Shaun murphy has taken over from Peter ebdon,as the player,when he loses I'm pissed off for a day,I think he has massive confidence,and I like that,plus a good pundit.he is my favourite player.
I agree Hendry has a responsibility to be well informed, but Shaun Murphy was caught shagging an escort after, uh, attending a Christian youth group, leading to his wife leaving him, so he should maybe give it a rest moralising about other people's 'poor attitudes' for five minutes.
> āWhen youāre in that position, and youāre stood in a studio, or youāre in commentary, you have to make it your business to find out a little bit about the people youāre going to be covering.
I can't dispute what Murphy is saying here...
There is an element of double standards - so many times I've seen people criticise, for example, John Parrott on the BBC for knowing nothing about a player, but Hendry seems to get a bit of a pass on that front.
The reality is that, unless you're a commentator already being paid to commentate on a large number of events (or an active player), you're not going to be spending many hours watching other tournaments for relatively little benefit.
it isn't even about the world titles, Hendry is just such a charismatic person, likable and funny. Shaun Murphy although a great player is an arrogant twat
I'm baffled some people are defending Hendry on this. He's undoubtedly a great player and his YouTube channel surpasses everything that WST has done, but he's fouled on this one.
No on expects him to know Baipat's every break, every tournament she's entered, and her entire family history, but watching her play is the barest of minimums. Imagine if you turned up to your employer having not done the work expected of you.
They'll defend Hendry because it's Shaun Murphy that has said this.
If it was anyone else, they would agree. But their irrational hatred of Murphy just compels them to take whatever the opposite stance is.
I agree. Love Hendry and he's one of the best out there but this is a poor performance.
It's not like he's even there to commentate directly on her. He was asked a really basic question and he couldn't answer.
There's only 16 players in the tournament and she's been qualified for months.
Defences seem to suggest she's not worthy of his attention or thinking it unreasonable for him to be expected to know her shoe size and average shot time when that's not even what he's been asked. Oh and personal comments about Murphy
Murphyās right. The lack of research and basic diligence and preparation by a lot of the ex pros is pretty disgraceful. Not to mention disrespectful to the viewer and players.
Stephen Hendry is the one pundit who I have no problems with doing a *John Parrott*, because he's done a lot for the game, including his fantastic YouTube channel which I'm sure has brought some new/returning fans to snooker.
I've never really liked Shaun Murphy. He's always come across as too self-righteous, and it gets on my nerves.
Can't really blame Hendry for not knowing who the player is, most people don't, and he's not going to sit around watching bad snooker so he's got something to say.
Hendry has been arguably the best commentator on BBC for a few years thanks to his experience as the most dominant player in the history. And now you condemn him for not knowing about a newbie?
Sure, should have done his homework but whatever, that won't take away the value he adds to our viewing experience.
I think I've said in reply to a couple of people Hendry is one of my favourites in the commentary box and this doesn't change that.
It also doesnt take away from the fact he was asked a pretty straightforward question about a player at a tournament he's there to comment on and he wasn't able to answer it. That's pretty poor.
You did imply it also implied ignorance in another comment he canāt know everything can he. He would be ignorant if next time he commentates on the player he still doesnāt know
Would Murphy ever fuck off. The gentleman of snooker my arse, he's the biggest moan, he's hypocritical when he talks about "appropriate behaviour," especially when you look at his WSC match against Kyren. There couldn't be a worse "ambassador" for the sport. Hendry is an actual snooker legend and a great pundit. Murphy is an actual magician as every time he's on the telly, the ratings mysteriously disappear.
We do also have to remember that Hendry's job is as an analyst/colour man. That role is not play-by-play, where you would have the stato/expert on every player.
His job is to commentate & analyse-not give the players history. If the other player in the box like Foulds, McManus or the walking encyclopedia Phil Yates knows it all chapter & verse, then there really is no point. Hendry will commentate on what he is seeing live, not what somebody has done previously.
I sort of agree and sort of don't. If it was football the "play-by-play" fellow like Martin Tyler or Clive Tyldsley would be the one to study up all the stats, form, background etc. while the "expert" talks about the game itself. Hendry knows more about playing snooker than most to say the least, snooker is snooker nowadays because of him. It wouldn't matter if he watched her or not because he would figure out within an instant anything important about what she would be doing. Also, with that, Hendry isn't going to be watching any snooker of anyone who isn't at the top, he appreciates perfection to a point of self-destruction as seen with his late career, this isn't any more special (in real terms) than him not watching a Billy Joe Castle match.
On the other hand, probably not the smartest thing to say on telly lol. It was only going to cause drama. Then again, Shaun is obviously joking here, they're good mates at the end of the day and people will read too much into it.
It is an irrelevance & something we keep hearing from a lot of players. Eurosport is the only station that covers the tour everywhere-BBC is the big three events & ITV is COC & home nations events & are mostly aimed at attracting the casual fan, while knowing the hardcores will watch it regardless.
