Club Crisis
Following the appointment of Barry Hearn as the new chairman of the WPBSA, which we all welcome with some relish, I hope that somewhere along the line the new man will take a long hard look at the amateur game and the people who compete at grass roots level.
As the owner of one of the biggest commercial clubs in the country we have in recent years seen a very serious decline. We opened in 1982 with 22 snooker tables but due to the recession and decline in business we have diversified and now have 15 snooker tables, 10 English pool tables and 7 dartboards.
The amateur game is pretty much in turmoil and most players at this level will confirm that the EASB is a shambles and to my knowledge does not even get financial support from Sport England when I am led to believe that 50 other sports far less popular than snooker get given considerable amounts of money.
Pro-am tournaments a few years ago were immensely successful for all commercial clubs and you could look around the country every weekend and choose from at least five or six events to play in, with good prize money and big entries. Sadly, that all disappeared and needs to be re-introduced.
In my area the Bristol League attracted 140 teams playing in six or seven divisions at the peak of the game but these days they only have three divisions with a total of 40 teams.
In 1985 the Bristol League attracted 135 players for their annual under 18 event but now, due to lack of support, they do not run any junior tournaments.
In the boom years we had over 20 big commercial clubs in the
Barry Hearn has massive problems with the professional game that’s for sure and no doubt he will deal with them in his usual manner but at some stage I hope he will take a serious look at the amateur set up and the game at local league level.
Derek Curnow,
Clive Everton comments: Derek Curnow raises important issues but is perhaps too severe on EASB, whose relationship with Sport England is entangled in sport politics.
Jumping to it
I note your recent comments in Snooker Scene on unintentional jump shots, which would certainly merit some consideration, and I would suggest that only a simple change would be necessary to implement the idea into the rules—though the powers that be seem to have lost interest in improving them.
My solution would be to change the wording in the preamble to Section 2 Rule 19 by changing the comma after 'not' to a full stop and inserting (before 'except:') An intentional jump shot is a foul, followed by the rest of the rule as written.
Thus, an intentional jump could still be made as long as the initial contact with an object ball is proper, such as a sideways jump over some other reds while playing the first red with an elevated cue for positional purposes, whether during a pot or playing safe. The jump rebound off a secondary contact with a cushion would also still be fair.
All unintentional jumps would only be fouls if another infringement was also made, such as striking a ball not on or making a miss.
Peter Rook by e-mail
(Feb 2010)
Jumping to it...
It is interesting to read comments on the jump shot in your magazine, prompted by a shot played by Nigel Bond at the Crucible in April. However, I don’t really see what all the fuss is about.
The clear intention of the jump shot rule is to prevent the cue-ball from travelling on a path, or reaching a point on the table, by airborne movement which would not be available had it remained on the level, because of an intervening ball. That to me is fairly sound logic, and the rule as written covers it perfectly satisfactorily.
Yes, the rule does go into more detail because it needs to define the boundary between what is considered to be a jump shot and what falls short of that. And yes, the rule disregards any travel of the cue-ball after it has made its first contact with an object ball. But it does prevent the cue-ball from making an initial jump over an object ball and, helpfully, therefore outlaws a jump as a means of escape from a snooker.
The important point is that the cue-ball has reached somewhere that it should not have been able to reach, and I cannot therefore agree with Clive Everton’s comment (November 2009) that a jump shot caused by a miscue should be legitimised. No other call of foul makes reference to whether or not it is deliberate — surely almost all fouls are accidental! — and neither should it.
Chris Downer, by e-mail
(Dec 2009)
Hung Out to Dry
Your Glasgow Notebook item ‘Artistic Temperament’ (Snooker Scene November) mentions that an architect' hung himself.'
It should be ‘hanged,’ as this is the correct use of the verb when talking about a person, as opposed to a jury or clothes which are hung.
Hope this helps and that you won’t have to write too many more articles referring to hanging!
