20140430-135354.jpg

Ronnie O'Sullivan named player of the year at awards ceromony

Just wanted to see what your opinions on this were, personally I would of nominated Ding Junhui and Neil Robertson over Ronnie O’Sullivan for this award this year and I hate to say it even Mark Selby would of got my vote over Ronnie.

Do the people who make these decisions at World Snooker even watch Snooker? do they know what each player has achieved in a season or do they just pick names out of a hat?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Discussion
  1. 1.
    I would have gone with Ding Junhui as well for a great season just over, as you said, Robertson for his remarkable ton of tons.
    2.
    Odd decision. If I were making the decision(s) I would have started engraving Ding's name by the time he won the International Championship - that being three ranking event wins in a row.

    Either way, does anyone really care about awards anymore, snooker or otherwise?
    3.
    after such a defeat and personal disappointment world snooker are just keeping ron sweet because they want there golden hen to keep playing.. if ronnie would have won then we may have seen go to ding
    4.
    To be honest, I would have voted for Ronnie too. What he did in the Masters and in the Welsh Open was outstanding, plus he won the CoC and made the final of the WC for the third time in a row.
    Ding was definitely brilliant and I would have choosen him over Ronnie if only he appeared on a major final except the one who won (International Champ). His results in the UK,Masters and World were pretty disappointing.
    6.
    streamer45
    To be honest, I would have voted for Ronnie too. What he did in the Masters and in the Welsh Open was outstanding, plus he won the CoC and made the final of the WC for the third time in a row.
    Ding was definitely brilliant and I would have choosen him over Ronnie if only he appeared on a major final except the one who won (International Champ). His results in the UK,Masters and World were pretty disappointing.


    Agree with this. Ding won more but he won titles that a lot of the top players didn't even enter. Fact remains he has a poor record in the big events, being hammered by Ronnie in the Welsh Open final and his first round exit at the WC were probably decisive enough to give Ronnie the award.
    7.
    streamer45
    To be honest, I would have voted for Ronnie too. What he did in the Masters and in the Welsh Open was outstanding, plus he won the CoC and made the final of the WC for the third time in a row.
    Ding was definitely brilliant and I would have choosen him over Ronnie if only he appeared on a major final except the one who won (International Champ). His results in the UK,Masters and World were pretty disappointing.

    I agree. Despite losing his world title Ronnie had a brilliant season. He was unbeatable in the Masters where he totally destroyed Selby 10-4 in the final and the way he won the Welsh Open with a 147 against Ding in the final was fantastic. Winning the first Champion of Champions event, beating Ding and Robertson along the way, and reaching his third World Championship final in a row, beating Shaun Murphy 13-3 in the quarter final, are great achievements as well.
    8.
    It's amazing how close a call it is, because in a couple of the previous seasons it was very rare for any player to win more than one event, and now Ding won five and reached another final, but it's still not a lot more than what O'Sullivan and Robertson did. Obviously if any of these three had won the WC they should have won this award as well, but since none of them won it, it should have gone do Ding, in my opinion.
    9.
    Well of course it went to Ronnie, there's nobody else out there. World snooker, the BBC, the entire national press, all utterly Ronnie-centric. The BBC sports news the day after the final was incredible, they Hardly mentioned Selby, just kept on about how Ronnie was still on track for a 6th world title. It's pathetic, demeaning to the other players and entirely unhealthy for snooker as a whole. We all know what happens when you put all your eggs in one basket, particularly one so fragile.

    -
    10.
    PatBlock
    Well of course it went to Ronnie, there's nobody else out there. World snooker, the BBC, the entire national press, all utterly Ronnie-centric. The BBC sports news the day after the final was incredible, they Hardly mentioned Selby, just kept on about how Ronnie was still on track for a 6th world title. It's pathetic, demeaning to the other players and entirely unhealthy for snooker as a whole. We all know what happens when you put all your eggs in one basket, particularly one so fragile.

