Ronnie O'Sullivan named player of the year at awards ceromony

[ferret]

Just wanted to see what your opinions on this were, personally I would of nominated Ding Junhui and Neil Robertson over Ronnie O'Sullivan for this award this year and I hate to say it even Mark Selby would of got my vote over Ronnie.

Do the people who make these decisions at World Snooker even watch Snooker? do they know what each player has achieved in a season or do they just pick names out of a hat?

[justf]

I would have gone with Ding Junhui as well for a great season just over, as you said, Robertson for his remarkable ton of tons.

[gettingbetter]

Odd decision. If I were making the decision(s) I would have started engraving Ding's name by the time he won the International Championship - that being three ranking event wins in a row.

Either way, does anyone really care about awards anymore, snooker or otherwise?

[j6uk]

after such a defeat and personal disappointment world snooker are just keeping ron sweet because they want there golden hen to keep playing.. if ronnie would have won then we may have seen go to ding

[streamer45]

To be honest, I would have voted for Ronnie too. What he did in the Masters and in the Welsh Open was outstanding, plus he won the CoC and made the final of the WC for the third time in a row.
Ding was definitely brilliant and I would have choosen him over Ronnie if only he appeared on a major final except the one who won (International Champ). His results in the UK,Masters and World were pretty disappointing.

[DeanH]

Is there a piece anywhere of the whole night?

this from WS
http://www.worldsnooker.com/page/New...813143,00.html

[cueman]

To be honest, I would have voted for Ronnie too. What he did in the Masters and in the Welsh Open was outstanding, plus he won the CoC and made the final of the WC for the third time in a row.
Ding was definitely brilliant and I would have choosen him over Ronnie if only he appeared on a major final except the one who won (International Champ). His results in the UK,Masters and World were pretty disappointing.

Agree with this. Ding won more but he won titles that a lot of the top players didn't even enter. Fact remains he has a poor record in the big events, being hammered by Ronnie in the Welsh Open final and his first round exit at the WC were probably decisive enough to give Ronnie the award.

[Holden Chinaski]

To be honest, I would have voted for Ronnie too. What he did in the Masters and in the Welsh Open was outstanding, plus he won the CoC and made the final of the WC for the third time in a row.
Ding was definitely brilliant and I would have choosen him over Ronnie if only he appeared on a major final except the one who won (International Champ). His results in the UK,Masters and World were pretty disappointing.

I agree. Despite losing his world title Ronnie had a brilliant season. He was unbeatable in the Masters where he totally destroyed Selby 10-4 in the final and the way he won the Welsh Open with a 147 against Ding in the final was fantastic. Winning the first Champion of Champions event, beating Ding and Robertson along the way, and reaching his third World Championship final in a row, beating Shaun Murphy 13-3 in the quarter final, are great achievements as well.

[Odrl]

It's amazing how close a call it is, because in a couple of the previous seasons it was very rare for any player to win more than one event, and now Ding won five and reached another final, but it's still not a lot more than what O'Sullivan and Robertson did. Obviously if any of these three had won the WC they should have won this award as well, but since none of them won it, it should have gone do Ding, in my opinion.

[PatBlock]

Well of course it went to Ronnie, there's nobody else out there. World snooker, the BBC, the entire national press, all utterly Ronnie-centric. The BBC sports news the day after the final was incredible, they Hardly mentioned Selby, just kept on about how Ronnie was still on track for a 6th world title. It's pathetic, demeaning to the other players and entirely unhealthy for snooker as a whole. We all know what happens when you put all your eggs in one basket, particularly one so fragile.

-

[j6uk]

Well of course it went to Ronnie, there's nobody else out there. World snooker, the BBC, the entire national press, all utterly Ronnie-centric. The BBC sports news the day after the final was incredible, they Hardly mentioned Selby, just kept on about how Ronnie was still on track for a 6th world title. It's pathetic, demeaning to the other players and entirely unhealthy for snooker as a whole. We all know what happens when you put all your eggs in one basket, particularly one so fragile.

-

yeah and? thats snooker/entertainment! what do you set the reds up with?! a triangle. welcome to the piramid factor of the sport called snooker, there's only room for one,

[PatBlock]

yeah and? thats snooker/entertainment! what do you set the reds up with?! a triangle. welcome to the piramid factor of the sport called snooker, there's only room for one,

I appreciate that ROS is something special, very special indeed and we may never see the like of him ever again. But it's unhealthy to obsess. If we keep telling the world that Ronnie = snooker and visa versa, they may just start to believe it and when he goes, so may the all too flimsy coverage we get (Despite having a so-called 'promoter' at the helm) at the moment. Surely you see that a more rounded profile would be better for the long term interest in and survival of the sport.

-

[j6uk]

I appreciate that ROS is something special, very special indeed and we may never see the like of him ever again. But it's unhealthy to obsess. If we keep telling the world that Ronnie = snooker and visa versa, they may just start to believe it and when he goes, so may the all too flimsy coverage we get (Despite having a so-called 'promoter' at the helm) at the moment. Surely you see that a more rounded profile would be better for the long term interest in and survival of the sport.

-

no! what, so there's room for two? there's only one winner. i'm sure it don't need me to spell it out.. who puts the bums on seats and captures the imagination? it never has come down to ether or, only one, be that ronnie,jimmy or alex. that's the way it works, the cult of the anti hero, the fallen and flawed.. see what im getting at?

[Looki]

Ding's achievement was very remarkable matching Hendry's record with 5 ranking titles. Clear winner for me. Even O'Sullivan commented

"Ding is the in-form player. If he wins this he will equal the record for ranking titles in a season. People talk about records but that record is worth having. You are a winner if you do that sort of stuff."

http://www.worldsnooker.com/page/New...693465,00.html

He doesn't decide the winner, of course, but I think he's absolutely right about this particular record and therefore Ding should've been named the player of the year.

[gavpowell]

I think this was a public vote wasn't it? At the Crucible there were all these little cards for you to fill in "Who's your player of the year?" and the choices were Ding, Ronnie and Neil, I think. Unless it's just a parallel thing to compare and contrast with the offiical vote?