Ronnie O'Sullivan named player of the year at awards ceromony

[gazza147]

I agree I think Ronnie deserved the Award the way he has Played in some of the Events hes Won thrashing Opponents with World Class Performances and that 147 at the end was Unreal which Tops it off! as for Ding he hasnt proved himself at the Big Events at all yet and maybe another Jimmy!!!....lol

[Looki]

I agree I think Ronnie deserved the Award the way he has Played in some of the Events hes Won thrashing Opponents with World Class Performances and that 147 at the end was Unreal which Tops it off! as for Ding he hasnt proved himself at the Big Events at all yet and maybe another Jimmy!!!....lol

At all? He's won Masters once and UK twice.

[The Statman]

A bit of a tough call, although since they must have known that the fans' player of the year was Ronnie O'Sullivan, there might have been reason to give the Player of the Year to Ding. Five titles in a season would surely have won it any other year and it may never happen again.

I was more surprised that the Magic Moment of the Year went to Mark Selby for making the 100th maximum, rather than Neil Robertson for making the 100th ton. I say that because Selby just happened to hit his maximum at the right time when there were 99 already, whereas Robertson made all 99 previous centuries himself!

[streamer45]

I was more surprised that the Magic Moment of the Year went to Mark Selby for making the 100th maximum, rather than Neil Robertson for making the 100th ton. I say that because Selby just happened to hit his maximum at the right time when there were 99 already, whereas Robertson made all 99 previous centuries himself!

They couldn't have known if Robbo went on to reach the 100th when they were voting. And that's the reason why they introduced a new special award for exactly that achievement.

[The Statman]

They couldn't have known if Robbo went on to reach the 100th when they were voting. And that's the reason why they introduced a new special award for exactly that achievement.

Why not? They gave Performance of the Year to Selby for winning the Worlds, so it must have been decided after the championship.

[PatBlock]

no! what, so there's room for two? there's only one winner. i'm sure it don't need me to spell it out.. who puts the bums on seats and captures the imagination? it never has come down to ether or, only one, be that ronnie,jimmy or alex. that's the way it works, the cult of the anti hero, the fallen and flawed.. see what im getting at?

I do, and those players are an essential part of the healthy mix needed AS WELL, but should not be seen as the be all and and all of the sport. This was never the case with Alex Higgins for example, yes he was in the press a lot but not necessarily for snooker reasons, and he certainly was not regarded as snooker personified, other players of the time had equal coverage and equal respect.

-

[streamer45]

Why not? They gave Performance of the Year to Selby for winning the Worlds, so it must have been decided after the championship.

Fair point there

[Erwan_BZH]

Personnaly I think it's kind of a joke to have given this award to Ronnie. OK, he's had great performances, came back to the World Final again, was close to making history with a third title in a row, had a magic 147 to top it all but at the other hand, Ding had won 5 ranking events (5!!) and was just invicible at some point of the season. So to me, Ding should have been the clear winner.

And to get back to one comment I saw earlier, I agree that World Snooker should stop promoting snooker only trhough Ronnie's performances. There is a Ronnie-addcition which I found dangerous because even when a bloke wins 5 titles, or hit a ton of tons in a single season, he's (partially) eclipsed by any single result Ronnie does. That's not fair. Ding, Robbo, Selby, Higgins, Maguire, Murphy....all these guys are wonderful promoters of the game, each with their own qualities, and they deserved to be put on the front row. I understand Ronnie is THE biggest ticket machines we have in the game....but relying solely on him is putting all your eggs in the same basket.

[wake_up_bomb]

I can understand why this decision was made. Think about it logically.

Ding has won 5 events this year, Ronnie has won 4.

Ronnie won the second biggest event of the year - the Masters. Ding lost in the first round of the Masters

Ronnie got to the final of the World Championships, Ding lost in the first round.

Ronnie also won the Champion of Champions, which was a real creme de la creme field. Ding lost in the second round. To Ronnie.

Ronnie also walloped Ding the only other time that they met during the season, and made a 147 in the final frame.

