Ronnie O'Sullivan

[chrisjpainter]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/snooker/35581281

I've never been a big fan of O'Sullivan, but surely a stunt like this is bringing the game into disrepute? To deliberately turn down a 147 because £10,000 isn't enough is, I think, pretty reprehensible.

 

It'd be small minded to suggest a ban and a fine of £10,001 wouldn't it?

[hambone]

Just watched this on the news, my thought was 'how nice to be in a position to be able to turn down 10 grand'. No one has lost out except O'Sullivan himself

[SneakyD]

The promoter would make a far larger amount in royalties, why shouldn't he let the prize money build up until it has reached an amount commensurate to the achievement? After all it is open to any other player to score a 147 and claim the prize.

[Whitebridges]

He's his own man.

 

Look through the history and prize money paid for a 147 break.

 

Maybe snooker is on the wane as a spectator sport in the UK and Europe? It's booming in Asia.

 

In this particular case fair pay to him having a bleat.

[Danger-Mouse]

It`s his choice. I can see why he did it even if I don`t entirely agree with it. Then again £10k is a huge amount of money to me, to Ronnie it`s really nothing and he knows he will probably stand a decent chance of winning a bigger prize somewhere down the line.

 

I know lots of people will really attack him over this but when you consider that for his fastest ever maximum he made £147,000 + £18,000 it`s easy to see why he was dismissive of the amount.

[Smokersmith]

Perhaps he's marketing the re-launch of ..

 

DENIM ..... "For the man who doesn't have to try too hard" ..........

[Hamster]

He will go down in history as the only player to have turned down the chance of a televised 147 on purpose to prove a point, £10k is a cheap price for that plus you never know the organisers might get the hint.

 

If a football player is worth £100k a week then he's worth more than £10k for the feat.

[toontastic]

Must be nice to find 10,000 insulting, my other half cleans up after dementia patients who have soiled themselves and spends six hours a day cleaning carpets, bedding and clothes and 10k isn't even her yearly wage.

[pontbeck]

That really brings it all into perspective. He would have known the prize structure before entering . Arrogance personified.

[lord_seagrave]

In his own words:

 

"I knew it was £10,000. I could have done it, but I didn't think the prize was worthy of a 147. So I've tried to let it build up until it's worthy and then go for it,"

 

Fair play to him, I reckon.

 

LS

[AVB]

It's insulting and unacceptable. What next. Throwing a game because the prize money isn't enough?

[buze]

I think he is right. He's not bringing the game into disrepute, he's making a point by preventing the 147 break to become completely worthless. If he starts accepting THAT, in 5 years, he'll get 500 quid for it, and his lifehood will be gone. The fact that there's only 10k for a 147 *now what* is bringing the game into disrepute.

 

Mind you he's /partialy/ at fault here, as he made so many of them -- we all enjoyed them, sometime many times --; however now I think he realized that by pleasing the crowd, he shot himself a little bit in the foot. It's not a subtle way of trying to correct the situation, but ultimately, he's right.

 

And yes, given what the BBC pays it's 'stars' and waste on completely abysmal shows, and given the trend in asian countries, AND given that lame footies get paid 10k before they get out of bed... I think it's insulting to his talent (because, lets be clear -- you like or not like his personality, but he's a bleeping genius at snooker--)

 

10k is not going very far into his pension fund, for when he's no longer on top. By then his 147's will all still be used as wonderful footage by the BBC, while he eats pastas in his 70's.

[pontbeck]

Times change , sports are popular then decline, be thankful for what is achievable because it might not be there tomorrow

[AVB]

I think he is right. He's not bringing the game into disrepute, he's making a point by preventing the 147 break to become completely worthless. If he starts accepting THAT, in 5 years, he'll get 500 quid for it, and his lifehood will be gone. The fact that there's only 10k for a 147 *now what* is bringing the game into disrepute.

 

Mind you he's /partialy/ at fault here, as he made so many of them -- we all enjoyed them, sometime many times --; however now I think he realized that by pleasing the crowd, he shot himself a little bit in the foot. It's not a subtle way of trying to correct the situation, but ultimately, he's right.

 

And yes, given what the BBC pays it's 'stars' and waste on completely abysmal shows, and given the trend in asian countries, AND given that lame footies get paid 10k before they get out of bed... I think it's insulting to his talent (because, lets be clear -- you like or not like his personality, but he's a bleeping genius at snooker--)

 

10k is not going very far into his pension fund, for when he's no longer on top. By then his 147's will all still be used as wonderful footage by the BBC, while he eats pastas in his 70's.

I disagree. He knew the prize fund, or should have done, before entering. If he wasn't happy with it he shouldn't have entered. As I said above what if he realised the prize money wasn't enough and threw the game/match? Jockeys get bans for not trying and so should he.