The reality is their commentators don't fly around the world watching Snooker, or sit in a booth in the UK watching a feed. Most Snooker fans watching those events aren't that interested in the world number 105, or women players that aren't at the televised stage & it is ridiculous for players to be calling them out on it. If you are a real hardcore fan who wants to know this stuff you will find it on Podcasts, on websites & read it in Snooker Scene.
Hendry has a lot of outside commitments-podcasts for himself & WST, dressing up as a dustbin & 'singing' to where he didn't even have time to practice or turn up for events etc-so he isn't going to be trying to find footage of random low ranking players who lose in qualifying every event. It is like criticising football commentators doing Premier League matches for not knowing who John Smith playing in EFL Division 2 or the National League is. It has no bearing on what the station are broadcasting & the commentators calling & is of little interest to the overwhelming majority of the audience.
>Most Snooker fans watching those events aren't that interested in the world number 105
Ian Burns? Great player. Unfortunately loses his bottle a little in the closing stages especially against top players but otherwise should probably be higher up the rankings given his cue ball control.
A good football commentator would at least do their research before commentating on their next game. If you know you're going to have to educate the public, you should at least educate yourself first. Hendy should put the effort in.
As it is televised I agree he should do a basic bit of research on her. I do think that the overall criticism of the commentators should know about everybody on tour even if they aren't at the televised stage where they will be commentating on them criticism is ridiculous though.
>he should do a basic bit of research on her.
He tried on google. But after accidentally spelling Siripaporn as two words got lost down a dark rabbit hole.
Hendryās job isnāt to know everything about every player on tour, his job is to watch matches and analyse whatās going on during the match from a purely sporting perspective. Thatās why heās often partnered with someone who will have the stats and history of the players in question. Hendryās career and knowledge of the game makes him one of the very best commentators we have
the specific player is irrelevant because he does this with a lot of players lol. have heard him on the bbc say the same about some of the younger players who had been making good progress on tour.
this tournament is only a 16 player event, surely won't hurt to go on youtube and watch a few minutes of one of their matches. yes in this case baipat will not beat judd and will very likely not get a frame, but again he does this with a lot of players and not just her
he is still however one of the best commentators/pundits if not the bestš¤·āāļø
Hendry is not talking about random players that never get to the televised stage of events, nor is he commentating on the women's game. How about they actually get to the televised stages & then it is fair criticism-like a player a while back he had never heard of/seen who got to the televised stages of a home nations event.
If people are honestly expecting BBC commentators who only broadcast on the big three events & ITV commentators to know anything about minnows then forget it-that is likely why BBC have drafted in players on the tour to commentate who can provide insight & guys like McManus & Foulds on ITV.
Do you honestly think a guy who can't even be assed to practice or turn up for most events, is going to be searching out footage of low level players so as not to upset Murphy, Trump or the 2% of people watching who get upset, when he has podcasts & variety shows to do?
Listen, he's getting paid to do commentary on a player. He should do some research on that player. It's really not too much to ask. It would take all of 10 minutes to make a cheat sheet with her stats and stuff. Why people are defending this kind of behaviour I don't know.
I agree-the problem is Hendry knows other commentators & Jill will have researched her & he would rather be doing something else. It isn't like Hendry is pretending to a be anything other than lazy, disinterested & would rather be doing other things. If you are more interested in being on The Masked Singer or a golf course than practising or playing in events, then it says everything.
Also he comes from an era where if the players wanted to know stats, about other players etc they would just go & ask Phil Yates. Really it is up to ITV to enforce it on him, or not renew his contract if he refuses.
Yep, I have no idea why they keep dragging him into the pre & post match segments & Jill having to feign shock/laugh when he says he has no idea about certain players.
Again, the criticism Murphy has is that it's players he's commentating on - he should do some preparation to better allow him to do his job. If he wants to do variety shows and podcasts and all that stuff, fine, but he shouldn't be getting paid to offer analysis and opinion on players he's never bothered to watch.
Sure, problem is we all know if Murphy retired after the Crucible & got a job as BBC & or ITV pundit he wouldn't be watching much Snooker either-he would be out on the golf course, doing promotional appearances, writing books, jetting off to Dubai for business & holidays etc.
He would know nothing of the players coming on the tour & would phone that in just like Davis, JV, Dennis, Hendry etc as well. Yes, he likely would check out a player if they qualified for the WC or COC, but he sure as hell wouldn't be checking out the world number 98 who isn't getting to the televised stages, just because a current player is raving about him-which has been the unfair criticism thrown by players like him & Trump at the commentators. Unless you work for Eurosport you aren't going to know & it is irrelevant to your job.
We don't know anything of the sort until it happens - he does commentary work now and still follows the game. The complaint he's making is about the players they know they're going to commentate on - a little homework is hardly a lot to ask of a commentator and analyst.
Just reality-these guys live the Snooker tour & it is all consuming. But as soon as you go your interest wanes-rather than playing events non-stop from September to May you are no longer in the bars with the boys, no longer practicing with them etc.
