Jin Long has been fined £150 by the WPBSA disciplinary committee for conceding frames early during the Masters qualifiers last November.

I don’t know how early these concessions were but the rule has since been changed to allow the referee to use discretion.

It was wrong for Ronnie O’Sullivan to concede a frame against Joe Perry at 23-0 during the UK Championship but for a player to leave the blue over the pocket when it’s all his opponent needs and then be warned seems absurd.

Thankfully, common sense has prevailed.

Speaking of which, snooker journalists made an approach to the WPBSA to ask them to start making the results of disciplinary hearings known in the spirit of open government.

They have agreed to do so from now on, for which we are grateful.


Anonymous said...

very funny

Anonymous said...

i didnt find it funny

Anonymous said...

The question that needs to be asked is who is making these decisions and who are the disciplinary commitee?
I agree Ronnie should be punished for his premature concession in the UK but for what Jin Long did he should have been merely warned.
Maybe that is what was required in the first place, and any comittee which decides (decidid) that this was punishable by a fine has no feel for the game.
Snooker will never be quite like golf, although some aspects of the game should be tidied up if only to respect the game and its history.

Dave H said...

That's the point though - if Jin Long did the same next week he wouldn't be disciplined because the rules have been changed

They were never intended to punish concession when frame ball is left

Anonymous said...

Under the rules in use during the Masters Qualifiers Jin Long had to be warned and thus the fine imho is warranted.

Granted, I'm personally very glad at the latest "common sense" addition to the concession rule.

That said, I remember a match in the Masters Qualifiers where 1 player should have been warned a couple of times (and hence lost at least 1 frame...and the match due to the frame score at that time) but wasn't warned...AND even won the match.

Anonymous said...

Ronnie ALWAYS gets away with every of his anti-social behaviours. Docking him 700 ranking points or whatever it was when he was in the lead by over 6000 points was pathetic.

Would they dock him 700 points if he were on the verge of dropping from the Top 16, for example?

Monique said...

Ronnie didn't get away with it for this concession ... he was warned as he should be by the rules. And will most probably be fined of the amount that is usual for this kind of conduct.

As for the 700 points. That was what he had got for reaching that round. Again it is what is done in such cases.

There is no reason he should be favoured, but there is also no reason he should be treated any differently to other players when rules apply.

Back on topic?

Sergey said...

A £150 fine seems an apt punishment for such a heinous crime.

Dave H said...

I deleted your previous comment because it was libellous and it wouldn't be you who'd be sued, it'd be me

Anonymous said...

Best blog title so far. The Long Good Friday - brilliant!

wildJONESEYE said...

really if a player wants to concede a frame suerly that should be his desition and move on to the next frame....

if that player makes a habit of it say once every match then action needs to be taken...

but its just plain stupid fining players in this way the fact theire oponement gets a frame without winning it is punishement enough.

Anonymous said...

it can help prevent match fixing

it can help spectators who are at the venue to actually see snooker instead of petulant players conceding frames and matches early.

all players are aware of the rule. if they dont agree with the WS rules they do not need to play. they know the rule and so take the punishment if they break them.

i see it like most players as being that simple (no matter if you agree or not with the rule)