Nick Hill, by e-mail
(Dec 2009)
Made in
I was disappointed to read in a recent issue your reference to Chinese-made tables further reducing British influence in the equipment market and that Milliken as the cloth manufacturer is American owned. While Milliken is indeed the present-day parent, our company and its local management are very much British and we are proud of our Strachan & Co heritage and the ‘Made in
Billiard cloth has been made on this site in Gloucestershire since the 11th century and remains today a large local employer and successful export business. Variations of our product have clothed several Popes, thousands of British soldiers over the years and the Duke of Edinburgh wore a uniform made from our cloth at his marriage to the Queen.
The business in its present form was bought by a member of the Strachan family in 1865, the same year Seth Milliken and William Deering founded their woollen fabrics business in the
Duncan Kettell, marketing director, Milliken
As we said (August issue) an American company, Milliken, supplies cloth to the professional circuit which is manufactured by Strachan at Stroud. As a Belgian company was already supplying balls for the circuit, it seems to us that the appointment of a Chinese company to sell tables made it reasonable to infer that British influence in the equipment trade is not as dominant as it once was.
Kicks
I was pleased you drew attention to Martin Goodwill’s research into the causes of kicks (Snooker Scene July).
As a long-standing manufacturer of snooker cloth, we have been criticised for contributing to the kick phenomenon on the professional circuit, where Strachan cloth is exclusively used. We now know this is not the case.
In snooker, conditions can vary from one tournament to the next but the cloth does not. However, when a player experienced a kick on the table, the cloth often got the blame. Thanks to Martin, we now know the true causes.
Duncan Kettell, Marketing Director, Milliken Woollen Speciality Products.
The interesting part of Martin Goodwill’s article on Kicks – Snooker Scene July 2009 was that he was able to validate Ben Plummer’s idea that the super clean caused kicks by producing kicks on demand.
He writes: “I can say with 100% certainly that you can’t play billiards with super clean balls. The balls kicked all the time and threw much wider angles” – presumably on his own table.
Clearly this needs to be translated into the public sphere. Would some enterprising official at the
Uniquely, however, both English billiards and snooker ate played on the same table with same size balls. All that remains is for the WPBSA to do something!
Just for Kicks
Having read Martin Goodwill’s comments about the causes of kicks (see Snooker Scene July), I think it is the most logical explanation of something that has plagued our games for years.
I have always thought that it is the grip between one rotating surface and a stationary one that will cause a kick.
Kicks caused by chalk will always happen but they are rarer than people think. Chalk cannot seriously be blamed for the many kicks at the Crucible this year with highly polished new balls and new cloth etc .
As Martin says, we at billiards are constantly handling the balls and they become a little bit greasy. I have recently stopped polishing the cue ball on my shirt before putting it in the D, or the red on the spot, and have only had one kick in about thirty hours of play since reading his comments.
Another experiment is to hold a ball in each hand and polish the two surfaces until very shiny, then touch them gently together and rotate them slowly against each other. You will find that they stick. Do it again after handling them a bit and you will find that they stick a lot less.
To sum up, try just wiping chalk off of the balls but not trying to get them too shiny and see what happens.
Roy Bacon by e-mail
I tuned in to the tournament [World Series Grand Finals] in
Why tinker with such a great game? I certainly will no longer support snooker if it continues down this road.
After reading your match report in June Snooker Scene I feel I must protest at your comments regarding the conduct of the fans travelling from
I was present during the match between Mark Allen and Ronnie O' Sullivan and although we were loud at times it was never while the shots were being played. One of our travelling party was ejected from the arena during this match because of shouting out when one of the frames had ended, his comment being "nice one Mark".
Most of the supporters present from
However, the noise levels and possible distractions to the players generated by these fans were not any greater or more badly timed than that of the O'Sullivan supporters who were not reprimanded at all.
I feel that the heavy-handed approach taken by the security staff and referees toward the
Having been a snooker player for 20 years myself at the top of Northern Ireland's amateur game I have experienced rowdy passionate crowds both against and in support of me and I can honestly say that their enthusiasm and energy for the game is inspirational and creates the tension and atmosphere that is now sometimes lacking in the BBC’s televised snooker events.
