Ssb - exclusive: Hearn bids for wpbsa chairmanship

[RocketRoy1983]

Your right Mike P youd have thought so wouldnt you? Your right about his book too it is repetitive drivel.

Big break I dont quite understand your comments in post 81? Ones understanding doesnt come into it so stop coming across as if you know better than most as it is pathetically ignorant.

[JanieWatkins]

Light at the end of the tunnel??

Hi Val

It would seem there's some differing opinions in the O'Neill household

Jamie is out on facebook backing Walker!

"Jamie O'neill: big del has enlightened me about the barry hearn thing taking over world snooker and doesent want him to get in as he will cut the tour"

I wasn't aware that Barry had publicised any future intentions should he come back into the sport, but SPA is backing Barry, Barry is backing SPA and SPA's aims include opening up the sport, so I will trundle off to bed a tad confused! nowt new there!

[goldengirl]

Janie - Jamie is his own man with his own veiwpoint.
I'm just fed up of seeing him working so hard to attain his dream of being a MT professional and wondering if it is worth it!! Unless you're in the Top 32 it's no more than a really expensive hobby that you have to fund yourself!!
As I've said before I don't care who is running it and even Rodney Walker can stay IF they all start thinking of the players and the game instaed of themselves.
We desperately need someone with moral intergrity and some entrepenurial flair - if there is such a beast. When it was first muted about Barry Hearn the first thing I said was that we need to know his intentions before jumping from the frying pan into the fire - but I have no doubt it could not be any worse than now!

[madman]

The trouble is, yes we need a new chairman and Barry Hearn seems the perfect choice. But as Jamie o Neil and Matt Wilson in a previous post has pointed out, will Hearn want to reduce the main tour to 64 players and then possibly 32.

Until the players know his intentions, if they vote the current board off, Hearn will have to submit his 'plan of action' for the players to consider before they vote him in. And if it is his intention to reduce the tour to 64, i do not think he is going to get the backing of all the majority of the players.

Its like when Altium could / should of been voted in a few years back, too many players were under the impression, this was what they intended to do, hence the never got in.

The other point is, a lot of players are very loyal to Del Hill, he's a nice fella, and he can easily persuade these players to see his side and they listen to him. Its like he has a spell over some of them and they get taken in a bit too easily. Most of the players will get swayed into his way of thinking. But if hearn can guarantee no reduction in the main tour, i'm pretty sure he will get voted in no problem.

Personally, i think he is the best person for the job, as long as he can guarantee the tour and a few bob for the players.

[noel]

Your points are good and make clear just how important it is to get as many players out to vote as possible!


How do you think can that be done mate?



=o)

Noel

The trouble is, yes we need a new chairman and Barry Hearn seems the perfect choice. But as Jamie o Neil and Matt Wilson in a previous post has pointed out, will Hearn want to reduce the main tour to 64 players and then possibly 32.

Until the players know his intentions, if they vote the current board off, Hearn will have to submit his 'plan of action' for the players to consider before they vote him in. And if it is his intention to reduce the tour to 64, i do not think he is going to get the backing of all the majority of the players.

Its like when Altium could / should of been voted in a few years back, too many players were under the impression, this was what they intended to do, hence the never got in.

The other point is, a lot of players are very loyal to Del Hill, he's a nice fella, and he can easily persuade these players to see his side and they listen to him. Its like he has a spell over some of them and they get taken in a bit too easily. Most of the players will get swayed into his way of thinking. But if hearn can guarantee no reduction in the main tour, i'm pretty sure he will get voted in no problem.

Personally, i think he is the best person for the job, as long as he can guarantee the tour and a few bob for the players.

[ja.]

Your points are good and make clear just how important it is to get as many players out to vote as possible!


How do you think can that be done mate?



=o)

Noel

give extra ranking points to everyone who voted

[April madness]

The trouble is, yes we need a new chairman and Barry Hearn seems the perfect choice. But as Jamie o Neil and Matt Wilson in a previous post has pointed out, will Hearn want to reduce the main tour to 64 players and then possibly 32.

Until the players know his intentions, if they vote the current board off, Hearn will have to submit his 'plan of action' for the players to consider before they vote him in. And if it is his intention to reduce the tour to 64, i do not think he is going to get the backing of all the majority of the players.

Its like when Altium could / should of been voted in a few years back, too many players were under the impression, this was what they intended to do, hence the never got in.

The other point is, a lot of players are very loyal to Del Hill, he's a nice fella, and he can easily persuade these players to see his side and they listen to him. Its like he has a spell over some of them and they get taken in a bit too easily. Most of the players will get swayed into his way of thinking. But if hearn can guarantee no reduction in the main tour, i'm pretty sure he will get voted in no problem.

Personally, i think he is the best person for the job, as long as he can guarantee the tour and a few bob for the players.

