O'Sullivan On Why He Quit Match With Hendry

Not the first time he's had problems like this but I did think they were a thing of the past for him. Every so often Ronnie just seems to need a break from snooker, he just stops liking the game. I think that's partly why he turned to pool, just for the variety.
 
I think that attitude sucks. Bailing should never be an option.

As a competitor in life, sport, society, family, we all must do our best, each time out, every time.

If your depressed, unhappy, inspired, not feeling it, down in the dumps, deal with it the best you can. You don't think a new father looking in on his child in the middle of the night, after a long day at work, faced with another day of long, hard work, is frustrated?

Missed a ball? Missed 1,000 in a row? You better do all that you can on that 1,001th shot, even if you miss again, if you want my respect.
 
I highly applaud Hendry for his remarks during his interview. He is a true class act.
 
1pRoscoe said:
I highly applaud Hendry for his remarks during his interview. He is a true class act.

Absolutely. It's good to see there is no more animosity between these 2 great players.
 
Disgraceful

O'Sullivan's behavior was highly unprofessional, and, ultimately, a disgrace to his sport. Every single one of his fellow competitors realized this, but opted not to go on the record bashing Ronnie. Some may feel that this is admirable, but I do not.

Through his behavior, O'Sullivan has robbed one of the premier snooker events of its authenticity and dignity, simultaneously dragging down his sport's image. It would be far better for snooker if Hendry had taken demonstrative exception to O'Sullivan's behavior, thereby defending snooker's dignity and its unswerving commitment to its customers.

Of course, this is the AZB forum, so many will argue that O'Sullivan's tantrums draw the crowds and make snooker more colorful. After all, this point is offered every single time that Earl Strickland drag pool's dignity down. I, on the other hand, will say that anybody who shows so little repsect for their chosen profession (snooker, in this case) and its customers (the paying fans, in this case) should consider a different line of work.

An honest and sincere effort is the minimum we expect of sportsmen that we pay to see. On that rare occasion that we get less (such as when Roberto Duran quit against Sugar Ray Leonard), most of us are shocked and we label the perpetrator a quitter that has defamed his sport. Why should we settle for any less of O'Sullivan, whose excuse for quitting was that "he was just having a bad day at the office."
 
Last edited:
Quinten Hann has conceded snooker frames many times while leading. Also Earl Strickland has conceded racks after a miss on 5-ball or so. Nowadays conceding a rack in 9-ball might lead to a penalty. Some players just do it. But conceding the whole match is not appropriate. I think it's very wrong.
 
As a true competitor, who the heck wants to win any title, be it bar room, state, or World Championship, by default, when your opponent quits?

People want to beat the best, and come out on top, not have it conceded to them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sjm
As a true competitor, who the heck wants to win any title, be it bar room, state, or World Championship, by default, when your opponent quits?

People want to beat the best, and come out on top, not have it conceded to them.

He was down 4-1, and he knows how well Hendry was playing.

If he knew he just didn't have it that day, then what is the point in playing the other 5 games if he knew on that day he would lose?

If he is payed a salary then I can understand the "paying fans" angle, but if this was a tournament based on tournament winnings, and there is nothing about conceding early, then I dont see anything wrong with this.


What is everyone whining about, why does conceding a match when you know you can't win bad for snooker at all?

I seems amusing so many people are getting apparently upset over this... all he did was concede, what is the big deal????
 
Ronnie O'Sullivan

There comes a time when you realize that when a game of billiards is not that much interesting anymore for either personal and professional reasons. Personal by means that Ronnie has his father whom is in jail, a snooker player whom has recently passed away, and so many other things in his life (I am certainly not in his head, per se, but you get the idea). I mean, he's human! Under professional status, there will be a contender who will surpass Ronnie... there is just no doubt about it! There is practically a reason on why he is not interested in snooker. I would just imagine trying to perfect on snooker but realizing that there is another sport (pocket billiards) that he finds interesting. In that matter as well, sponsorships are not looting in the pounds (as in money) as it once was back then. As we all know about Allison Fisher's invasion from the UK, I believe that Ronnie O'Sullivan is perhaps considering getting into pool either here or in Europe. Now I am no mind reader or psychic, but I can pretty much assure you all that it comes down to time when one enjoys playing a form of billiards and doing it so diligently that it doesn't find the interest in it and converts into something different. Just my little 2 cents..
 
  • Like
Reactions: JAM
MacGyver said:
He was down 4-1, and he knows how well Hendry was playing.

If he knew he just didn't have it that day, then what is the point in playing the other 5 games if he knew on that day he would lose?

If he is payed a salary then I can understand the "paying fans" angle, but if this was a tournament based on tournament winnings, and there is nothing about conceding early, then I dont see anything wrong with this.


What is everyone whining about, why does conceding a match when you know you can't win bad for snooker at all?

I seems amusing so many people are getting apparently upset over this... all he did was concede, what is the big deal????

When people apy admissions, there are no garuntees. Their football, basketball, baseball, team or whatever coulod be getting drilled, but they don't just concede and walk off the field. Fans who bought tickets would demand their money back and would desreve the refund.

I would expect this from an Earl, but, not Ronnie. As it says in the article, if he is that unhappy with Snooker, quit.
 
