropped a couple of the more meaningless Euro PTC's.
what has the length of matches at the UK Championship got to do with the Euro PTCs?
So betty does'nt put his/her name up anymore, you can see quite clearly which are bettys!!!
Yeah snooker's now in a more dismal state than it's ever been in. The boredom factor is much higher than before, and the changing of the ranking system is confusing and unwieldy. It needs more big tournament action in the UK, a proper UK championship and Masters to back up the Worlds, and less focus on China which as previous posters stated don't fill the arena's for a place where supposedly 100million people are up during the night to watch Ding Junhui in the last 32 of a ranking event.
anon 8.08pm
what bloody rubbish "snooker's now in a more dismal state than it's ever been in" how do you work that out ?
snooker players are excited to be playing once again, there's more events for them to play in, yes everything not perfect but its better than it was 18 months ago.
and it will get better in time but if your idea of exciting snooker is players sitting on their arses doing nothing then you can keep that where the sun dont shine.
@2.35 the last comment you made about "the more meaningless Euro PTC's" is kind of silly imho.
Most important reason is that across mainland Europe, the PTCs are attended quite well. Comparing thise Euro PTCs to the UK PTCs...that's a different issue. I'd almost go as far as to say drop the UK PTCs as they do NOTHING at all for spectators since none are basically allowed.
How can you therefore consider the Euro PTCs meaningless when in fact there are people showing up and paying to see snooker being played in their hometown rather than on TV???
Cheers.
11.11pm - don't be so rude to the 8.08pm poster, the person had a point about the big tournament action and if you read back this stream of messages there's actually quite a few who follow the same view point.
well if they follow the same view point they haven a clue in hell what they are talking about.
yes we need more majors but for christ sake Barry Hearn has been in sole charge of the sport a little over a year what do people want in so little bloody time.
i dont agree with everything reducing the UK i could happily give him a slap.
but snooker is in a better place now than ever before and ive been a fan since 1981.
ive forgot more about snooker than you will probably ever know wild.
who are you in the grand scheme of snooker that you can say people on here havent a clue?
fyi there are lots of pro snooker players (and ex pros) on here.
i am fairly certain many know more about snooker than you. nobody cares you have been a fan since 1981. my mum has been a fan for longer than you. she wouldnt know the miss rule though....
so, who are you? a well known snooker person around the circuit?
or
just a guy who is into snooker and thinks he knows it all?
Dave I wonder if you could delete post 1.23pm, Wild - he uses blasphemus language and it's totally out of order for such a blog. I would be grateful if you could do this for the kind people on this blog. It's not the first time he has used it and I think you should consider banning him from the blog altogether. Anyone else agree, wonder if there is a waive of opinion on this matter?
Yeah dave I have to agree with the previous poster if he has used another swear word you wouldn't let his posts stand so I'm not sure why you allow him to swear in his posts like that. I would ban him.
12:49pm..Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
Wild has been banned from many snooker forums for posts like these.
swear away wild. if ned flanders at 12.49, 5.00, and 5.22 doesnt like swearing, he shouldnt go on the internet.
Cheers anon 5.22pm thanks for the support, yeah he seems like an idiot
Anonymous 9.52am, it's not swearing, it's blasphemy which is the worst form of swearing and offends many people in this Christian country. You seem a bit outvoted anyway, I agree with the other guys that it's out of order.
8.17. If you really are a Christian you should turn the other cheek. Im sick of you religious lot moaning and refusing handshakes. If you are so easily offended go see a councellor.
11.04pm - No it's wrong to turn the other cheek to such behaviour it's offensive and it should be stood up to. That's like me saying if someone comes up and starts punching a Christian in the face, they should turn the other cheek instead of defending themselves. Forgiveness is part of Christianity, and rising above things, but when a point of principal has to be made it is right to make it.
Additonally, Christianity has nothing to do with refusing handshakes, get a grip? Also, your spelling is atrocious, councellor? Perhaps you're not intelligent enough to construct your argument in a better way, as poor spelling just reveals you for what you really are - an absolute joke with everyone appalled at your terribly failed attempt of blasphemus humour.
Dave, I think you should not only ban Wild but that idiot at 11.04 too
Calm down everyone
2.27, haha, you say Im an absolute joke because I misspelt one word?
For all your nonsense about blasphemous stuff you cant even spell the word right. Let he who is without spelling error cast the first criticism.
Book of Jeevus, chapter 4 verse 3.
The snooker journalist Marcus Stead said he stopped commenting on this blog regularly due to silly comments. You can see his point.
Marcus Stead stopped commenting after he read your i love Ronnie posts!
Post a Comment