Details over whether the ball will be available on the table throughout the frame, or if it will be introduced only after a maximum 147 break has been completed, are unclear and – if it is indeed on the table throughout the match – we have no idea if a penalty will be applied for potting it too early.
Let’s be clear, having an additional, unpottable ball on the baize throughout the game, getting in the way and adding no value is, frankly, a complete waste of time, making things less – not more – interesting. It demonstrably makes the mechanics of the sport worse.
Meanwhile, if it’s only added after the completion of a 147, then well... what’s the point? Maximums are rare enough (there have been fewer than 200 official 147s in the entire history of the sport) that the prospect of an additional 20-point gold ball afterwards is almost entirely moot. And due to their scarcity, seeing someone make a maxi, or even come close to doing so, is special enough already without a painfully contrived gimmick being added. Watch the atmosphere created by and the reaction to either of the 147s made at the recent Masters at Alexandra Palace by Ding Junhui or Mark Allen if you need proof of just how much buzz they already create.
Presumably, Saudi Arabia wants to be able to boast about a point of difference for their event, market the tournament around a possible “167 break” and, hopefully by the end of the three days, be able to claim the “highest break in snooker history”. Not that a break made under these gimmicky, non-official conditions would count in the record books.
This is one ludicrous suggestion too far. Where will it stop? Why not make the bullseye worth 100 points in darts? Perhaps an ace in tennis counts for two points, to stop all those pesky rallies spoiling the gimmicky fun that fans clearly want...
This 20-point golden ball nonsense isn’t the first time a snooker promoter has tried to change the basics of the game. A short-lived experiment in 1959 saw the introduction of a “Snooker Plus” tournament, which included two additional colours, an orange ball worth eight points and a purple worth 10, which raised the theoretically available maximum to 210. In 2018, another promoter suggested the addition of a purple ball with a value of eight points be added towards the end of a frame so that a “super-maximum” 155 would become possible.
Shaun Murphy has defended the inclusion of a golden, 20-point ball </p>
Shaun Murphy has defended the inclusion of a golden, 20-point ball (PA Wire)
These suggestions were rightly dismissed as being unserious. What a shame the authorities weren’t so clear-eyed this time.
Shaun Murphy, who can always be relied upon to toe the party line and will likely be one of the 10 players selected for the invitational event, rushed to the defence of the new gimmick by comparing it to the Snooker Shoot-Out ranking event – a quickfire version of the sport with a shot clock and minorly tweaked rules that has become a generally well-loved, one-off breath of fresh air in the calendar comparable to Twenty20 cricket.
“It was heresy when the Shoot-Out was brought in as a ranking event – people were nearly out with torches on the streets,” exaggerated Murphy. “But I haven’t met a single person who has been to the Shoot-Out and not enjoyed it. You should never criticise something unless you’ve tried it. It’s just something different and it’s not the first time the sport has tried new ideas.”
There is something to be said for the sport bursting out of its sometimes fusty old bubble to attract new fans but let’s not pretend that a 20-point, golden ball gimmick more suited to a light entertainment TV show is the answer to snooker’s problems. It’s simply a sign of a desperate sport going too far.
www.independent.co.uk