John Higgins even commented after beating Allen that the mostly pro-Allen crowd had been brilliant and that the cheers of support for both players had made for a very exciting match for the viewing public and for the players.
Reading Neil Robertson’s comments in the same issue I agree that there is a time and place for passion in sport and I can understand why he is more likely to take an interest in a sport with vocally passionate crowds and players than a sport which at first glace appears to be dull and boring, as snooker has been described by Ronnie O'Sullivan's recent biographer.
Recently, snooker has been in a bit of a crisis with the loss of sponsors for major tournaments and many people are coming up with radical ideas to improve the situation and make the game more appealing. What about the radical idea of letting the crowd enjoy itself and interact at appropriate times with the sport they are watching. Televised snooker needs to rediscover the passion it once knew in the time of its great entertainers, men such as Alex "the Hurricane" Higgins and Jimmy "the Whirlwind" White.
How would these players cope in the modern restrained era of snooker when the very essence of their game depended upon playing to the passions of the crowd? Is snooker really dying as O'Sullivan says or are the stuffy administrators killing it?
Colin Bingham, Antrim
Clive Everton comments: Colin Bingham is a former tour player, former Northern Ireland Champion and amateur no. 1 and is the proprietor of the Fountain Club, Antrim. His opinion should be given due weight.
What is ‘excessive’ is always a matter of opinion. Rightly or wrongly, the match referee did censure some of Allen’s supporters on this occasion.
The ideal snooker crowd would contain passionate supporters of both players while offering perfect quiet ‘on the shot’.
However, snooker crowds are often composed of people who simply like watching snooker without any particular affiliation to this or that player.
It is crowds like this, rather than players, who often convey a lifeless atmosphere.
While Alan Chamberlain's decision in the Selby-Dott incident was, technically, one way of interpreting the Rules, he did also have the option of applying Section 5 Rule 1 (a)(ii) as it was a situation "not covered adequately by rule" and he could have made "a decision in the
interests of fair play".
Commonsense would seem to suggest that a warning to Dott not to interfere with the referee's duties (i.e. don't touch a ball to prevent its entry into a pocket) and to treat it as having been conceded by the striker Dott to be an in-off would have sufficed. Referee Chamberlain had to make a quick decision and was not incorrect to act the way he did. But he could
have gone for the commonsense option.
Since my late friend
One such was in response to a situation that was brought to our attention by Steve Davis, where the striker, having potted a red, finished with the cue-ball surrounded by reds with no escape possible. If he played as required by rule he would probably leave an easy clearance on for his
opponent whereas, if he 'accidentally' fouled a red while making an awkward bridge, he would, if asked to play again, be 'on' a red.
Our suggested solution for this and similar incidents, was to give the next player the option. after a foul where a stroke had not been made, of having any disturbed balls replaced and the offender would be 'on' the same ball as before (in the case above this would be any colour of his choice) such that the principle used after a miss would also apply after a foul that is not part of a stroke, including the case you quoted in the Mark Allen-Martin Gould match.
As to the jump shot, this is clearly defined in Section 2 and if all instances of the cue-ball leaving the bed of the table were to be declared foul, then the slo-mo replays we have been treated to this year would show that more than 90% of all strokes played would be fouls.
A jump shot could be used when not snookered if it were not the rule as written. With only snooker escapes banned for 'jumps' and given the option of playing at a red in clear view tight against the top cushion from the 'D' or playing an easy jump over a colour to pot another red over a middle pocket it is not hard to guess the option that would appeal.
I met up with gentlemen from World Snooker and Professional Referees Association on the eve of the 2009 Welsh Open at
Peter Rook by e-mail
Clive Everton comments: All sound points. However, I remain convinced that an adequate wording could be found in relation to legitimising jump shots – which would certainly all be accidental – unless in escaping from a snooker.