    -

    yeah and? thats snooker/entertainment! what do you set the reds up with?! a triangle. welcome to the piramid factor of the sport called snooker, there's only room for one,
    11.
    j6uk
    yeah and? thats snooker/entertainment! what do you set the reds up with?! a triangle. welcome to the piramid factor of the sport called snooker, there's only room for one,


    I appreciate that ROS is something special, very special indeed and we may never see the like of him ever again. But it's unhealthy to obsess. If we keep telling the world that Ronnie = snooker and visa versa, they may just start to believe it and when he goes, so may the all too flimsy coverage we get (Despite having a so-called 'promoter' at the helm) at the moment. Surely you see that a more rounded profile would be better for the long term interest in and survival of the sport.

    -
    12.
    PatBlock
    I appreciate that ROS is something special, very special indeed and we may never see the like of him ever again. But it's unhealthy to obsess. If we keep telling the world that Ronnie = snooker and visa versa, they may just start to believe it and when he goes, so may the all too flimsy coverage we get (Despite having a so-called 'promoter' at the helm) at the moment. Surely you see that a more rounded profile would be better for the long term interest in and survival of the sport.

    -

    no! what, so there's room for two? there's only one winner. i'm sure it don't need me to spell it out.. who puts the bums on seats and captures the imagination? it never has come down to ether or, only one, be that ronnie,jimmy or alex. that's the way it works, the cult of the anti hero, the fallen and flawed.. see what im getting at?
    13.
    Ding's achievement was very remarkable matching Hendry's record with 5 ranking titles. Clear winner for me. Even O'Sullivan commented

    "Ding is the in-form player. If he wins this he will equal the record for ranking titles in a season. People talk about records but that record is worth having. You are a winner if you do that sort of stuff."

    He doesn't decide the winner, of course, but I think he's absolutely right about this particular record and therefore Ding should've been named the player of the year. :)
    14.
    I think this was a public vote wasn't it? At the Crucible there were all these little cards for you to fill in "Who's your player of the year?" and the choices were Ding, Ronnie and Neil, I think. Unless it's just a parallel thing to compare and contrast with the offiical vote?
    15.
    I agree I think Ronnie deserved the Award the way he has Played in some of the Events hes Won thrashing Opponents with World Class Performances and that 147 at the end was Unreal which Tops it off! as for Ding he hasnt proved himself at the Big Events at all yet and maybe another Jimmy!!!....lol
    16.
    gazza147
    I agree I think Ronnie deserved the Award the way he has Played in some of the Events hes Won thrashing Opponents with World Class Performances and that 147 at the end was Unreal which Tops it off! as for Ding he hasnt proved himself at the Big Events at all yet and maybe another Jimmy!!!....lol


    At all? He's won Masters once and UK twice. :)
    17.
    A bit of a tough call, although since they must have known that the fans' player of the year was Ronnie O'Sullivan, there might have been reason to give the Player of the Year to Ding. Five titles in a season would surely have won it any other year and it may never happen again.

    I was more surprised that the Magic Moment of the Year went to Mark Selby for making the 100th maximum, rather than Neil Robertson for making the 100th ton. I say that because Selby just happened to hit his maximum at the right time when there were 99 already, whereas Robertson made all 99 previous centuries himself!
    18.
    The Statman

    I was more surprised that the Magic Moment of the Year went to Mark Selby for making the 100th maximum, rather than Neil Robertson for making the 100th ton. I say that because Selby just happened to hit his maximum at the right time when there were 99 already, whereas Robertson made all 99 previous centuries himself!


    They couldn't have known if Robbo went on to reach the 100th when they were voting. And that's the reason why they introduced a new special award for exactly that achievement.
    19.
    streamer45
    They couldn't have known if Robbo went on to reach the 100th when they were voting. And that's the reason why they introduced a new special award for exactly that achievement.
    Why not? They gave Performance of the Year to Selby for winning the Worlds, so it must have been decided after the championship.
    20.
    j6uk
    no! what, so there's room for two? there's only one winner. i'm sure it don't need me to spell it out.. who puts the bums on seats and captures the imagination? it never has come down to ether or, only one, be that ronnie,jimmy or alex. that's the way it works, the cult of the anti hero, the fallen and flawed.. see what im getting at?


    I do, and those players are an essential part of the healthy mix needed AS WELL, but should not be seen as the be all and and all of the sport. This was never the case with Alex Higgins for example, yes he was in the press a lot but not necessarily for snooker reasons, and he certainly was not regarded as snooker personified, other players of the time had equal coverage and equal respect.