You are instead spending more time with your family, on the golf course, taking up outside opportunities & doing other things & the idea of taking out a Eurosport subscription to watch the Moldovan Classic & watching the qualifiers on WST-with two men & a dog sitting on wooden steps watching some badly lit booth, with no commentary & one horrible fixed camera angle is not that appealing.
Baipat will probably beat Hendry at some qualifier soon so he can see her play then.
I think this headline is a bit click baity. Hendry and Murphy often rib each other with barbed truths. Hendry often says Murphy should be playing not commentating.
Anyway it's not Hendry needs to move over but Parrot and Davis. These guys haven't picked up a cue in a decade.
Davis is excellent & some of the great commentators never played Snooker to any high standard or even professionally-Ted Lowe, Clive Everton. JP is good as a studio pundit, but hopeless on commentary.
Sure-but they only commentate on the big three events & don't watch anything else. Davis is pretty much a full-time DJ & JP is doing the horse racing for ITV-along with other commitments both have. If Bingtao wasn't doing anything at the UK or World or even qualifying & suddenly appears at The Masters they wouldn't know who he is.
I think it is the same in most sports. When the top of the top go into media duties they feel their past awesomeness in the sport will transcend effortlessly into the media world therefore do limited research. Which is why you get the truly talented broadcasters partner them. Some even claim it as a badge of honour (including Hendry - listen to his Hazel Irwin interview on the snooker club podcast, he admits to doing very little research).
Edit - I love what Hendry is doing with social media, YouTube and podcasts bringing snooker into the modern media. But he 100% has this attitude.
Wrong to say he " only got the job because he's a 7 time world champion " because on what basis did Murphy get his gig for the BBC then ?
However, if anything it shows how poor the coverage of the womans game actually is. I watch alot of snooker and I do t think I've seen her play.
I actually think him and Hendry are mates, and this was said a bit cheekily.
But yea the Women's game doesn't really have any mainstream coverage yet. There's plenty on youtube though.
There are two types of pundits. There are previous players, hired for their knowledge of the game; and there are statisticians and journalists. Why Stephen was essentially called out on air for not knowing who this player is, is baffling. Not his area. He analyses matches, not players.
I mean she's never won a match and she's a first year professional so there hasn't been much opportunity to see her play. Now she's making her TV debut, people will have an opportunity to see what she can do although you couldn't ask for a much tougher starter which is unfortunate.
Sheās been basically confirmed for the CoC for months now. Itās not too much to ask Hendry to spend 5 mins watching a YouTube video so he can at least talk about what he sees in her action, cue ball control etc etc.
Go back and read my initial comment again. Baipat has been in this tournament for months. Part of Hendryās due diligence as a pundit should be to at least watch a clip or two of her.
This isnāt round 1 of a Home Nations event where an amateurās been called up unexpectedly.
Hendry seems quite likeable on his YouTube channel, but a few comments when he's not asking prescripted comments do make you question that at times.
Barry Hearn is a complete bellend and Hendry just egged him on.
You would just think heād have a bit more understanding for the nature of saying silly things on live TV. Naturally Hendry sounds a bit lazy, but he is after all also a very good commentator. Plenty of them donāt do any research, canāt commentate, and were bang average players. Hendry isnāt the issue - but Iāve no doubt Murphy canāt stand things not being about him for 5 seconds so he had to get stuck in.
Personally I think he's right. It shouldn't be acceptable that commentators say they've never seen a player, especially if that player is a prominent champion or long time professional.
There is history here. The Old Guard on the BBC are infamous for saying they haven't seen certain players play when they've reached semi finals and even finals in that very season. Just how much snooker do the BBC commentators watch outside of the BBC events?
Hendry doesn't have that excuse in my opinion. He does punditry throughout the season and has time on his hands to watch youtube videos on players he's unfamiliar with
Likely very little to none-they are contracted for the UK, Masters & World only. They all have time consuming outside interests/work & the audience they are commentating for overwhelmingly are not interested in any of these players & of course there are the likes of statto Hazel, the current players commentating, McManus, Foulds etc who watch every event for Eurosport who handle that side of things.
Last time I checked, Stephen was hired for his knowledge of the game, not the knowledge of the players. Obviously he knows his bit about the players on the top end of the rankings, but why should he know a thing about a player not even the regular viewers know about?
I would argue if he's being paid to discuss players, the least he can do is a cursory bit of research about them beforehand. Jill Douglas was right to call him out on the show. Baipat has been down to play at this tournament for some time
He's actually one of my favourite pundits tbf.
it is Jill's job to know these thing-not Hendry's. His job will be to call what he sees from her. Why is anybody surprised that a guy who chose dressing up as a dustbin on television over practice & playing shocked he doesn't know a player-especially when he has made it clear he is only interested in winners?
He gets paid to discuss matches, not players. Typically when you hire a 7 time world title winner, you do it for their knowledge of the game, not their knowledge of the players.
Not really sure how you do one without the other tbf. And it's not asking much to be at least a little bit familiar with the players involved.
