Ssb - jungle jimmy gets wembley wildcard

[wildJONESEYE]

I say,good luck Jimmy White,and dont listen to the knockers.

Jordan,Sam Fox i think he is well used to plenty of Knockers this year

[jb134]

I've posted along these lines before, I'd be grateful of any feedback on my views.

It is my belief that the reason the game was so great around 20 years ago is that almost every time you turned on the telly to a snooker match, YOU CARED WHO WON!

Be it loving Alex Higgins, Willing white to win, rooting against Davis no matter who he was playing, berating Thorburn and Griffiths for perceived slow play, admiring an ageing Reardon or Spencer, laughing with or at Dennis Taylor, you were drawn into the matches and got involved.

Even the bit part players, Werbenuik, Dean Reynolds, Francisco, Knowles, Kirk Stevens etc etc, we all knew their stories, they had their successes and failures and we were a part of it, we cared.

Parrot, Hendry etc came along which was fine, they took the game to the next level, and on and on but as someone stated earlier, the mistake was all these household names disappeared, with the exception of Davis and White.

How we all marvelled when Mountjoy had an indian summer, as did Rex Williams, these guys were still capable as time moved on, they all would have been.

I can remember one particularly great match between an up and coming Parrot and a wily, knowledgeable Reardon which bridged two generations, just as I had tears in my eyes when Tom Watson did not win this years open.

Look at golf, ten year exemptions for major winners, wild cards, senior tours, exemptions from the lifetime money list (Cliff Thorburn is still in the top 20 or so snooker money winners), in short these greats in other sports gradually fade away over time, as our love for Jack Nicklaus, Arnold Palmer etc etc shows.

In snooker they disappear completely and suddenly, much has been made over the years of youth not getting a chance, but nor does fading talent in snooker. As such we currently have a generation of young snooker players who on the whole play the game better than it has ever been played before, and guess what, the game is dying.

When I watch Jimmy at Wembly this year, I will care who wins, I believe that is why he has been brought back, he will generate interest and ticket sales, if the game is to survive and grow it must do what it can to generate interest and this move, in my opinion is a step in the right direction.

[snookerpoolman]

Generally I agree it's a bizarre decision, however the 'bums on seats' argument holds a lot of weight particularly in London. One point about Jimmy in the jungle - surely he did this as a fact of him not qualifying for Telford? Rather than actually pulling out of the event to appear on a TV show?

[Looki]

One point about Jimmy in the jungle - surely he did this as a fact of him not qualifying for Telford? Rather than actually pulling out of the event to appear on a TV show?

What do you mean by this? You think that he pulled out of the qualifiers because he thought he didn't have a chance to qualify and rather went to appear on a tv show? Cause pulling out of the tournament is what he did.

[Odrl]

I've posted along these lines before, I'd be grateful of any feedback on my views.

It is my belief that the reason the game was so great around 20 years ago is that almost every time you turned on the telly to a snooker match, YOU CARED WHO WON!

Be it loving Alex Higgins, Willing white to win, rooting against Davis no matter who he was playing, berating Thorburn and Griffiths for perceived slow play, admiring an ageing Reardon or Spencer, laughing with or at Dennis Taylor, you were drawn into the matches and got involved.

Even the bit part players, Werbenuik, Dean Reynolds, Francisco, Knowles, Kirk Stevens etc etc, we all knew their stories, they had their successes and failures and we were a part of it, we cared.

Parrot, Hendry etc came along which was fine, they took the game to the next level, and on and on but as someone stated earlier, the mistake was all these household names disappeared, with the exception of Davis and White.

How we all marvelled when Mountjoy had an indian summer, as did Rex Williams, these guys were still capable as time moved on, they all would have been.

I can remember one particularly great match between an up and coming Parrot and a wily, knowledgeable Reardon which bridged two generations, just as I had tears in my eyes when Tom Watson did not win this years open.

Look at golf, ten year exemptions for major winners, wild cards, senior tours, exemptions from the lifetime money list (Cliff Thorburn is still in the top 20 or so snooker money winners), in short these greats in other sports gradually fade away over time, as our love for Jack Nicklaus, Arnold Palmer etc etc shows.

In snooker they disappear completely and suddenly, much has been made over the years of youth not getting a chance, but nor does fading talent in snooker. As such we currently have a generation of young snooker players who on the whole play the game better than it has ever been played before, and guess what, the game is dying.

When I watch Jimmy at Wembly this year, I will care who wins, I believe that is why he has been brought back, he will generate interest and ticket sales, if the game is to survive and grow it must do what it can to generate interest and this move, in my opinion is a step in the right direction.

