While players such as Mark Allen, Mark Selby, John Higgins and Stephen Maguire have all spoken out in favour of Barry Hearn’s plans to revolutionise the game, not everyone in the game shares their enthusiasm as first Mark Davis and now Peter Ebdon have expressed their concern…
Mark told The Argus:
“He is not chairman of just the top 16, he is the chairman of the whole tour so he has got to be careful. We all get a vote and if he says something ridiculous it won’t go down too well.
“You are still a good player if you are in the top 64. Is he trying to say that if you are 40th in the world then you don’t deserve to earn a living from the game? If I was a golfer or a tennis player in the world’s top 30 then I would be a millionaire.
“He seems only want to look after the top boys. That is fair enough but you can’t just discard the other players.
“There has been plenty of talk among the players about what he has said but until we know exactly what he plans to do then it is hard to say too much.
“I’m not entirely surprised as we knew he had a lot of changes in mind when he took over but it’s typical that the first time I get into the top 32 they talk about changing the system.”
While Peter told the Daily Express:
“The players should be very careful. I definitely won’t be backing it. Players must understand that if they give away 51 per cent then it’s lost for ever. No previous WPBSA chairman has asked for 51 per cent of the company.
“Barry Hearn is dynamic in the way he wants to create change. He’s bringing in one-frame and best-of-five matches. They’re novelty events. As a player, it’s a load of nonsense. You might as well toss a coin.
“I’ve spoken to players, who want proper tournaments with proper prize money.
“The general feeling is that this takeover attempt won’t be backed. There’s too much to lose. It should be for our association to run the game, not some outside company. This is ludicrous. I was on the previous board for five years when Rodney Walker did a fantastic job. He took us from £750,000 in debt to £4million in the bank, which was great considering the worldwide recession.”
May 5th promises to be a day of drama as the professional snooker players are tasked with choosing the future direction of their sport once again and like the last big vote that saw Sir Rodney Walker ejected as World Snooker chairman, I can see it being a close one again.
Given his strong links to the previous board it is unsurprising to see Peter speak in such terms and judging by this thread over at TSF he is not the only one who objects to the way that Barry Hearn proposes to run snooker in the future.
However based at least on the information that is in the public domain, I can’t agree with him on this one. Yes the players want ‘proper tournaments’ but as Dave Hendon has said recently, if the resources were there at the moment then would we not already have more ranking tournaments and not be in this position right now?
Now I would be lying if I said that one-frame events would be ones that would appeal to me. Indeed I have always been a fan of the longer frame matches and would be strongly opposed to any moves to reduce the length of the World Championship for example. It is important however that there are different formats in the game and if quickfire events on digital television for example can generate interest in the sport so that by the time the big events come round more people are watching, then surely they cannot be a bad thing.
Ultimately whoever runs the game will not be able to change things overnight, but with his connections and proven track record I would give Barry as good a chance as anyone to do so over time and although I have certain reservations, hope that his plan is given the thumbs up…
Loading tweets...
14 comments
Paul Coret says:
April 1, 2010 at 9:15 pm (UTC 0 )
I wonder why Ebdon never has spoken out when snooker was nearly dead under Walkers reign. probably because he was belonging to the walker clan. he was on the board was he not? I also cant believe Ebdon is saying Walker did a great job. yeah, money in the bank, but only 6 tournaments a year, pathetic. And look what venues they were held in. I am not saying Hearn is the messiah, but something had to change from the sport going bankrupt.
matt2745 says:
April 1, 2010 at 9:16 pm (UTC 0 )
Yeah he was on the board until around this time last year.
trophymad says:
April 1, 2010 at 9:36 pm (UTC 0 )
change always drags along fear with it and reading Mark Davis words I can see this side effect of change quite clearly. And his fears are understandable. If you are a top 10 Player you know very well that you won’t fall victim to any “mediocrity” sort out of Hearn. But if you are stuck in the middle of the ranking (which would be the defenition of mediocrity) than this new system is pretty threatening. But often enough it’s not the fault of the players that they get stuck in the middle of the ranking: The prize money is so little that you can only make a living of it, when you win constantly like the Top 10 Players do. Think about it, how many players do we have that make a lot of money? Ronnie, John, Mark S., Neil Robertson, Ding Junhui, Steve Davis, Stephen Hendry, Jimmy White and… Well, that’s 8 Players, add 10 if you like because I surely forgot some big names. But the lower you are in the ranking the harder it is to get commercial contracts that earns you some extra money. So what does a person do if she or he can’t make a living out of the sport? Right! They get themselves another job. That means less practice time at the table and as a result from that the form at the table isn’t going to be any better and the player can’t climb in the ranking. So far the players in the middle of the ranking and below had no chance to play enough to have the chance to base their lives on Snooker. But if Hearns Plan is backed up by them they will have the chance. But they must use it and perhaps this is the key factor in Hearns plan: Activation of all this Players who are stuck in the middle, try to make them klimb and get busy. I hope they’ll back him up, but I see their fears too.