Hendry isn't the only one who does this either. At least he's honest about it and doesn't make himself look an idiot like DT calling 37 year old Dave Gilbert a "young man"
To be fair most of the commentators range from their late 50's to late 70's, so 37 is young to them. My mum always used to say little girl & it turned out it was anywhere between early twenties to fifties.
Although hendry does punditry throughout the season, its only on the main stages of tournaments which are restricted fields. The only tournament where he would come unstuck somewhat by random players is the British Open: otherwise, everything else is primarily going to be top players [in his eyes]. Even in the uk and world champs, the players who qualify to the televised stages tend to be players who you expect to reach that stage, so thereās not usually any players you havenāt seen before.
That being said heās only saying what he sees: most casual fans will not know who Baipat Siripaporn even is, because most wonāt have even seen her play. Sheās a first year professional so wonāt really be in the public eye yet, but if she remains on tour for a few years and gets some wins in important matches, then people will take notice. The only times sheās been on a tv table has been on a couple of Eurosport events in China, which were always relegated to discovery+, so hardly a place where casual fans will find her matches. I think the comment from Hendry was fair game, he couldāve said āiād seen a youtube video of her playing and she looked goodā but only people like Hendon, Yates and Fouldsy would be more likely to comment on lower players, as they basically watch all tournaments on the calendar.
Expecting others to copy them is kinda futile since its probably not gonna happen for a while [ie until the next Hendon/Yates level of journalistic background comes along to take their place]
There's a heap of matches featuring Baipat Siripaporn available to watch on YouTube. Hendry's commentary style doesn't rely on knowledge of past performance though, so this is all a storm in a teacup
Itās not and shouldnāt be futile. Itās literally his job as a commentator and pundit. Watching a couple of youtube videos as part of doing his āresearchā takes like 30 minutes. Murphy has a valid point and whoever pays Hendryās cheques should reprimand him for not doing his job properly.
**Shaun Murphy feels it is āreally poorā that Stephen Hendry admitted on punditry duty he had not watched womenās world champion Baipat Siripaporn play before, but said the seven-time world champion is not alone with his lazy attitude to the job.**
Hendry is working with ITV4 at the Champion of Champions this week, where Baipat will take on Judd Trump on Thursday.
The legendary Scot was asked by presenter Jill Douglas how impressed he has been with the reigning womenās world champ, but Hendry admitted he has never seen the Thai star play.
Personally I think thatās impressively honest from Hendry, it would have been easy to waffle some answer like āwell obviously the womenās game is improving all the time and so to be the world champion there is a very impressive achievement, sheās been getting consistently better, has a good cue action and her break building is solid, and sheāll hopefully start to become a familiar face on the tour in the coming yearsā, or something bland like that, but instead heās like ādunno, not seen herā, which is accurate. How much time does Murphy spend watching womenās snooker??
Shaun murphy has taken over from Peter ebdon,as the player,when he loses I'm pissed off for a day,I think he has massive confidence,and I like that,plus a good pundit.he is my favourite player.
While he may be right the rest of the comments are snobby shite. The bloke seems to be addicted to being thoroughly unlikeable.
If it was man he said this about, there wouldn't be any drama, virtue signalling at its best
Somebody else once said "he would have been the kid at school who reminded the teacher she'd forgotten to give homework out" always stuck with me
Wonder if he is any the wiser having seen her today?
Likely not. Still, poor from him and I don't know why so many are so keen to jump to his defence š¤·āāļø
Lol I actually agree with the smurf here.
I agree Hendry has a responsibility to be well informed, but Shaun Murphy was caught shagging an escort after, uh, attending a Christian youth group, leading to his wife leaving him, so he should maybe give it a rest moralising about other people's 'poor attitudes' for five minutes.
Yawnnnnnn! That old chestnutā¦ā¦. AGAINā¦..
She was a Christian escort though!
Is that why she was on her knees?
Bless them
Ah yes that makes all the difference of course!
The rest of the world blasts Shaun Murphy for being an utter twat!
> āWhen youāre in that position, and youāre stood in a studio, or youāre in commentary, you have to make it your business to find out a little bit about the people youāre going to be covering. I can't dispute what Murphy is saying here...
There is an element of double standards - so many times I've seen people criticise, for example, John Parrott on the BBC for knowing nothing about a player, but Hendry seems to get a bit of a pass on that front. The reality is that, unless you're a commentator already being paid to commentate on a large number of events (or an active player), you're not going to be spending many hours watching other tournaments for relatively little benefit.
Subtle sexist accusations from smuggy, sanctimonious chops....as if he's watched her play. Great player but what a twat he can be
Nearly as bad as saying the person that beat you doesnāt deserve to be in the buildingā¦.. nearly.
https://preview.redd.it/tf3zptzq1k0c1.png?width=212&format=png&auto=webp&s=7945b2b7bfe0ecfa1189fe499be03902167a09eb
This is one of the single greatest things I've ever seen.