That's a good post, the first one that helps me understand why so many people are in favour of this decision. It hasn't changed my opinion though. I've already spoken at length about why I think this is not the right decision for the future of the sport, and why I think it is unfair to Liang Wenbo (and his millions of fans), so I won't repeat myself.

But I'd like to say something else... The feeling that you speak of, watching a match and actually caring about it, I get it every time I watch snooker. For me it's not necessarily about caring who wins, but it's about caring for the players and knowing what they're all about.

I'm always sorry to hear about the decline of snooker in the UK, and I wish people would find the magic again, but for what price? There's so many people here from all over the world, from countries where snooker used to have no presence whatsoever. We've fallen in love with the game as it is, and there is more of us every day. This is a crucial time for the future of the sport, with the new board and new ideas, and they're on record as saying that re-popularizing the sport in the UK is the priority. Perhaps it should be, as the UK is still the heart of snooker, and most of the players are British, and they're actually the ones who produce the magic.

But every time there's talk about introducing new formats, like 6-reds or shot clocks, or short tournaments, in order to revive a supposedly dying sport, the alarm bells go off. Because when something is gained, something else may be lost, and I fear that might be the case here. It's not really about wanting to watch Liang more than White. I would prefer it actually, as Liang is a better player, but it's only one match, and White is a great player in his own right, and a good entertainer. But it's about more than that. It's a decision in the spirit of "show over quality", and at a time when important decision about the future of snooker are being made, I don't want this to be the trend.

I realize that not many people care about what I think, and it's going to make little difference... But every time I post something against decisions like this one, or against proposed changes that tamper with the game, as well as every time I post something about a match or a tournament I just watched, that's me clinging to the magic of snooker. It would make me profoundly sad if it was ever lost...

[brendan147]

That's a good post, the first one that helps me understand why so many people are in favour of this decision. It hasn't changed my opinion though. I've already spoken at length about why I think this is not the right decision for the future of the sport, and why I think it is unfair to Liang Wenbo (and his millions of fans), so I won't repeat myself.

But I'd like to say something else... The feeling that you speak of, watching a match and actually caring about it, I get it every time I watch snooker. For me it's not necessarily about caring who wins, but it's about caring for the players and knowing what they're all about.

I'm always sorry to hear about the decline of snooker in the UK, and I wish people would find the magic again, but for what price? There's so many people here from all over the world, from countries where snooker used to have no presence whatsoever. We've fallen in love with the game as it is, and there is more of us every day. This is a crucial time for the future of the sport, with the new board and new ideas, and they're on record as saying that re-popularizing the sport in the UK is the priority. Perhaps it should be, as the UK is still the heart of snooker, and most of the players are British, and they're actually the ones who produce the magic.

But every time there's talk about introducing new formats, like 6-reds or shot clocks, or short tournaments, in order to revive a supposedly dying sport, the alarm bells go off. Because when something is gained, something else may be lost, and I fear that might be the case here. It's not really about wanting to watch Liang more than White. I would prefer it actually, as Liang is a better player, but it's only one match, and White is a great player in his own right, and a good entertainer. But it's about more than that. It's a decision in the spirit of "show over quality", and at a time when important decision about the future of snooker are being made, I don't want this to be the trend.

I realize that not many people care about what I think, and it's going to make little difference... But every time I post something against decisions like this one, or against proposed changes that tamper with the game, as well as every time I post something about a match or a tournament I just watched, that's me clinging to the magic of snooker. It would make me profoundly sad if it was ever lost...

Just to give my honest opinions here. No offense intended:-

1) This could be JW last match on TV. So bringing back this legend into 2010 Masters will be a crucial strategy for WPBSA to attract more fans into the arena. JW is somewhat a true ambassador for this sport. IMHO, he promoted snooker worldwide more than any other PRO.; &

2) I believe WPBSA will do their very best to think new strategies to promote this sport in UK and worldwide before it DIES. Don't worry about that. In meantime, just enjoy the snooker game as you want to. Think positive...

CHEERS

[Odrl]

Just to give my honest opinions here. No offense intended:-

1) This could be JW last match on TV. So bringing back this legend into 2010 Masters will be a crucial strategy for WPBSA to attract more fans into the arena. JW is somewhat a true ambassador for this sport. IMHO, he promoted snooker worldwide more than any other PRO.; &

2) I believe WPBSA will do their very best to think new strategies to promote this sport in UK and worldwide before it DIES. Don't worry about that. In meantime, just enjoy the snooker game as you want to. Think positive...

CHEERS

Thank you. I'm sure I'll enjoy the Masters as much as I do every year, and I wish you the same.

