Snooker player Shaun Murphy says Amateurs shouldnt be allowed to play with pros....

Cameron Smith

is kind of hungry...
Silver Member
Hed

He’d be going back to qschool even if he won this tournament. This invitation was quite literally a free-roll.

I’m not saying they should or shouldn’t top up with amateurs. Just saying that I think a lot of people misunderstood Murphy due to the unfortunate timing of his comments.
I believe he can earn his card by finishing among the top 8 players without a card on the one-year list. So in that sense, he is playing for a 2-year card every time he goes out.

Here is how different players qualified this year for reference,
 

JAM

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Kyren Wilson v. Ronnie O'Sullivan match was neck and neck, but both made fumbles. Kyren ended up sealing the win with a century run.

543.png
 

mark187

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
What a match that was between Jack Lisowski and Hossein Vafaei. Jack is the Lou Butera of snooker. I've never seen a snooker player play that fast. Hossein was more deliberate in his shooting style, and when he came with a miss, he just smiled, very cool, calm, and collected. This was a tense-filled frame at the end. It had the crowd going "ooh" for the good hots and then loud groans when the missed. Jack wins and moves to the quarterfinals. After the match, instead of scrambling out of the arena, both Jack and Hossein stuck around for the fans and signed autographs and took selfies with them. I like that!

View attachment 618466View attachment 618467View attachment 618468View attachment 618469View attachment 618470
I like Jack Lisowski. Unfortunately, he seems to play well through tournaments and then fall apart in finals. Hopefully he gets that monkey off his back, because he's a great player
 

skogstokig

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I like Jack Lisowski. Unfortunately, he seems to play well through tournaments and then fall apart in finals. Hopefully he gets that monkey off his back, because he's a great player
seen this for a while now, him playing really well until the quarters or the semis. the guy needs a mental coach or something because it isn't his game that's failing him, it's his head.

zhao well deserving winner though. i hope he snaps it off, but kyren is favorite from here on
 

vjmehra

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Hed

He’d be going back to qschool even if he won this tournament. This invitation was quite literally a free-roll.

I’m not saying they should or shouldn’t top up with amateurs. Just saying that I think a lot of people misunderstood Murphy due to the unfortunate timing of his comments.

I'm not convinced anyone misunderstood what he said.

What he meant may well be a different thing of course.

In snooker (and in any sport, in my view...albeit that is of course subjective), you should play the ball not the man, if he (or she) is better, you lose, if you are better, you win. Pretty simple.

Everyone has their own pressures and even if Murphy was the one under more pressure (in his eyes)... he is a pro and has a tour card, he should (and 99/100 does) be able to deal with pressure situations, it is ridiculous to suggest an amateur has any sort of advantage.

If the pro players object to amateurs getting a share of prize money without paying their dues (be it fees, appearances, media commitments or whatever) that is a separate point, but Murphy was 100% incorrect in what he said (again to re-iterate, that is perhaps different from what he meant).
 

Shuddy

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I believe he can earn his card by finishing among the top 8 players without a card on the one-year list. So in that sense, he is playing for a 2-year card every time he goes out.

Here is how different players qualified this year for reference,
That’s only for players already on the tour who didn’t qualify by being the top 64 or by being the top 27 on the 2nd year of their two card. The top 8 on the one year list are only for players gaining ranking points already on the tour who haven’t qualified by other means. The top up players aren’t eligible for ranking points and are not officially on the tour, so he can’t be included in the qualifying criteria that apply to players on the tour.
 

Shuddy

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I'm not convinced anyone misunderstood what he said.

What he meant may well be a different thing of course.

In snooker (and in any sport, in my view...albeit that is of course subjective), you should play the ball not the man, if he (or she) is better, you lose, if you are better, you win. Pretty simple.

Everyone has their own pressures and even if Murphy was the one under more pressure (in his eyes)... he is a pro and has a tour card, he should (and 99/100 does) be able to deal with pressure situations, it is ridiculous to suggest an amateur has any sort of advantage.

If the pro players object to amateurs getting a share of prize money without paying their dues (be it fees, appearances, media commitments or whatever) that is a separate point, but Murphy was 100% incorrect in what he said (again to re-iterate, that is perhaps different from what he meant).
Interestingly, I don’t think money is an issue at all.

But your comments suggest you have misunderstood what he said. He didn’t complain about losing, or who played better or worse. He complained that they have changed a well established system for this season, and that it’s not fair to players that earned their tour card through traditional means. Other pros/ex-pros (except Ronnie, who doesn’t give a shit) have basically said what’s the point of having a series of processes and criteria for being able top play in pro events if they then ignore all that and allow amateurs to join the pro events anyway.