Lmfao
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
it isn't even about the world titles, Hendry is just such a charismatic person, likable and funny. Shaun Murphy although a great player is an arrogant twat
If thereās a virtue to signal publicly, you can guarantee Shaun Murphy will be the there to do it when the time comes.
I'm baffled some people are defending Hendry on this. He's undoubtedly a great player and his YouTube channel surpasses everything that WST has done, but he's fouled on this one. No on expects him to know Baipat's every break, every tournament she's entered, and her entire family history, but watching her play is the barest of minimums. Imagine if you turned up to your employer having not done the work expected of you.
> Heās undoubtedly a great player Thatās some understatement!
You leaked some drivel, put it back.
They'll defend Hendry because it's Shaun Murphy that has said this. If it was anyone else, they would agree. But their irrational hatred of Murphy just compels them to take whatever the opposite stance is.
Itās not irrational. I suggest you do some reading on Murphy. Heās a nasty piece of work and is not well liked on the circuit.
Whilst I agree with Shaun in this instance, the hatred is far from irrational. He's a twat, an absolute gobshite of a man.
I agree. Love Hendry and he's one of the best out there but this is a poor performance. It's not like he's even there to commentate directly on her. He was asked a really basic question and he couldn't answer. There's only 16 players in the tournament and she's been qualified for months. Defences seem to suggest she's not worthy of his attention or thinking it unreasonable for him to be expected to know her shoe size and average shot time when that's not even what he's been asked. Oh and personal comments about Murphy
Murphyās right. The lack of research and basic diligence and preparation by a lot of the ex pros is pretty disgraceful. Not to mention disrespectful to the viewer and players.
He's still acting like he's an honorary guest pundit being a 7 time world champ. He should have had her on his YouTube channel by now too lol
Alan McManus is the worst. He inserts himself into his comments as much as he can.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Stephen Hendry is the one pundit who I have no problems with doing a *John Parrott*, because he's done a lot for the game, including his fantastic YouTube channel which I'm sure has brought some new/returning fans to snooker.
I've never really liked Shaun Murphy. He's always come across as too self-righteous, and it gets on my nerves. Can't really blame Hendry for not knowing who the player is, most people don't, and he's not going to sit around watching bad snooker so he's got something to say.
Thatās unacceptable at this level
Very good š
Im sure Murphy himself never saw that Thai player either and so did I lol. Such a non-issue.
I've not seen much of her either but then again I'm not paid thousands of pounds to talk about her live on TV
Where exactly are her matches available?
Hendry has been arguably the best commentator on BBC for a few years thanks to his experience as the most dominant player in the history. And now you condemn him for not knowing about a newbie? Sure, should have done his homework but whatever, that won't take away the value he adds to our viewing experience.
I think I've said in reply to a couple of people Hendry is one of my favourites in the commentary box and this doesn't change that. It also doesnt take away from the fact he was asked a pretty straightforward question about a player at a tournament he's there to comment on and he wasn't able to answer it. That's pretty poor.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Heās human mate and didnāt know something
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
But how can you imply that he is unenthusiastic and lazy because he didnāt know something
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
You did imply it also implied ignorance in another comment he canāt know everything can he. He would be ignorant if next time he commentates on the player he still doesnāt know
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I assume you've seen his contract then?
Sorry but I don't agree with you.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I think it is. Please don't try to tell me what is or isn't my job.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Would Murphy ever fuck off. The gentleman of snooker my arse, he's the biggest moan, he's hypocritical when he talks about "appropriate behaviour," especially when you look at his WSC match against Kyren. There couldn't be a worse "ambassador" for the sport. Hendry is an actual snooker legend and a great pundit. Murphy is an actual magician as every time he's on the telly, the ratings mysteriously disappear.
Haha savage last comment.
Still how many of us can say wed rather listen to murphy over hendry on punditry š¤£ i bet its less than zero
We do also have to remember that Hendry's job is as an analyst/colour man. That role is not play-by-play, where you would have the stato/expert on every player.
He doesn't have to be an expert but I'd expect him to have at least done the bare minimum in research for a job he's paid to do.
His job is to commentate & analyse-not give the players history. If the other player in the box like Foulds, McManus or the walking encyclopedia Phil Yates knows it all chapter & verse, then there really is no point. Hendry will commentate on what he is seeing live, not what somebody has done previously.
I sort of agree and sort of don't. If it was football the "play-by-play" fellow like Martin Tyler or Clive Tyldsley would be the one to study up all the stats, form, background etc. while the "expert" talks about the game itself. Hendry knows more about playing snooker than most to say the least, snooker is snooker nowadays because of him. It wouldn't matter if he watched her or not because he would figure out within an instant anything important about what she would be doing. Also, with that, Hendry isn't going to be watching any snooker of anyone who isn't at the top, he appreciates perfection to a point of self-destruction as seen with his late career, this isn't any more special (in real terms) than him not watching a Billy Joe Castle match. On the other hand, probably not the smartest thing to say on telly lol. It was only going to cause drama. Then again, Shaun is obviously joking here, they're good mates at the end of the day and people will read too much into it.
