posted Jan 1, 2007

Ronnie has made a fool of so many. As one contributor said earlier when he conceded his UK quarter he missed a red, looked around to see what damage he had done and when he realised he had let his opponent in he then conceded. How is this linked to depression? As for Ronnie not having broken the rules and saying it is job and he can walk out when we wants that is a simply absurd statement. If a bus driver for example decided to leave his bus halfway through a shift with loads of passengers on it I can assure you (jbbyrnes) that would be the end of his time with that bus company. Your defence of this self absorbed man is simply pathetic.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 3, 2007

The guy has simply lost the plot. He is, & always has been in my opinion, to big for his boots. With Snooker currently struggling to attract sponsorship, the guy needs to understand his responsibility that he has to the paying public & snooker itself. When you turn pro & receive the rules & regulations from the governing body, article 1a reads "To act like a professional sportsman at all times". Ronnie is in breach of this & should be treated as such by the board. The only help he needs is to find out how to get his feet back on the floor....J

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 3, 2007

I agree with Johnboy57's comments. but acting professional is not something that can be judged by set critera like not conceeding a match. Being unprofessional in terms of 1a concerns incidentls like Ronnie's treatment of Alain Robidoux many years ago when he openly insulted him during and after a match. You simply cannot argue the point that conceeding a match is anything other than the prerrogative of the player concerned because there is no legitimate argument to make. I agree what he done is bad for the sport and its image to people new to it, but people often forget that professionals play not only for the public but for themselves and to make a living. If they only ever done what the viewers wanted they would have no control over their own careers, and we would lose much of the excitement and controversy that makes the game so great.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 3, 2007

jbbyrnes your statement that players play for themselves and to make a living has no relevance. Is Ronnie playing to make a living? I would suggest Ronnie has made enough money for several lifetimes. Your attempt to defend him is admirable. You should ask him if you can become his agent. Show him the comments you have made on these pages and I reckon you have a job. Any neutral with a remote amount of intelligence would agree the man is nothing but a fraud and needs to be kicked into touch.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 5, 2007

The point I am making, frameandfortune, is that when the players enter the arena they are doing so for themselves as much as they are for the viewers. If you stopped making so much fuss about how let down you feel and how he owes something to you as a viewer then maybe these incidents would be more infrequent as people would ignore them and not feel compelled to comment on them weeks after the event. People the world over will now be watching Ronnie and Rodney Walker very closely to see what comes of this - publicity which is not bad for either the player or the game I'm sure you'll agree. I'm not saying what happened is good, but if it gets people watching the sport and discussing it in-depth as we do here, is it ultimately a bad thing? I think not.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 5, 2007

jbbyrnes I don't feel down by Ronnie walking out. If Ronnie wants to walk out of a match, punch a referee, use foul language to his opponent he can, as long as he receives the relevant punishment afterwards. If people like snooker they will watch it. If anyone needs the sort of publicity Ronnie gave the sport for them to watch it they are not snooker fans and snooker doesn't need hooligan type soccer fans brought to the sport. The fact is people make efforts to go to watch these matches; taking time off work etc. and Ronnie should be brought to account and ultimately handed a severe punishment.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 8, 2007

It seems we will have to agree to disagree on this one, frameandfortune. I cannot agree that Ronnie must face formal discipliniary action for exercising his own judgement, however poor that judgement may be. However, I too am one of the many fans disappointed by the all-too-soon ending of what could have ben a classic encounter, so I guess we must take this incident for what it is - one of the many things that makes this game to great to watch and be a part of. So, on to the next thread.....

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 12, 2007

I heard Rodney Walker had lunch with Ronnie the other day to discuss Ronnie's walk out at the UK. Wouldn't it be good if Joe Bloggs could walk out of his job one day without a word to anyone and then have the boss offer you to lunch to talk about it the next week. It is another example of double standards. If that had been Quentin Hann would there have been any lunch offers or the like? Of course not. This is Ronnie. We musn't upset him because he might walk away from the game. We wouldn't want that. We would rather have world war 3 break out. I wonder if Ronnie walked out during that lunch? Maybe the broccoli wasn't quite good enough for his refined tastes!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 26, 2007

Seems like Rodney Walker is O'Sullivans friend as well.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Nov 1, 2008

No, he's good for the game. Didn't those people get a refund?

add comment | complain about this comment