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…