With more that one red left, the wording would have to be something like: “A jump shot is a foul if used to make contact on any ball on which the striker may be snookered.”
Easy Pockets
Whilst watching the World Championship on TV it was stated that the pockets were a little easier on the tables this year compared to other championship tables. Surely all the tables for professional tournaments are adjusted to the WPBSA pocket templates and should be uniform.
If for example a world record break was made on either of these two tables it could not be officially accepted as the pockets are oversize or if these are correct then all the other years the pockets were under sized and any world records that have been made cannot be recognised.
I believe that the WPBSA would not accept any world records to tables that do not have the pockets made with the WPBSA template. Indeed I believe that they do not release copies of their templates to the trade for general use.
The second point I would like to make is about the kicks on the balls. If this had been any other major sport this problem would have been solved. Although it may not matter, as much in the amateur game I feel sorry when a professional loses a frame or a match through a kick.
Bob Camfield, by e-mail.
Clive Everton comments: The WPBSA has never shown the slightest interest in ratifying, or ratifying records. In so far that this is done at all, it is done by the likes of Snooker Scene.
Although pocket templates are standard, pockets have always varied in receptivity this year, they were more receptive then in some other years, even accepting that the pockets did conform to the templates.
Other than its institutionalised secrecy, it is difficult to understand why WPBSA templates are not released for wider use.
An American Writes
As I am located in the
To address several previous letters to the editor.
1. Michaela Tabb seems to be a fine referee and also easy on the eyes. I have no idea what a previous writer was referring to when he mentioned "showing skin". Perhaps Michaela should be wearing a burka?
2. Ronnie should not be crucified for poor behaviour in
3. As to the "unshaven, unkempt" issue, unless you issue uniforms to the players and enforce some sort of personal appearance regulations, you will get a varied turnout.
I think that part of the reason that snooker is not as popular worldwide as it once was is the "stodgy, stuffy" attitude that the older generation has toward it. I am not too put off by a bearded, long haired player that is potting balls. It takes all kinds, and I'd hate to see individualism suffer.
Wolfgang Oeller,
Sorting it Out
I would be grateful if you would allow me to comment on the article which appeared in your May issue headed "
1) That EASB delegates its billiards activities to EABA; 2) that EABA decline to co-operate with this venture; and? 3) That EABA will ban any of their players who participate in this event.
With regard to the first point, it is true that EASB entered into a legal contract for EABA to operate billiards on our behalf, and at that time they were wholly responsible for all our billiards activities. However, at the end of last year, the EABA activated a clause which allowed them to cancel this arrangement. The precise reason for this action was not specified.
Therefore, from
I can, however, confirm that the absence of any involvement by the EABA will not affect EASB providing a billiard team for the HIBSF, and other international events, which will be selected from our own membership. We will also be providing the trophies for this competition, which we hope to become a permanent fixture in the Home International series, and will do everything in our power to make this a success.
On the third point, I have been in touch with the EABA since reading your article and they assure me that the report is "inaccurate" and probably resulting from "tittle-tattle." This will no doubt come as a relief for those of our members who currently choose to compete on the EABA billiards circuit, and were fearful of reprisals resulting from their ambitions to represent their country.
Peter Ainsworth,
Company Secretary, EASB Ltd
Clive Everton comments: Several players had gained the impression, which we are pleased to hear was erroneous, that EABA members playing for
Ticket to Wride
When we contacted World Snooker Ltd, the WPBSA’s commercial arm, they offered to contact our reader directly but as he raised a matter of interest to many and as we do not in any case disclose contact details without expressed permission Snooker Scene insisted on a reply for publication. This was not forthcoming but WSL did issue a press release stating that they were aware of several agencies selling tickets at inflated prices. Accordingly, they had appointed See Tickets as their official agents to guarantee that the “most reasonable rates” would be offered.
WSL concluded: “it remains our policy to ensure booking fees are clearly shown throughout the booking process and we advise customers online and in printed material that ticket prices exclude booking fees.”
Product Categories
Search Products
