A strange incident in last week's Welsh Open has been brought to my attention.
In the third frame of his match against Stephen Maguire, Ding Junhui appears to pot two reds in succession - that is without potting a colour in between.
You can view the footage here.
There has been speculation on the internet that the video has been faked. However, I have watched the original and unedited BBC footage of the frame and it is genuine. Indeed, it was logged at the time by a member of the production team.
Ultimately, no harm was done. Although Ding won the frame he lost the match.
Maguire had no reason to spot it. The non-striker is waiting to come back to the table, not intently following every shot.
The referee, Colin Humphries, can be forgiven for making a mistake. Who amongst us does not?
What I find odd is that Ding himself lost concentration to the extent that he forgot he was on the black.
A weird business, then, and proof that, in the internet age, there's always someone out there who will spot these things.
Bet that annoyed some matched-betting users though. What if someone had £1000 on Maguire to win THAT frame and he see's that happen?!
ReplyDeletenow I understand why ding hasn't appeared in any finals this season...
ReplyDeleteGood thing he wasn't on a maximum.
ReplyDeleteNo excuses there, that is carp refereeing. Surely he must have thought 'That's two shots I haven't picked a ball out of the pocket?' Get him off the referees list.
ReplyDeletethere is something fishy about carp refereeing
ReplyDeleteEverybody in the hall (incl the ref and Maguire) must be thinking "Hey, he potted two reds in a row, didn't he...? But I dare not point it out, I'll make a fool of myself if I'm wrong...".
ReplyDeleteShouldn't the Ref in the upper box by the cameras have pointed it out? He could just have checked the video tape!
It was on table two so there was no man in the upper box (the marker), there unfortunately.
ReplyDeleteThe shot he played on the mystery 2nd red was a diabolical one.
ReplyDeleteDing is cracking up I believe.
The discussion about this sequence being a tampered tape seems to be gone.
ReplyDeleteI have watched the chinese version
and it is nonsense.
The tape is faked and don´t tell me in a hundred years time, that a proref + two proplayers and spectators + wievers on telly and a pro camerateam should miss 2 reds in a row.televised!
As I said above, I have seen the original BBC footage and it's not a fake.
ReplyDeletewe should all mail the beeb when the WC is on to get them to show it...
ReplyDeleteKimball, its real, stuff happens in life.
ReplyDeleteSeen it a few times over the years more worrying if you think its a fake is why anyone would go as far as to fake such a random thing as this.
I thought it was fake when I first saw it. If not though, it seems like quite a strange simultaneous lapse of concentration from Ding and the referee. It's not as if there was any big distraction or even a particularly long pause between shots. Makes me wonder what was going on in Ding's head to make him pot a red, look around for a few moments presumably looking at angles from colours, then get straight down and pot another red.
ReplyDeleteExtrememly bad refereeing though - looks like he just wasn't paying attention.
there wasn't a marker on this match. On the this table the referee was using the zapper to add the scores.
ReplyDeleteit was also a bit of a problem on this table, because, for some odd reason, the sensor for the zapper, was located high up on the side wall and not near the monitor where the ref usually points his zapper.
I was in that arena taking photos later on the match, but not on that frame and none of us in the media centre watching the match live on the monitor noticed Ding's aberration.
im close to stephen and watched every ball and can asure you its fake
ReplyDeleteYep, I watched every shot on tape and it isn't a fake.
ReplyDeletebet you a pound dave its fake
ReplyDeleteDave
ReplyDeleteive read on a well known snooker forum that a WS representative has checked this out on tape and commented on it actually having happened.
now, either the person posting is fibbing, but i know he knows a lot of folk in the game and i know he knows the person mentioned who works for WS, so.......
when this happens, someone is wrong.
is it the WS rep, or did the guy misread his mail from him?
*puzzled*
For the last time: it did happen, I've seen it. That's it. End of.
ReplyDeleteI,ll believe this chinese cracker
ReplyDeletewhen BBC runs it on the mastertape.
Kimball
listen here, this is stephen theres no way did i miss ding potting 2 reds in a row. ITS FAKE
ReplyDeleteEven if you are the wrong Stephen,
ReplyDeletethere are other tapes on You Tube,
showing the black potted in the sidepocket for going to 36 and the ref. scoring 36 the same second!
If that is true, it would be totally against the ref. way of scoring and announcing after spotting the black.
If it was true, Colin should give back his license and if you are the
right Stephen, please stay sharp
through complete tournaments!
You are costing a lot of bread,
whinig about feeling flat!
Kimball
If you really are Stephen Maguire, email me at the address top right and I will very happily ring you and talk you through the footage I have seen.
ReplyDeleteDear Dave,
ReplyDeletewhat about Colin Humphries, any comment from him?
Kimball
yeah.
ReplyDeletehe says every person in every walk of life, including EVERY snooker referee makes human error mistakes and he is no different
OK, Mr Hendon you saw some bbc footage and you decree it's real. Any second opinion on that? Because you cannot dismiss what other people think just by saying That's it. End of. Even if it's on your blog. ;)
ReplyDeleteIndeed, everyone can make mistakes, Mr Hendon included.
Ding's gesture and face seems like that he reliased he potted 2 reds in a row, but not going to point it out.
ReplyDeleteSnooker © The Fine Art Method
ReplyDeleteA secret is wasted if not shared.
Its time Snooker Players realised that the game and the rewards are about TV entertainment, not the first to the line or the last man standing.
Snooker in this country is in decline and in danger of disintegrating into small factions fighting over a disappearing bone, yet entertainment is never mentioned as the problem but simply the lack of sponsors.
Snookers past champions are proving to the world that the game is not attractive by the absence of the "Bing Crosby OPEN or the many OPENS that could be sponsored by the top tobacco earners.
Sponsors generally are not interested in the commodity, but the hiring of viewing customers.
Snookers only chance of surviving without the BBC BACKING is to become self supporting. The BBC probable wouldn’t survive without the help of EURO SPORT.
There are far too many subsidiary businesses living off the game of Snooker without contributing to the game. No firm advertises ENTERTAINING tables, cues, chalk or clothes but are relying on snooker for business.
What should come first: Entertaining Snooker or Sponsors?
Mr hey you
Ihave been playing snooker for over 30 years in competitions all over the uk and i remember well way back when i started there was strength in depth in the game of snooker. the professional scene was in fine form and there were plenty of amatuer players with thier own ranking list trying to get to the top of the tree with competitions up and down the country weekly and monthly. The stronger players stayed at the top and sealed thier rights to turn professional at the end of the season , i recall it was the top eight that qualified automatically and rightly so. All the tournaments carried ranking points and the snooker halls were buzzing. a re introduction of twelve amateur tournaments throughout the year with good prize money for the most consistent players would i be a fine way of getting the game buzzing again at the grass roots which inturn i think would produce the best most consitent quality snooker players and future professionals.
ReplyDelete