Shaun Murphy has become the latest player to speak out on the controversies involving the WST and the WPBSA’s handling of Zhao Xintong.
The latter captured a maiden World Snooker Championship title on Monday with an 18-12 triumph over Mark Williams at the Crucible Theatre.
It completed a remarkable month for the 28 year-old in Sheffield, who began the competition in the very first round of qualifying.
Zhao won four matches in the preliminary phase at the English Institute of Sport before storming his way through each round at the venue stages – winning nine matches in total.
A first male professional world snooker champion from China, he has become the game’s biggest rising star.
His attacking style of play and a boyish charm have endeared him to many, and authorities will hope to capitalise on these attributes by seizing the opportunity to promote his profile on a global level.
But Zhao’s rapid rise back to the top of the game following the conclusion of his ban has not been without controversy.
The World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association plus the World Snooker Tour have come in for serious criticism, particularly from other professional players on the circuit.
At the forefront of the discussion is whether or not Zhao should have been allowed to compete during the 2024/25 campaign at all.
The former world number six’s WPBSA ban ended in September last year but he is still technically banned by his national governing body until July this year.
The normal stance is that a player who isn’t in good standing with their national federation can’t participate in WPBSA tournaments.
If that stipulation had been followed as usual, Zhao would not have been able to enter the amateur Q Tour circuit, which is ultimately how he obtained an invitation to participate in the 2025 World Snooker Championship.
“This point was made to anyone in World Snooker and the WPBSA who would listen at the time,” Shaun Murphy said on the OneFourSeven Snooker Podcast.
“Asking the question, how can a player who is still banned by their own governing body be seen and be deemed to be in good standing?”
“And therefore be allowed to enter WPBSA events such as Q Tour – that was a question that was asked about ten months ago before the start of the season that’s just ended.
“It seemed fairly black and white to most of us that he wasn’t in good standing with his national governing body.
“There are lots of other players that this has and does and will apply to. You can’t just go around joining federations and tournaments as you see fit.
“You have to be in good standing. The question we all asked was, how can a player who is still banned be deemed to be in good standing?
“I’m yet to hear a satisfactory answer from anyone at WPBSA Towers or the tour, so I don’t know the answer.
“It struck me as odd. I think a lot of players have the same view. It was something that was discussed at length by the Players’ Board in conjunction with the WPBSA.
“We were told that, despite him being still banned by his NGB in China, that WPBSA considered him to be in good standing. That was the answer.
“We said, ‘hang on a minute, he’s still banned but you’re not recognising that?’
“The argument I’ve seen a lot is that he’s been away from the game – he didn’t take a gap year, he didn’t go on a sabbatical to go and feed refugees somewhere.
“There was an enforced suspension, because he’d done something wrong. He’s done the crime, he did his time, and therefore should be allowed back.
“But that’s where it gets a bit sticky, because there is an argument being made that he didn’t do his time.
“That’s a big problem for a lot of people that raised it at the time, and it’s still being raised today.
“There’s a lot of people of the view that, actually, had he have served his full ban and come back to the sport when he was in good standing with his NGB, as per the WPBSA rules by the way, no one would have a word to say about it.
“It’s a strange one. Jason Ferguson was on telly over the weekend saying that it’s unprecedented and this and that – that we’ve never seen it before.
“Then in another interview, [he was] saying there are rules in place for this type of thing, and it’s happened before, and the rules are well established.
“Which one is it? We don’t know.”
Second on the list of grievances is the situation involving Zhao’s ranking, with the new Crucible king immediately rejoining the top 16 in 11th on the back of his £500,000 champion’s cheque.
Amateur players are allowed to keep prize money and can secure their professional status for the upcoming campaign through performances as top-ups.
But the wording in the players’ entry pack seemed to clearly state that those earnings couldn’t then translate into ranking points, and Zhao should in fact be starting the 2025/26 term on zero.
“It’s a very small nuance in the system, which has never been exploited or seen before, and there are a few different things at play here,” Shaun Murphy continued.
