Tweet
I don't know if anyone noticed, in the last frame of Lee-Bond, how unlucky he was in reaching the snookers-required stage.
He was 57 down with 59 on the table, and stroked in a nice red, but the cue-ball went back down the table, cannoned the green and went in-off. This left him 53 behind with 51 on the table.
I saw the frame on British Eurosport, and the commentators, Joe Johnson and someone else (I forget who) didn't seem to remark on it at all.
They had remarked that he would need blacks with at least some of the reds (before he needed snookers). Then, after he had his unfortunate in-off, a few shots went by before Johnson's colleague mentioned, on one of Bond's shots, that he needed only the one red, before Johnson corrected him and pointed out that Lee actually already needed snookers. Even then it didn't occur to either of them – or at least they didn't say it – that it was actually Lee's own shot that caused it!
He was 57 down with 59 on the table, and stroked in a nice red, but the cue-ball went back down the table, cannoned the green and went in-off. This left him 53 behind with 51 on the table.
I saw the frame on British Eurosport, and the commentators, Joe Johnson and someone else (I forget who) didn't seem to remark on it at all.
They had remarked that he would need blacks with at least some of the reds (before he needed snookers). Then, after he had his unfortunate in-off, a few shots went by before Johnson's colleague mentioned, on one of Bond's shots, that he needed only the one red, before Johnson corrected him and pointed out that Lee actually already needed snookers. Even then it didn't occur to either of them – or at least they didn't say it – that it was actually Lee's own shot that caused it!
Comment