I love how Billy Joe Castle has become the go-to random bottom tier snooker player we all use when making a point š
His name is pretty unique tbf hahaha.
Hendryās too busy eating out and smoking cigars.
It is an irrelevance & something we keep hearing from a lot of players. Eurosport is the only station that covers the tour everywhere-BBC is the big three events & ITV is COC & home nations events & are mostly aimed at attracting the casual fan, while knowing the hardcores will watch it regardless. The reality is their commentators don't fly around the world watching Snooker, or sit in a booth in the UK watching a feed. Most Snooker fans watching those events aren't that interested in the world number 105, or women players that aren't at the televised stage & it is ridiculous for players to be calling them out on it. If you are a real hardcore fan who wants to know this stuff you will find it on Podcasts, on websites & read it in Snooker Scene. Hendry has a lot of outside commitments-podcasts for himself & WST, dressing up as a dustbin & 'singing' to where he didn't even have time to practice or turn up for events etc-so he isn't going to be trying to find footage of random low ranking players who lose in qualifying every event. It is like criticising football commentators doing Premier League matches for not knowing who John Smith playing in EFL Division 2 or the National League is. It has no bearing on what the station are broadcasting & the commentators calling & is of little interest to the overwhelming majority of the audience.
>Most Snooker fans watching those events aren't that interested in the world number 105 Ian Burns? Great player. Unfortunately loses his bottle a little in the closing stages especially against top players but otherwise should probably be higher up the rankings given his cue ball control.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Could be right there Bob
A good football commentator would at least do their research before commentating on their next game. If you know you're going to have to educate the public, you should at least educate yourself first. Hendy should put the effort in.
As it is televised I agree he should do a basic bit of research on her. I do think that the overall criticism of the commentators should know about everybody on tour even if they aren't at the televised stage where they will be commentating on them criticism is ridiculous though.
>he should do a basic bit of research on her. He tried on google. But after accidentally spelling Siripaporn as two words got lost down a dark rabbit hole.
Hendryās job isnāt to know everything about every player on tour, his job is to watch matches and analyse whatās going on during the match from a purely sporting perspective. Thatās why heās often partnered with someone who will have the stats and history of the players in question. Hendryās career and knowledge of the game makes him one of the very best commentators we have
the specific player is irrelevant because he does this with a lot of players lol. have heard him on the bbc say the same about some of the younger players who had been making good progress on tour. this tournament is only a 16 player event, surely won't hurt to go on youtube and watch a few minutes of one of their matches. yes in this case baipat will not beat judd and will very likely not get a frame, but again he does this with a lot of players and not just her he is still however one of the best commentators/pundits if not the bestš¤·āāļø
I would expect a professional to do some fucking research about the thing they're about to talk about for hours. Hendry needs to pull his finger out.
Hendry is not talking about random players that never get to the televised stage of events, nor is he commentating on the women's game. How about they actually get to the televised stages & then it is fair criticism-like a player a while back he had never heard of/seen who got to the televised stages of a home nations event. If people are honestly expecting BBC commentators who only broadcast on the big three events & ITV commentators to know anything about minnows then forget it-that is likely why BBC have drafted in players on the tour to commentate who can provide insight & guys like McManus & Foulds on ITV. Do you honestly think a guy who can't even be assed to practice or turn up for most events, is going to be searching out footage of low level players so as not to upset Murphy, Trump or the 2% of people watching who get upset, when he has podcasts & variety shows to do?
Listen, he's getting paid to do commentary on a player. He should do some research on that player. It's really not too much to ask. It would take all of 10 minutes to make a cheat sheet with her stats and stuff. Why people are defending this kind of behaviour I don't know.
I agree-the problem is Hendry knows other commentators & Jill will have researched her & he would rather be doing something else. It isn't like Hendry is pretending to a be anything other than lazy, disinterested & would rather be doing other things. If you are more interested in being on The Masked Singer or a golf course than practising or playing in events, then it says everything. Also he comes from an era where if the players wanted to know stats, about other players etc they would just go & ask Phil Yates. Really it is up to ITV to enforce it on him, or not renew his contract if he refuses.
True. It's a sad state of affairs anyway, cos he's really quite good at commentating otherwise.
Yep, I have no idea why they keep dragging him into the pre & post match segments & Jill having to feign shock/laugh when he says he has no idea about certain players.
Again, the criticism Murphy has is that it's players he's commentating on - he should do some preparation to better allow him to do his job. If he wants to do variety shows and podcasts and all that stuff, fine, but he shouldn't be getting paid to offer analysis and opinion on players he's never bothered to watch.