SlickRick_PCS said:
There comes a time when you realize that when a game of billiards is not that much interesting anymore for either personal and professional reasons. Personal by means that Ronnie has his father whom is in jail, a snooker player whom has recently passed away, and so many other things in his life (I am certainly not in his head, per se, but you get the idea). I mean, he's human! Under professional status, there will be a contender who will surpass Ronnie... there is just no doubt about it! There is practically a reason on why he is not interested in snooker. I would just imagine trying to perfect on snooker but realizing that there is another sport (pocket billiards) that he finds interesting. In that matter as well, sponsorships are not looting in the pounds (as in money) as it once was back then. As we all know about Allison Fisher's invasion from the UK, I believe that Ronnie O'Sullivan is perhaps considering getting into pool either here or in Europe. Now I am no mind reader or psychic, but I can pretty much assure you all that it comes down to time when one enjoys playing a form of billiards and doing it so diligently that it doesn't find the interest in it and converts into something different. Just my little 2 cents..

Very well said. TAP, TAP, TAP. Good post! :)

I do not know much about Ronnie the celebrity, but I did get to see him in Vegas this year at an event. :o

He made himself available to the media, and when the film did not come out right, the media approached him again to do another shoot. Ronnie was gracious and accommodating, agreeing to have another picture shoot, which is more than I can say about another English lady player (not Allison) who thumbed her nose at the press throughout the event.

Though he is a big super star in the snooker world, he is also a human being. Nobody, but Ronnie, knows why he exited the stage, but I will bet my bottom dollar that it was personal in nature.

There are many who condemn this behavior in a professional arena, but me, I tend to remember that pool players are human too. I watched the video, and without knowing all of the particulars, it must have been a difficult decision to walk out, but IF -- and that is a very big "if" -- he was physically, emotionally, or mentally sick, it is his right. He shook the hand of his opponent and exited the stage with grace. JMHO, FWIW!

JAM
 
chilli66 said:
Absolutely. It's good to see there is no more animosity between these 2 great players.

LOL...animosity between two English Snooker players? Let me guess-

Ronnie: I dislike you, sir.

Steven: I concur. Spot of tea?

:D
 
Ronnie may be most naturally gifted cueist out there, but he is a nutcase. I think what Earl did at Mosconi, breaking his cue shaft wasn't exactly a class act, but at least he carried on. You don't walk out on your opponent, ever.

Why most talented players have to be such spoiled brats?
 
Lol

I mean, how long can you shoot at Balls with no NUMBERS on them ..... Balls have got to have some personality to them!!! ....... lol :D
 
sjm said:
O'Sullivan's behavior was highly unprofessional, and, ultimately, a disgrace to his sport. Every single one of his fellow competitors realized this, but opted not to go on the record bashing Ronnie. Some may feel that this is admirable, but I do not.

Through his behavior, O'Sullivan has robbed one of the premier snooker events of its authenticity and dignity, simultaneously dragging down his sport's image. It would be far better for snooker if Hendry had taken demonstrative exception to O'Sullivan's behavior, thereby defending snooker's dignity and its unswerving commitment to its customers.

Of course, this is the AZB forum, so many will argue that O'Sullivan's tantrums draw the crowds and make snooker more colorful. After all, this point is offered every single time that Earl Strickland drag pool's dignity down. I, on the other hand, will say that anybody who shows so little repsect for their chosen profession (snooker, in this case) and its customers (the paying fans, in this case) should consider a different line of work.

An honest and sincere effort is the minimum we expect of sportsmen that we pay to see. On that rare occasion that we get less (such as when Roberto Duran quit against Sugar Ray Leonard), most of us are shocked and we label the perpetrator a quitter that has defamed his sport. Why should we settle for any less of O'Sullivan, whose excuse for quitting was that "he was just having a bad day at the office."

I agree SJM, the only thing I would say is that Hedry made his comments BEFORE Ronnie made his excuse through his PR company. I think Hendry was righ to not judge Ronnie too soon as it could have been any number of reasons (mental, death in family etc etc). However ronnie has confirmed his excuse was merly a "bad day at the offic" u will see more players condem him Im sure, and rightly so.

If I had travelled a long way and paid good money I wouldn't be too pleased about it. I think Ronnie's prize money should be withheld in the same way boxers purses are if they quit early or for other reasons.
 
sjm said:
O'Sullivan's behavior was highly unprofessional, and, ultimately, a disgrace to his sport. Every single one of his fellow competitors realized this, but opted not to go on the record bashing Ronnie. Some may feel that this is admirable, but I do not.

Through his behavior, O'Sullivan has robbed one of the premier snooker events of its authenticity and dignity, simultaneously dragging down his sport's image. It would be far better for snooker if Hendry had taken demonstrative exception to O'Sullivan's behavior, thereby defending snooker's dignity and its unswerving commitment to its customers.

Of course, this is the AZB forum, so many will argue that O'Sullivan's tantrums draw the crowds and make snooker more colorful. After all, this point is offered every single time that Earl Strickland drag pool's dignity down. I, on the other hand, will say that anybody who shows so little repsect for their chosen profession (snooker, in this case) and its customers (the paying fans, in this case) should consider a different line of work.

An honest and sincere effort is the minimum we expect of sportsmen that we pay to see. On that rare occasion that we get less (such as when Roberto Duran quit against Sugar Ray Leonard), most of us are shocked and we label the perpetrator a quitter that has defamed his sport. Why should we settle for any less of O'Sullivan, whose excuse for quitting was that "he was just having a bad day at the office."

Well said. I have no patience for temper tantrums, quitters and all around poor sports.
 
Back
Top