[Masterdoctorgenius]

i cant visit threads in the lounge

[jb134]

Odrl, you do care about the game, obviously you do, as do I but we are both enthusiasts.

When the game was at its peak in terms of viewers and sponsorship (and therefore money) this was due to massive numbers of non-enthusiasts watching and generating a desire by TV to show the game and therefore sponsors to pour money in etcetc.

In turn some of those casual watchers become enthusiasts or their kids do and the game gets talked about in the workplace or the playground and it becomes more popular and it grows.

Those of us who love the game will always watch but only by appealing to the rest can the game be saved.

[jb134]

I got to love snooker watching it with my gran, she never missed it. She knew nothing of the game whatsoever she loved Higgins, White and Stevens and loved to see Davis beat and never forgave Terry Griffiths for beating Higgins in the UK final.

The reason being it was like a soap opera, there were goodies and baddies and everyone had their favourites.

The thing about little old ladies is the generally have more cash to spend on sponsors products than snooker players. (please take the generalisation for what it is)

[mick 142]

Hey, I wish it weren't so! I would rather see packed halls watching young up-and coming players knocking our socks off with dazzling snooker but the fact is people aren't interested in the new players we have. Even when snooker was massive most people watched to see their favourite 'Character' playing and the actual game was secondary. Now we have a TV schedule full of IQ<100 reality shows for people to cater for those needs. Yeah, you can call the players old farts, past, it, no hopers, whatever you like but Alex Higgins would get a bigger crowd, even in his state, than most of the top 16.
Until Barry Hearn does for snooker what he did for darts ie a massive brainwashing operation by Sky and the Sun:-) the game is on it's last legs.

Mat Wilson

spot on give Alex the wild card and jimmy for the worlds 2010 .

[Templeton Peck]

The gap between the standard Higgins is currently at and the standard main tour professionals are at is so great now it would be like letting a good amateur play in the tournament. Jimmy still occasionally qualifies for events so he has periodically proven he's still good enough to compete against the top 16. No-one whines when Drago gets a wildcard for the Malta Cup, or when they let non-pro Chinese players into the extra wildcard round at the Shanghai or China Open, so really what is the problem in letting the most popular player in the game have a wildcard for his local event while he's still good enough to compete??

[brendan147]

The gap between the standard Higgins is currently at and the standard main tour professionals are at is so great now it would be like letting a good amateur play in the tournament. Jimmy still occasionally qualifies for events so he has periodically proven he's still good enough to compete against the top 16. No-one whines when Drago gets a wildcard for the Malta Cup, or when they let non-pro Chinese players into the extra wildcard round at the Shanghai or China Open, so really what is the problem in letting the most popular player in the game have a wildcard for his local event while he's still good enough to compete??

They underestimated Jimmy. That's why they whined.

[Odrl]

The gap between the standard Higgins is currently at and the standard main tour professionals are at is so great now it would be like letting a good amateur play in the tournament. Jimmy still occasionally qualifies for events so he has periodically proven he's still good enough to compete against the top 16. No-one whines when Drago gets a wildcard for the Malta Cup, or when they let non-pro Chinese players into the extra wildcard round at the Shanghai or China Open, so really what is the problem in letting the most popular player in the game have a wildcard for his local event while he's still good enough to compete??

Actually, some people whine about the Chinese wildcards as well, but that's a slightly different case. In the Chinese events, only two or three players are Chinese, the rest are mostly British. But the irony is that a lot of the Chinese wildcards actually get through, and they play the last32 players, not the players from the first qualifying round. It just shows that the standard is pretty high, and that these players are hugely disadvantaged in their opportunities to become professional. The biggest qualifying "channel" for the MT is based in the UK, so how much of a chance does a kid from China really have?

And then you have players like Yu Delu and Tian Pengfei, who have beaten the professionals on more than one occasion in those tournaments... Tian beat David Gray and Marco Fu at last season's China Open, before losing to John Higgins. And when the British board that runs the professional game has 4 wildcards for the MT to award, whom does it award them to? The likes of Preece, Norman and Gray... Disgraceful.

The Masters on the other hand is a British event, and 13 of the top16 players are British. Every single one of them is more local to London than Liang Wenbo is to Shanghai or Beijing actually. So let's not pretend that the lack of "local presence" is what this is all about.

[wildJONESEYE]

They underestimated Jimmy. That's why they whined.

cant speak for all but i whined because he is a nobody today in the world of snooker and theres others that deserve a chance more than him thats why i whined as you put it..

Ranked 60+ dropping down because of playing tarzan in the jungle and he got a wild card.

sorry but pulling out of the UK should not be rewarded.