“Because he’s won the World Championship, he will be seeded number two for every tournament next season.”
“That happened to me and it’s happened to a few others who weren’t ranked that highly, but because of the benefit of winning the World Championship, you’re seeded two for everything.
“So whether he starts on zero points or 500,000 points, he’s going to get the rewards of being the number two seed. He’s going to be in everything.
“[But] the rules of the tour and the entry pack for the tour are as follows where this is concerned.
“These are the words: ‘An amateur player can qualify for the top 64. However, their ranking points will always reset to zero at the start of each season.’
“Those are the words in the terms of entry in our players’ contract that we all sign, that everyone signs up to every year, [and] that’s just been very publicly renegotiated.
“WST have decided to totally change the rules. They’ve come out with a statement saying they agree that it could have been worded better, but what we meant was this.
“Something along those lines – ‘what we should have said was this, or what we meant was X’. The players are in uproar about it frankly.
“This actually has nothing to do with Zhao Xintong. He just happens to be the player that this has happened to.
“But the rules are clear. An amateur player is invited in to play as a top-up, if they earn enough points, they can qualify and earn their right to be a pro into the top 64.
“That’s always been the case, that isn’t new. I think he is the first to do it, but that’s not a new thing.
“What is a new thing is WST’s decision – a staggering decision, a jaw-dropping decision – to totally ignore the wording of their own contract.
“It is black and white, it’s what we’ve all agreed to, and it isn’t as things stand how World Snooker Tour are proceeding.
“And just to make this absolutely clear, this is nothing to do with Xintong. Nobody has got a problem with Zhao Xintong.
“This is about World Snooker Tour riding roughshod over our players’ contract, which we renegotiated in good faith and signed in good faith.
“And they’ve just decided to ignore it and rewrite it as they see fit.”
Featured photo credit: WST
There definitely seem to be a couple of wrinkles in the “party line” on Zhao Xingtong, and the rest of the tour have homed in on them quickly. Will any snooker bosses be bothered? Nope. That’s my guess. This isn’t amateur stuff where the rules matter. This is professional sport, where the image of the rules matters so that the crux of the business can happen: money; making money, moving money, spreading money and concentrating money. Such is professional sport Vs amateur sport as far as I can tell. It’s a showbusiness to those running it. That’s how the professionals get paid the bucks by the organisers. As such, this whole discussion is not likely to get far in my opinion. A few conciliatory gestures may be made perhaps. That’s likely to be all that will come of it in the long term.
I’m looking forward to seeing how the mantle of being reigning world champion sits with Zhao. A Wilson, or a Brecel year? Also being the focus of his nation’s hopes for it’s debuting world champion, and that sort of thing. It’s something new indeed.
The first MALE world snooker champion from China…
I don’t recall a woman ever winning the snookeer world championship. Do you perhaps mean the world women’s snooker championship, which is a totally different thing run by a different governing body?
Bai Yulu is a reigning snooker world champion, so if you don’t “recall” that, perhaps you have a little chauvanist bias. The governing body is orthogonal and irrelevant.
The wording in the article could have been better. It has been edited.
There is a lot of speculation about potential fixing of this year’s win. While there are examples of hot shots coming from nowhere, the rules controversy adds to the suspicions. In addition, given that China is a huge and growing economy, currying favour is a possible motivation. As we have seen with the Olympics, and with soccer, money talks and not in a rules based way!
So does that mean a lifetime ban for Willo? Ronnie? Everyone else he beat to win? If they match fixed then surely they should all be banned.
That Makes no sense So Zhao Xintong can be in the Top 64 but their point revert to zero how the hell does that work So Zhao is WN 11 but has 491,000 less points than no 12 My understanding dating back to 2019 when James Cahil was a Amataur at the Crucible if a amateur’s manages to get in the top 64 on the world rankings they can keep the points
Others, such as Nick Metcalfe, have taken issue with the gushing praise and flowery language that’s greeted his coronation and ascent back to the top. I’m personally not bothered about that but it’s hard to argue with Murphy’s argument that you’re not in good standing if still banned by your own governing body. A few things I’ve discovered about his ban and the offences that led to it have slightly tempered the positivity I initially felt about his success.