matt2745 says:
April 1, 2010 at 9:39 pm (UTC 0 )
Yeah I can definitely see Mark’s fault to be fair and that’s why I can see the vote being very close. There are going to be players who will see the changes as being disadvantageous for them and will vote accordingly.
anon says:
April 1, 2010 at 9:44 pm (UTC 0 )
Surprise surprise an ex board member firing bullets at a takeover bid by one of the most succesful sports promoters around! I was at the EGM when Ebdon spoke up in defense of Walker and made a spectacle of himself . After that outburst and knowing where his loyaltys lie these comments are hardly surprising. I have nothing against Walker but it was not rocket science how he managed to get £4 milllion in the WSA bank .Look how much prize money he left players playing for!
anotheranon says:
April 1, 2010 at 10:04 pm (UTC 0 )
The link to the TSF topic is a bit misleading given there are only 10 comments and only 3 seemingly cautious of Hearn. These are the only comments I’ve seen on any forum which question the 51%.
It’s a no brainer and it should be a no brainer for all players no matter what their ranking. If they vote against the Hearn proposals they are effectively saying they don’t think they can be top 64 and surely every player thinks they can be top 64? If you don’t believe in your own ability then you shouldn’t be a professional!
Ebdon must not be listened to. He has history in his part in the Altium deal. These are revolutionary times. Voter apathy is not an option. For the good of snooker the players need to unite around Hearn and give the game and the fans the future it deserves.
matt2745 says:
April 1, 2010 at 10:08 pm (UTC 0 )
Fair point on the link, just wanted to put another point of view and play Devil’s advocate to an extent, even though I’m definitely of a pro-Hearn view personally.
In fact I wouldn’t like to imagine the future of the game if they vote no. Hearn resigning and leaving us with nobody doesn’t bear thinking about…
Unsuspecting Snooter says:
April 1, 2010 at 10:29 pm (UTC 0 )
I AM A CLOWN
Ali says:
April 2, 2010 at 12:48 am (UTC 0 )
I take these comments with a pinch of salt. Ebdon says the proposals are likely to be rejected. Speak for yourself, Ebbo.
It’s exactly this type of archaic thinking which has left snooker in this rut. If they reject the proposal, which for the first time in years has me excited about snooker again, the game will continue to just fall out of the public’s consciencness.
Greg P. says:
April 2, 2010 at 7:11 am (UTC 0 )
I love Ebbo even though he’s a bit of a clown. I think a lot of us do. But he’s just wrong.
If Hearn is voted down it doesn’t bare thinking about. We might not even be talking about a World Championship 12 months from now.
trophymad says:
April 2, 2010 at 8:35 am (UTC 0 )
see and that’s the point: If Hearn’s Plan isn’t backed up he’ll leave. He never made a secret of this. And what then? It’s simply, what happens then: Snooker (at least Snooker the way we know it today) will be near to a total destruction. All the people that Hearn nagotiated with for sponsoring, new commercial contracts etc. will withdraw their offers and we’ll be left with a big Questionmark. There really is no other option then this plan of Hearn, is there?
Prestatynfan says:
April 2, 2010 at 10:11 am (UTC 0 )
Why should any middle ranking players fear Barry’s proposals. They are still in the same situation ranking wise as before. Stay in the top 64 and you are safe. Plus the 8 one year ranking chances to stay safe if you are out of the top 64 simply move from the full ranking list to the new Players Tour Championship and they get 12 PTC tournaments to make some money. Even after that there’s a qualifying tournament to immediately reclaim your place on the tour. What’s the problem for lower ranking players? To me, things look better all round! Go for it!
Unsuspecting Snooter says:
April 2, 2010 at 10:22 pm (UTC 0 )
LOOK AT THE CLOWN
philiprolfe says:
April 8, 2010 at 5:52 pm (UTC 0 )
THIS CLOWN CAN’T RUN A BUSINESS