By the way, he has spoken quite a bit on this issue since his first comments, with quite a bit of clarification, and with the support of a lot of pundits and players, people who know him well. That’s not always the case when players say something contentious. Ronnie often times has been criticized by pros and pundits for things he’s said, as have other players. I think in this case, they all know that he’s a gent and has been a really good ambassador for snooker for most his professional career. He’s even allowed them to make fun of him for his comments as he’s been working commentary since his loss, and he’s taken it all in a good sport and accepted a lot of the criticism he got.

I just don’t think he deserves a lot of the hate he’s getting for it. He really isn’t a sore loser. He always conducts himself with professionalism. His timing was shit, and he should have kept his comments out of the media (or maybe he shouldn’t have, apparently snooker has been on the back page of the English papers all week because of what he said), but he’s a decent dude who let his mouth run. If you want to see a sore loser, check out some of Gary Wilson’s post loss interviews.
 

gregcantrall

Center Ball
Silver Member
Interestingly, I don’t think money is an issue at all.

But your comments suggest you have misunderstood what he said. He didn’t complain about losing, or who played better or worse. He complained that they have changed a well established system for this season, and that it’s not fair to players that earned their tour card through traditional means. Other pros/ex-pros (except Ronnie, who doesn’t give a shit) have basically said what’s the point of having a series of processes and criteria for being able top play in pro events if they then ignore all that and allow amateurs to join the pro events anyway.

By the way, he has spoken quite a bit on this issue since his first comments, with quite a bit of clarification, and with the support of a lot of pundits and players, people who know him well. That’s not always the case when players say something contentious. Ronnie often times has been criticized by pros and pundits for things he’s said, as have other players. I think in this case, they all know that he’s a gent and has been a really good ambassador for snooker for most his professional career. He’s even allowed them to make fun of him for his comments as he’s been working commentary since his loss, and he’s taken it all in a good sport and accepted a lot of the criticism he got.

I just don’t think he deserves a lot of the hate he’s getting for it. He really isn’t a sore loser. He always conducts himself with professionalism. His timing was shit, and he should have kept his comments out of the media (or maybe he shouldn’t have, apparently snooker has been on the back page of the English papers all week because of what he said), but he’s a decent dude who let his mouth run. If you want to see a sore loser, check out some of Gary Wilson’s post loss interviews.
Good post!
Looks like he's in the process of learning a new position (much like Ronnie) as commentary. He is taking his lumps and learn from it.
Every competitor has been on the emotional rollercoaster. His apology highlights that. He very well could have a valid point regarding the system. To prevail in debate he needs to work on his presentation. Being a world class athlete proves his ability to devote himself.
 

Shuddy

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
As teh tournament is also being discussed in this thread, Luca Brecel just played god-like snooker to beat Kyren Wilson in the first semi-final. He won 6-4 with breaks of 59, 80, 97, 102, 105, 112, and 130. Absolutely ridiculous.
 
As teh tournament is also being discussed in this thread, Luca Brecel just played god-like snooker to beat Kyren Wilson in the first semi-final. He won 6-4 with breaks of 59, 80, 97, 102, 105, 112, and 130. Absolutely ridiculous.
He was truly unplayable, incredible stuff. Nobody could have beaten him today.

Tournaments been crazy so far, all the big names dropping by the wayside.

Been most unpredictable championship for years.
 

skogstokig

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
He was truly unplayable, incredible stuff. Nobody could have beaten him today.

Tournaments been crazy so far, all the big names dropping by the wayside.

Been most unpredictable championship for years.

big names dropping out has been a blessing. what stellar play we get to watch from zhao and brecel. and it's all out attack-style snooker too, at a fast pace.
 

gregcantrall

Center Ball
Silver Member
As teh tournament is also being discussed in this thread, Luca Brecel just played god-like snooker to beat Kyren Wilson in the first semi-final. He won 6-4 with breaks of 59, 80, 97, 102, 105, 112, and 130. Absolutely ridiculous.
Walked into a buzz saw comes to mind.
 
big names dropping out has been a blessing. what stellar play we get to watch from zhao and brecel. and it's all out attack-style snooker too, at a fast pace.
Absolutely I though loosing the big names may give us some lower quality matches, but it had been the absolute reverse. As you say, we have seen top quality, flowing attacking Snooker. Brilliant stuff!
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
Absolutely I though loosing the big names may give us some lower quality matches, but it had been the absolute reverse. As you say, we have seen top quality, flowing attacking Snooker. Brilliant stuff!
And now that Zhao has beaten Hawkins like a rented mule, we will have the battle of the young guns. Hopefully they can keep up the barrages.
 
And now that Zhao has beaten Hawkins like a rented mule, we will have the battle of the young guns. Hopefully they can keep up the barrages.
I hope so.

Not sure if I’m right, but this will be the first ever major tournament to have no players from English speaking countries.

Best of luck to both of them!
 

skogstokig

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I hope so.

Not sure if I’m right, but this will be the first ever major tournament to have no players from English speaking countries.

Best of luck to both of them!
would be the first such final yes. maybe also the first player from continental europe to reach a ranking event final?
 
Top