    -
    21.
    The Statman
    Why not? They gave Performance of the Year to Selby for winning the Worlds, so it must have been decided after the championship.


    Fair point there :p
    22.
    Personnaly I think it's kind of a joke to have given this award to Ronnie. OK, he's had great performances, came back to the World Final again, was close to making history with a third title in a row, had a magic 147 to top it all but at the other hand, Ding had won 5 ranking events (5!!) and was just invicible at some point of the season. So to me, Ding should have been the clear winner.

    And to get back to one comment I saw earlier, I agree that World Snooker should stop promoting snooker only trhough Ronnie's performances. There is a Ronnie-addcition which I found dangerous because even when a bloke wins 5 titles, or hit a ton of tons in a single season, he's (partially) eclipsed by any single result Ronnie does. That's not fair. Ding, Robbo, Selby, Higgins, Maguire, Murphy....all these guys are wonderful promoters of the game, each with their own qualities, and they deserved to be put on the front row. I understand Ronnie is THE biggest ticket machines we have in the game....but relying solely on him is putting all your eggs in the same basket.
    23.
    I can understand why this decision was made. Think about it logically.

    Ding has won 5 events this year, Ronnie has won 4.

    Ronnie won the second biggest event of the year - the Masters. Ding lost in the first round of the Masters

    Ronnie got to the final of the World Championships, Ding lost in the first round.

    Ronnie also won the Champion of Champions, which was a real creme de la creme field. Ding lost in the second round. To Ronnie.

    Ronnie also walloped Ding the only other time that they met during the season, and made a 147 in the final frame.

    You could make a case for Ding, but he won the Shanghai Masters, the International Championship and the China Open in his home country, and also won the German Masters and Indian Open. Rightly or wrongly, he didn't perform particularly well in any of what are seen as the biggest events.
    24.
    wake_up_bomb
    You could make a case for Ding, but he won the Shanghai Masters, the International Championship and the China Open in his home country, ...
    I believe Ronnie O'Sullivan won his major events in own country ;)
    25.
    The Statman
    I believe Ronnie O'Sullivan won his major events in own country ;)
    Maybe it is an unfair critique of Ding to state that he won 3 of this 5 ranking events in China, but it is not unfair to say that he totally flopped in the biggest events. I didn't mention the UK Championships before, which Ding was okay in, but he didn't make the quarter-finals. He didn't make the last eight of any of the so-called 'Blue Riband' events, or the Champions of Champions, so for me he wasn't the player of the season, even though he has done very well in the lesser ranking events.
    26.
    PatBlock
    I appreciate that ROS is something special, very special indeed and we may never see the like of him ever again. But it's unhealthy to obsess. If we keep telling the world that Ronnie = snooker and visa versa, they may just start to believe it and when he goes, so may the all too flimsy coverage we get (Despite having a so-called 'promoter' at the helm) at the moment. Surely you see that a more rounded profile would be better for the long term interest in and survival of the sport.

    -


    There is always room for a superior player. Ronnie will leave the sport one day, and there most certainly will be a player to rival them all from probably Asia/India given the population. It happens in every sport and industry. Every new player that comes along sets a higher and higher bar.
    27.
    thelongbomber
    There is always room for a superior player. Ronnie will leave the sport one day, and there most certainly will be a player to rival them all from probably Asia/India given the population. It happens in every sport and industry. Every new player that comes along sets a higher and higher bar.


    Absolutely. I just worry that the media will finally lose all interest in snooker once Ronnie's gone, because atm he's all they're interested in.

    -
    28.
    Ronnie has won 4 events this season, including one of the majors, the Masters, for a 5th time. He's also made the Final of the World Championship for the third time in a row, something that had not been done since Hendry in the early 90th. He's won a ranking event, the Welsh Open with a 147 - a première - and he set a new record in the process, nobody else has 13 competitive maximums. He's won the Masters playing some outstanding snooker including 556 unanswered points in a 6-0 whitewash of Walden in the QF, again a new record. If you don't think that's an exceptional season, I'm not sure what you need.