You could make a case for Ding, but he won the Shanghai Masters, the International Championship and the China Open in his home country, and also won the German Masters and Indian Open. Rightly or wrongly, he didn't perform particularly well in any of what are seen as the biggest events.

[The Statman]

You could make a case for Ding, but he won the Shanghai Masters, the International Championship and the China Open in his home country, ...

I believe Ronnie O'Sullivan won his major events in his own country

[wake_up_bomb]

I believe Ronnie O'Sullivan won his major events in his own country

Maybe it is an unfair critique of Ding to state that he won 3 of this 5 ranking events in China, but it is not unfair to say that he totally flopped in the biggest events. I didn't mention the UK Championships before, which Ding was okay in, but he didn't make the quarter-finals. He didn't make the last eight of any of the so-called 'Blue Riband' events, or the Champions of Champions, so for me he wasn't the player of the season, even though he has done very well in the lesser ranking events.

[thelongbomber]

I appreciate that ROS is something special, very special indeed and we may never see the like of him ever again. But it's unhealthy to obsess. If we keep telling the world that Ronnie = snooker and visa versa, they may just start to believe it and when he goes, so may the all too flimsy coverage we get (Despite having a so-called 'promoter' at the helm) at the moment. Surely you see that a more rounded profile would be better for the long term interest in and survival of the sport.

-

There is always room for a superior player. Ronnie will leave the sport one day, and there most certainly will be a player to rival them all from probably Asia/India given the population. It happens in every sport and industry. Every new player that comes along sets a higher and higher bar.

[PatBlock]

There is always room for a superior player. Ronnie will leave the sport one day, and there most certainly will be a player to rival them all from probably Asia/India given the population. It happens in every sport and industry. Every new player that comes along sets a higher and higher bar.

Absolutely. I just worry that the media will finally lose all interest in snooker once Ronnie's gone, because atm he's all they're interested in.

-

[Monique]

Ronnie has won 4 events this season, including one of the majors, the Masters, for a 5th time. He's also made the Final of the World Championship for the third time in a row, something that had not been done since Hendry in the early 90th. He's won a ranking event, the Welsh Open with a 147 - a première - and he set a new record in the process, nobody else has 13 competitive maximums. He's won the Masters playing some outstanding snooker including 556 unanswered points in a 6-0 whitewash of Walden in the QF, again a new record. If you don't think that's an exceptional season, I'm not sure what you need.

Robertson has won 2 events, including a major the UK Championship and made 102 centuries which is remarkable but that doesn't top ROS season in my view. Why? because with that he's got a ratio centuries/frames played of 1 century every 8.17 frames - as a comparison ROS in 2008 had a ratio of 1 century every 7.66 frames. So breakbuilding wise it's been done and better before, only there weren't enough tournaments at the time to reach the hundred.

Mark Selby has also won 2 events, including the World Championship and he's made the final in all 3 majors. For me he's ahead of Robertson. Selby got "Performance of the year" for winning the WC, just as ROS did last year for the same achievement. He also got "magic moment of the year for his 147 at the UK, the 100th in snooker history. Mark Selby would have been ahead of Robertson as well in my view anyway.

Ding won 5 ranking events and that's also something nobody had done since Hendry in the early 90th. I was expecting him to get player of the year actually. There were suggestion that him snubbing the awards ceremony could have played a role in the fact that he didn't. But I wonder if the reason is not different. For all he's won this season Ding has done very poorly in all three majors: last 16 exit in UK, round 1 exit in the Masters, round 1 exit in the World. So once again when it really mattered he couldn't deliver. And that IMO is the main reason why he's not got it.

[Rane]

I think Monique is right about Ding. By my opinion he should have been player of the year with Robertson and O´Sullivan close behind. But magic moment of the year should have been Robertsons 100 th century. I agree that the ratio of centuries has been seen before both by O´Sullivan and Hendry, but it´s a record that will be remembered on line with 1. televised 147, O´Sullivans 5.20 break etc. And I wonder if O´Sullivan could have kept the consistensy to reach 100 even in the years he was playing full time.