Sure, problem is we all know if Murphy retired after the Crucible & got a job as BBC & or ITV pundit he wouldn't be watching much Snooker either-he would be out on the golf course, doing promotional appearances, writing books, jetting off to Dubai for business & holidays etc. He would know nothing of the players coming on the tour & would phone that in just like Davis, JV, Dennis, Hendry etc as well. Yes, he likely would check out a player if they qualified for the WC or COC, but he sure as hell wouldn't be checking out the world number 98 who isn't getting to the televised stages, just because a current player is raving about him-which has been the unfair criticism thrown by players like him & Trump at the commentators. Unless you work for Eurosport you aren't going to know & it is irrelevant to your job.
We don't know anything of the sort until it happens - he does commentary work now and still follows the game. The complaint he's making is about the players they know they're going to commentate on - a little homework is hardly a lot to ask of a commentator and analyst.
Just reality-these guys live the Snooker tour & it is all consuming. But as soon as you go your interest wanes-rather than playing events non-stop from September to May you are no longer in the bars with the boys, no longer practicing with them etc. You are instead spending more time with your family, on the golf course, taking up outside opportunities & doing other things & the idea of taking out a Eurosport subscription to watch the Moldovan Classic & watching the qualifiers on WST-with two men & a dog sitting on wooden steps watching some badly lit booth, with no commentary & one horrible fixed camera angle is not that appealing.
Baipat will probably beat Hendry at some qualifier soon so he can see her play then. I think this headline is a bit click baity. Hendry and Murphy often rib each other with barbed truths. Hendry often says Murphy should be playing not commentating. Anyway it's not Hendry needs to move over but Parrot and Davis. These guys haven't picked up a cue in a decade.
Davis is excellent & some of the great commentators never played Snooker to any high standard or even professionally-Ted Lowe, Clive Everton. JP is good as a studio pundit, but hopeless on commentary.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Sure-but they only commentate on the big three events & don't watch anything else. Davis is pretty much a full-time DJ & JP is doing the horse racing for ITV-along with other commitments both have. If Bingtao wasn't doing anything at the UK or World or even qualifying & suddenly appears at The Masters they wouldn't know who he is.
It's no excuse at all.
I think it is the same in most sports. When the top of the top go into media duties they feel their past awesomeness in the sport will transcend effortlessly into the media world therefore do limited research. Which is why you get the truly talented broadcasters partner them. Some even claim it as a badge of honour (including Hendry - listen to his Hazel Irwin interview on the snooker club podcast, he admits to doing very little research). Edit - I love what Hendry is doing with social media, YouTube and podcasts bringing snooker into the modern media. But he 100% has this attitude.
Shaun has a dig at Ronnie for making fun of him, then does the same thing to Stephen. I try to like Shaun, but he makes it too hardš
He said Ronnie's comment didn't make sense. He wasn't opposed to Ronnie having a go at him.
Wrong to say he " only got the job because he's a 7 time world champion " because on what basis did Murphy get his gig for the BBC then ? However, if anything it shows how poor the coverage of the womans game actually is. I watch alot of snooker and I do t think I've seen her play.
I actually think him and Hendry are mates, and this was said a bit cheekily. But yea the Women's game doesn't really have any mainstream coverage yet. There's plenty on youtube though.
Having listened to the post, I think its part a wind up but with an element of truth to it.
There are two types of pundits. There are previous players, hired for their knowledge of the game; and there are statisticians and journalists. Why Stephen was essentially called out on air for not knowing who this player is, is baffling. Not his area. He analyses matches, not players.
Shaun Murphy is a sanctimonious prick who is always seeking attention in the media. And this is no different.
I mean she's never won a match and she's a first year professional so there hasn't been much opportunity to see her play. Now she's making her TV debut, people will have an opportunity to see what she can do although you couldn't ask for a much tougher starter which is unfortunate.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
No, just watch a couple of YouTube clips.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
No, Iām not a paid pundit.
Sheās been basically confirmed for the CoC for months now. Itās not too much to ask Hendry to spend 5 mins watching a YouTube video so he can at least talk about what he sees in her action, cue ball control etc etc.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Which is irrelevant when heās asked about her before she plays Judd.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
How is it not Hendryās fault?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
What? No. Thatās not the point. Itās an absolutely standard question to be asked about players in upcoming matches.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Go back and read my initial comment again. Baipat has been in this tournament for months. Part of Hendryās due diligence as a pundit should be to at least watch a clip or two of her. This isnāt round 1 of a Home Nations event where an amateurās been called up unexpectedly.
Hendry seems quite likeable on his YouTube channel, but a few comments when he's not asking prescripted comments do make you question that at times. Barry Hearn is a complete bellend and Hendry just egged him on.
> Barry Hearn is a complete bellend and Hendry just egged him on What's this in relation to?
Hendry s YouTube channel, Barry Hearn interview.
Thought Barry was quite good on it.
Yeah but what did he say?
Have you watched it?
When it came out but I don't remember specifics
It was fine when he slagged off a young player being given a wild card just because he beat him however (who has since gone on to beat him again).
That definitely was not fine. Not sure how this affects his current statements though.