But what if Del's (and some player's) worries are well founded? After all, a tour of 64 (or 48, or 32) players is so much cheaper to maintain than 96 player tour, and if it is cut, they won't have to do much effort to get a few more bob to players, add some more tournaments (which are now cheaper too, because there wouldn't be long qualifiers etc). But what will happen to players that are below the cutting line? And the ones who now play in PIOS and hope to get in the Main tour? The ones who didn't make much money would still not get it... Those who earn it now, will earn (probably) more.

All of this is just what if, of course. But there are many questions to consider. I can see why those who are excited about Hearn would want to vote for him, and I can understand why some are unwilling. I just hope the decision that will be made - whatever it is - is not a fatal error.

[bigbreak]

Your right Mike P youd have thought so wouldnt you? Your right about his book too it is repetitive drivel.

Big break I dont quite understand your comments in post 81? Ones understanding doesnt come into it so stop coming across as if you know better than most as it is pathetically ignorant.

steady up young man......why is your cage rattling?

One could apply the phrase "pathetically ignorant" to your assertion that the WSA board are imbociles( imbiciles),but I chose to draw your attention to your comment in a polite manner.

So in the best interests of the site and the comfort of those using it , let's keep the debate free of personal insults aimed at people you do not know.

In that way opinions will be better respected.

As far as my level of knowledge regarding the issues or the game is concerned, I have to say I am very comfortable with 50 years worth

[Terry Davidson]

Just some interesting points regarding Del Hill and the WPBSA board. During the Altium 'crisis' and according to Clive, it was Del Hill who convinced the players that the Altium offer would give control of the sport to Ian Doyle as it was Ian who brought the Altium offer to the WPBSA.

This was all part of a very effective 'disinformation' campaign which resulted in the Altium offer being rejected.

Now again, here we have someone saying Barry Hearn would reduce the tour and the number of players. As far as I'm aware Barry has said nothing of the sort but this kind of statement plays on the worst fears of the players.

I believe this is another disinformation campaign orchestrated by the present Board of the WPBSA and perhaps using Del Hill as their 'go to' guy since he has the respect of a lot of the players.

I would say shame on anyone who assists in broadcasting misinformation or something they haven't confirmed with the person involved, in this case Barry Hearn.

I think the players are getting sucked in by someone who is playing to their worst fears, and every one of the 76 voting members should take a step back and look at the logic of who benefits by broadcasting this kind of unsubstantiated information.

I hope Barry can make some kind of public statement giving his intentions right from the horse's mouth, rather than this rumour and innuendo that seems to be coming from someone who in the past has proven himself to be a supporter of the present WPBSA Executive, to the extent of gathering proxy votes to shoot down the Altium offer (from SS, but WPBSA tried to sue Clive over this statement and were unsuccessful, so my own perception is it must be at least based on fact).

Terry

[In-off]

I assume the amazingly tall proxy gatherer understands the laws of libel?

[In-off]

Your right Mike P youd have thought so wouldnt you? Your right about his book too it is repetitive drivel.

Big break I dont quite understand your comments in post 81? Ones understanding doesnt come into it so stop coming across as if you know better than most as it is pathetically ignorant.

You can't beat a British education

[GOMH71]

It's plain to see that the WSA plan is to cloud as many issues as possible.

From my own experience of dealing with Snooker Pro's if you make something too complicated then they switch right off it as it flies right over their heads.

For all their sublime talents there sure ain't very many sharp tools in Snooker's Tool Box ...

[the legend]

Ive been involved in snooker for a long time,first as a kid watching his dad play as a top amateur and then as a pro.Then in 1983 my dad opened a snooker centre which 25 years on im still trying to run and make a living.
I only say this just as a backdrop to the fact that snooker has been and is a massive part of my life,so inevitably i have followed snooker politics closely.I feel i have a good knowledge of all its ups and downs.
I played at blackpool in the early 90s when the game was opened up and was grateful for the chance to play as a professional however it soon became clear to me that having unlimited entries devalued the game both as a professional and it hurt the amateur game in a disastuous way.
Barry Hearn is no angel and probably not going to save the game in one fell swoop,but i would rather take a gamble on him taking the game forward than the people at the top now.The present board will spin about cutting down to 64 players,i would like someone to stand up to them and say yes were going down to 64,its the right thing financially for the players and the game.

[the legend]

Following on from my last post,it seems obvious that there is not enough money to pay players outside 64 a living,under this board or any other.
Lets be radical and say were having 64 players with at least 8 players up and down every year,a 1 a year ranking list,a qualifying school in the summer monthes open to all including the players relegated as it seems obscene to me that if your in bottom 8 you have to wait a year to earn your right to be a pro again.
I believe that if this was done there woud be these benefits
1 all players in the 64 would be guaranteed a living
2 any player would know exactly what there status was and be able to plan
3 overseas players wishing to qualify dont have to spend the year in uk
4 pro ams and any other comps would receive increased entries.

[RocketRoy1983]

In-off we all once more find ourselves questioning your post above?

Big break it was not intended as an insult but 50 years or not id ask you not to come across as arrogant.