He’s now qualified for the Champion of Champions.
It’s quite possible that the phrase ‘in good standing’ is too flimsy to withstand any challenges, and might even be unlawful. WPBSA used an independent tribunal to issue those bans, and were probably bound to follow them. The CBSA may not be relevant, but of course WPBSA definitely wouldn’t want to put it to the test.
Really a National Federation can’t be required to authorise players: that’s open to all kinds of abuse. Players are individuals, and if WPBSA wants to guard itself against allowing ‘unsuitable’ players, it should do so by itself.
Should have the title taken of him
He was banned in chine
How was he allowed to play
Again he is in another fix
World championship 2028 will be held in China
Snooker is fixed
Anyone know why Stephen Hendry wasn’t used by the BBC on the last day? He’s normally the BBC’s co-commentator for the closing frames. He didn’t work on the final after session one.
How can a player qualify for the top 64 if they have zero points ?
The wording seems totally contradictory to me.
Currently a player would need around £90,000 to be in the top 64.
So either Zhao’s prize money is counted and he is (well) in the top 64,
or he starts next season with zero points and at the bottom of the rankings (well outside the top 64) like all players with a fresh 2-year tour card.
It doesn’t make any sense to me…
Indeed it doesn’t make sense. That’s because they’ve had to introduce so many clauses and exceptions to the system, they’ve ended up confusing themselves! WST aren’t very good when it comes to fine detail, and for seeing possible outcomes.
And then they have cheek to tell us that they favour this ranking system because it’s the simplest one, that even snooker fan can understand!
In terms of whether he should have been able to enter Q Tour, WST said they asked the Chinese Federation and that they said their ban didn’t affect anything outside of China. That would mean he was “in good standing” to play these events with the National Federation. As someone else pointed out, its too vague a phrase to really mean anything, so assuming what WST said is true, that seems fair enough to me.
In terms of the ranking points, it is clear that the contract does not say he would keep his points. However, it is so clearly barking mad that he wouldn’t keep his points in this scenario when the rest of the top 64 do, that it seems believable that they got sloppy with the contract and didn’t proof read it properly. I would think it was their intention at the time that someone would keep their points in this scenario.
There is also absolutely no reason for them to change it on a whim to benefit Zhao (if they even wanted to do that), as he will be seeded number 2 for every tournament anyway and would have two years to get into the top 64 (which I assume no-one believes he would have any problem doing).
Have WST exhibited poor attention to detail? yes. Has anyone else been remotely disadvantaged by it? Not really as he is seeded 2 anyway. Is it the massive scandal Murphy is making it out to be? No.
Move on.
Yes I agree, the only rigorous way to interpret ‘in good standing’ is to require that all entrants have an authorisation letter. Zhao Xintong had that, however silly that makes the the CBSA look after their earlier hard line. But even if some National Federation had a grudge against a player (which can happen), the ‘in good standing’ clause could probably be successfully challenged. Ironically, the place where all these dubious clauses might not be challengable is in China, where they tend to operate via authority.
With the ranking fudge, Zhao Xintong would be seeded No.2 anyway, as World Champion for the 2025-26 season, but it would make a big difference for the 2026-27 season. If he had only one season’s points, he might drop out of the top-16 for a while, but with the policy now being followed, he’ll be assured top-16 for the next 2 years, no matter what. There’s also some advantage being seeded 3 or 4, rather than say 14 or 15.
I guess thats true. Be a lot easier if they didnt randomly take away peoples points for no reason in any situation really.
I think there’s a slight correction in relation to what everyone is saying. Correct me if I’m wrong but most events have the reigning champion as top seed, followed by world no.1, so presumably the world champion would be 3rd seed in many events. Not that it makes much difference.
The reigning champion is the top seed, the world champion is the second seed, and the world no.1 (if somebody else) is the third seed.