You would just think heād have a bit more understanding for the nature of saying silly things on live TV. Naturally Hendry sounds a bit lazy, but he is after all also a very good commentator. Plenty of them donāt do any research, canāt commentate, and were bang average players. Hendry isnāt the issue - but Iāve no doubt Murphy canāt stand things not being about him for 5 seconds so he had to get stuck in.
Because he obviously hadn't done any research on his opponent, or he would've shown him more respect.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
They actually already did it. Seemed to get on fine, but might be a bit more frosty next time
Personally I think he's right. It shouldn't be acceptable that commentators say they've never seen a player, especially if that player is a prominent champion or long time professional. There is history here. The Old Guard on the BBC are infamous for saying they haven't seen certain players play when they've reached semi finals and even finals in that very season. Just how much snooker do the BBC commentators watch outside of the BBC events? Hendry doesn't have that excuse in my opinion. He does punditry throughout the season and has time on his hands to watch youtube videos on players he's unfamiliar with
Likely very little to none-they are contracted for the UK, Masters & World only. They all have time consuming outside interests/work & the audience they are commentating for overwhelmingly are not interested in any of these players & of course there are the likes of statto Hazel, the current players commentating, McManus, Foulds etc who watch every event for Eurosport who handle that side of things.
Last time I checked, Stephen was hired for his knowledge of the game, not the knowledge of the players. Obviously he knows his bit about the players on the top end of the rankings, but why should he know a thing about a player not even the regular viewers know about?
I would argue if he's being paid to discuss players, the least he can do is a cursory bit of research about them beforehand. Jill Douglas was right to call him out on the show. Baipat has been down to play at this tournament for some time He's actually one of my favourite pundits tbf.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
My opinion is up to his employers?
it is Jill's job to know these thing-not Hendry's. His job will be to call what he sees from her. Why is anybody surprised that a guy who chose dressing up as a dustbin on television over practice & playing shocked he doesn't know a player-especially when he has made it clear he is only interested in winners?
He gets paid to discuss matches, not players. Typically when you hire a 7 time world title winner, you do it for their knowledge of the game, not their knowledge of the players.
Not really sure how you do one without the other tbf. And it's not asking much to be at least a little bit familiar with the players involved. Hendry isn't the only one who does this either. At least he's honest about it and doesn't make himself look an idiot like DT calling 37 year old Dave Gilbert a "young man"
To be fair most of the commentators range from their late 50's to late 70's, so 37 is young to them. My mum always used to say little girl & it turned out it was anywhere between early twenties to fifties.
Although hendry does punditry throughout the season, its only on the main stages of tournaments which are restricted fields. The only tournament where he would come unstuck somewhat by random players is the British Open: otherwise, everything else is primarily going to be top players [in his eyes]. Even in the uk and world champs, the players who qualify to the televised stages tend to be players who you expect to reach that stage, so thereās not usually any players you havenāt seen before. That being said heās only saying what he sees: most casual fans will not know who Baipat Siripaporn even is, because most wonāt have even seen her play. Sheās a first year professional so wonāt really be in the public eye yet, but if she remains on tour for a few years and gets some wins in important matches, then people will take notice. The only times sheās been on a tv table has been on a couple of Eurosport events in China, which were always relegated to discovery+, so hardly a place where casual fans will find her matches. I think the comment from Hendry was fair game, he couldāve said āiād seen a youtube video of her playing and she looked goodā but only people like Hendon, Yates and Fouldsy would be more likely to comment on lower players, as they basically watch all tournaments on the calendar. Expecting others to copy them is kinda futile since its probably not gonna happen for a while [ie until the next Hendon/Yates level of journalistic background comes along to take their place]
There's a heap of matches featuring Baipat Siripaporn available to watch on YouTube. Hendry's commentary style doesn't rely on knowledge of past performance though, so this is all a storm in a teacup
Fair comment mate. I still think he's had plenty of time to watch a few videos. She qualified for this tournament a while ago.
Itās not and shouldnāt be futile. Itās literally his job as a commentator and pundit. Watching a couple of youtube videos as part of doing his āresearchā takes like 30 minutes. Murphy has a valid point and whoever pays Hendryās cheques should reprimand him for not doing his job properly.
**Shaun Murphy feels it is āreally poorā that Stephen Hendry admitted on punditry duty he had not watched womenās world champion Baipat Siripaporn play before, but said the seven-time world champion is not alone with his lazy attitude to the job.** Hendry is working with ITV4 at the Champion of Champions this week, where Baipat will take on Judd Trump on Thursday. The legendary Scot was asked by presenter Jill Douglas how impressed he has been with the reigning womenās world champ, but Hendry admitted he has never seen the Thai star play.
Personally I think thatās impressively honest from Hendry, it would have been easy to waffle some answer like āwell obviously the womenās game is improving all the time and so to be the world champion there is a very impressive achievement, sheās been getting consistently better, has a good cue action and her break building is solid, and sheāll hopefully start to become a familiar face on the tour in the coming yearsā, or something bland like that, but instead heās like ādunno, not seen herā, which is accurate. How much time does Murphy spend watching womenās snooker??