    Robertson has won 2 events, including a major the UK Championship and made 102 centuries which is remarkable but that doesn't top ROS season in my view. Why? because with that he's got a ratio centuries/frames played of 1 century every 8.17 frames - as a comparison ROS in 2008 had a ratio of 1 century every 7.66 frames. So breakbuilding wise it's been done and better before, only there weren't enough tournaments at the time to reach the hundred.

    Mark Selby has also won 2 events, including the World Championship and he's made the final in all 3 majors. For me he's ahead of Robertson. Selby got "Performance of the year" for winning the WC, just as ROS did last year for the same achievement. He also got "magic moment of the year for his 147 at the UK, the 100th in snooker history. Mark Selby would have been ahead of Robertson as well in my view anyway.

    Ding won 5 ranking events and that's also something nobody had done since Hendry in the early 90th. I was expecting him to get player of the year actually. There were suggestion that him snubbing the awards ceremony could have played a role in the fact that he didn't. But I wonder if the reason is not different. For all he's won this season Ding has done very poorly in all three majors: last 16 exit in UK, round 1 exit in the Masters, round 1 exit in the World. So once again when it really mattered he couldn't deliver. And that IMO is the main reason why he's not got it.
    29.
    I think Monique is right about Ding. By my opinion he should have been player of the year with Robertson and O´Sullivan close behind. But magic moment of the year should have been Robertsons 100 th century. I agree that the ratio of centuries has been seen before both by O´Sullivan and Hendry, but it´s a record that will be remembered on line with 1. televised 147, O´Sullivans 5.20 break etc. And I wonder if O´Sullivan could have kept the consistensy to reach 100 even in the years he was playing full time.
    30.
    thelongbomber
    It happens in every sport and industry. Every new player that comes along sets a higher and higher bar.


    Two examples to the contrary: Bradman in cricket and Sugar Ray Robinson in boxing(I'm ignorant of cricket but the boxing one is certainy the case) - sometimes you find someone came along decades before and set the bar so high it's been unreachable ever since.
    31.
    I'm a Ding fan but I really don't see how you could give him Player of the Year when he had no impact in the 3 major events, Worlds, UK and Masters. I don't buy the one either that Ronnie is the biggest box office ever. Alex Higgins drew the crowds in far more. He could guarantee to fill any venue.
    32.
    I'd take Robertson,O'Sullivan and Selby's seasons over Ding's.

    Selby played the finals of all the three big tournaments,winning the biggest one by beating the two best players in the world.

    Robertson won the UK championship,lost an incredible match against Selby in the WSC and made over a 100 centuries.

    Ronny won 4 titles,won the masters,played in the final of the WSC.

    Ding lost in the first round of both the Masters and the WSC,and the 1/8 at the UK champ.Great achievement to win 5 tournaments but you can't completely flop at the three most important events and be considered the best player of the year...at least that's my opinion.
    33.
    yeah I would have gone for ronnie. champ of champs, masters so convincingly, as was the welsh open with a magical 12th maxi etc. dings been up and down and how many of his tournament wins did ronnie play in? also with so many tournaments now theres bound to be more multiple tournament winners and seasons century breaks. still great achievements but ronnie out shines for me
    35.
    dieselman147
    dings been up and down and how many of his tournament wins did ronnie play in?


    I know it's probably a rhetorical question, but I'll answer it anyway... :smile:

    Ding Junhui and Ronnie O'Sullivan played together in twelve tournaments last season, O'Sullivan won four, Ding two, the other six were won by other players (Selby twice). :smile:
    36.
    O'Sullivan is a great player for sure but he is a part-time player
    who picks and choses his tournaments so he is fresh and rested
    for those he does play in. Hardly what a true champion would do.
    Ding played well in winning several tournaments altho he did not
    do well in the major events however it was a real accomplishment
    to win what he did.
    Robertson to me is the true champion who on and off the table
    exemplifies the game of snooker much like Hendry did in his day.

    I would have chosen Robertson or Ding.
    37.
    Surely a 'true champion' knows which battles to fight and which to not fight, which is precisely what Ronnie does. Are you suggesting that a true champion enters every competition going?
    Was Ronnie not a true champion when he took the best part of a year off and with little or no match fitness takes to the field and beats everyone hands down? I cant recall anyone in any other professional sport taking a year off competition and turning up and winning the World Championship