[LondonLuke]

I disagree. He knew the prize fund, or should have done, before entering. If he wasn't happy with it he shouldn't have entered. As I said above what if he realised the prize money wasn't enough and threw the game/match? Jockeys get bans for not trying and so should he.

I agree but at 140-0 it was a done deal regardless of the black being potted.

[Danger-Mouse]

I disagree. He knew the prize fund, or should have done, before entering. If he wasn't happy with it he shouldn't have entered. As I said above what if he realised the prize money wasn't enough and threw the game/match? Jockeys get bans for not trying and so should he.

 

He probably had a very good idea of what the prize money was but that doesn`t necessarily mean he knew what the prize for the biggest break was. The article posted says he asked the referee and the commentators what the bonus for the highest break was. And in point of fact he won that prize with the 146. The article also states that the pink he elected to take was the easier shot so one could argue that he was giving himself the best chance of winning the highest break prize.

 

Choosing not to go for the 147 isn`t even close to throwing a match and if anyone thinks banging in a 146 isn`t trying then they`re having a laugh because there are plenty of pros who will never score that high a break in competition.

[andrewluke]

were bookies offering odds on someone having a 147 break,if so i would be well ****** off if i bet on it happening!

Edited February 15, 2016 by andrewluke

[Winston72]

Maybe hes just set out to get everybody talking about him again? if so it seems to have worked, watched that frame and the man seems on form, personally i'm a fan.

[billytheghillie]

Always was a ****, and is still a ****.

[shaun4860]

It's not the first time, well it sort of isn't,

 

Couple of years ago he got into a position where he was on the final black for a 147,

 

Before playing the shot he asked the ref what the bonus for a 147 was, the ref told him there wasn't a bonus for a 147 so he decided not to pot the black,

 

The ref had a word and said "do it for the fans", he returned to the table and potted it.

 

Now people on here are saying it's not disrespectful, but in my opinion it is for the fans.... they pay the entrance fee to see good snooker and maybe, just maybe a chance to see a 147, which may be the only time they will ever see one live,

 

Then to have a player, any player not go through with it just because he doesn't think he is being paid enough is disrespectful.......well that's my tuppence worth anyway

 

[hambone]

It's not the first time, well it sort of isn't,

 

Couple of years ago he got into a position where he was on the final black for a 147,

 

Before playing the shot he asked the ref what the bonus for a 147 was, the ref told him there wasn't a bonus for a 147 so he decided not to pot the black,

 

The ref had a word and said "do it for the fans", he returned to the table and potted it.

 

Now people on here are saying it's not disrespectful, but in my opinion it is for the fans.... they pay the entrance fee to see good snooker and maybe, just maybe a chance to see a 147, which may be the only time they will ever see one live,

 

Then to have a player, any player not go through with it just because he doesn't think he is being paid enough is disrespectful.......well that's my tuppence worth anyway

 

Had not considered that aspect of it and that is a very valid point

[felly100]

It was the penultimate red colour combo when he opted for a tricky pink instead of the black.

If any snooker player can make a 146 as a 'protest' then he's worth the entrance fee.

[Trevorevans]

It's not the first time, well it sort of isn't,

 

Couple of years ago he got into a position where he was on the final black for a 147,

 

Before playing the shot he asked the ref what the bonus for a 147 was, the ref told him there wasn't a bonus for a 147 so he decided not to pot the black,

 

The ref had a word and said "do it for the fans", he returned to the table and potted it.

 

Now people on here are saying it's not disrespectful, but in my opinion it is for the fans.... they pay the entrance fee to see good snooker and maybe, just maybe a chance to see a 147, which may be the only time they will ever see one live,

 

Then to have a player, any player not go through with it just because he doesn't think he is being paid enough is disrespectful.......well that's my tuppence worth anyway

 

+1. The guy is a complete ****. Self promotion built on arrogance. If it's not cheating the game then it's cheating the fans. He was also once playing pretty badly against Hendry something happened, I.e. in-off or foul of some sort and he just walked up to Steven shook his hand and walked out of the arena with frames left to play. Hendry just looked bewildered. The fans again were cheated buy paying for a match they didn't get to watch. Edited February 15, 2016 by Trevorevans

[Dave-G]

I don't watch it but If the prize builds up I see it as a tactical decision to wait for a bigger pay off, Fair play for having the nuts to gamble he could do it again later for more money and its sporting that someone else could cop for it.

 

Is there much difference between that and playing a snooker when a ball could have been potted?

Edited February 15, 2016 by Dave-G

[Psyxologos]

Good on him. He did nothing wrong. After all, I doubt he needs it. If he did then he would have gone for it...