O/T Mark Selby...

I think...IMHO that timing individual shots for the rule of slow play is too much at the discretion of the referee and can often be explained by a player being presented with a sequence of dealing with difficult shots -snookers etc.-created by his opponent.
Better to adopt the idea used in chess. A set time (TBD) is given for each player at the start of each frame . The countdown starts for each player when his opponent goes back to his seat and hits a button . The remaining in play time available for each player is displayed on screens for all to see. If a player 'runs out of time' he then forfeits the frame. I am not talking about devaluing the game and turning it into 'speed snooker' so a sensible reasonable time to complete a frame should be allocated to each player in a way that it only penalises excessively slow play or deliberate gamesmanship.

I am sure it is possible to use statistics from previous tournaments for the 'powers-that -be' to determine an optimal time to bring frames to a conclusion without invoking the 'out of time' scenario too often. Purists would maybe not like it but it would add another dimension to the spectacle in that players would have to factor in the time they want to spend on particularly difficult shots - to play safe or risk eating up too much of their allocated time deliberating.

 

It does look like it doesn't it! However, in his younger days Selby was quite a joker when he played. Then he won the World title and he became very serious, probably when he realised how much money he could make from the game.

 

Except they use a shot clock in some tournaments (not sure how many) and it seems to work ok.

 

I don't like Trump either.

 

Not a bad idea. What about adding a stop clock with say 5 minutes to ponder shots. That starts timing out after a set period of Eg 30 seconds. With the ref able to interfere if for example the ball needs cleaning.
Just a thought.
Cos yes. I gave up watching play due to selby taking forever. Boring the pants off me. It takes away the thrill that others provide. Selby is undoubtedly a great Player. But takes the shine off the game for me. I would be grinding my teeth saying get on with it ffs.

 

I wish he'd missed that final black after after doing the stuttered run up.

 

Don't get me wrong, I wanted Murphy to win out of the two. However Murphy was his our worst enemy last night by missing easy balls (easy for professionals!) He could easily have won at least two more frames, which might have set Selby's nerves on edge. We'll never know....

 

I don't like Murphy either his speech at the end made me cringe. Laura asked me what I thought to both players. It was her who wanted to watch it after the Chase finished. It's one of them things you watch regardless I reckon. (Watch the end of the World Snooker Final). I told Laura her question was like asking me which nasty ailment I'd prefer.

 

You're right, Selby definitely had the run of the balls last night

 

lol mate . I wanted Ronnie, then Trump to win....

 

Ronnie first for me. Followed by Lisowski, Maguire, Williams, Higgins, Robertson and Allen.

 

Lisowski - too inexperienced (atm)
Maguire is worse than Selby and Murphy (imho)
Willliams - great player
Higgins - great player (maybe his best days are behind him)
Robertson - great player (needs a haircut )
Allen - gone off the boil the last couple of years I reckon

 

I like Maguire because he's combustible and you can see when he's blowing a gasket. He can't hide his emotions. He'd be sheet at poker mate lol

 

You only like Ronnie!

 

It's rubbish how under control we are. Billy Joe Saunders fights in Texas this weekend in front of 70,000 people. Here in the UK which has given a first vaccine to a bigger percentage of their population we have to wait until next week to set foot in another house. That should be wrong.