Why I'll never attend bizarre BBC Sports Personality of the Year

- - -

Morrissey once said he didn't want any recognition from the Brit Awards for his talent as a musician. He said it would almost be like Laurence Olivier being pleased with a TV Times award. I feel the same way about being given meaningless little trophies from people who don't know me. I don't want any recognition really. I don't see the point of it. I’m not interested in winning popularity contests. Nobody should be.

I've never been in the top 10 nominees for the BBC Sports Personality of the Year when I felt I should have been in the top 10. I feel that is a bit bizarre because if I can't get into the top 10 British sportsmen or women, then I must be doing something wrong. I mean, let's face it, we don't have a surplus of them.

I've never been to the Sports Personality, and I have no desire to be part of that club. Or the clique who go to these things. I just don't really get it.

Guys like Phil Taylor, George Best and Alex Higgins haven't won it which I don't really understand. Why? Is it judged on what you achieve in sports, or just as a popularity contest? Or both? It is all very blurred about how they reach their conclusions.

If it comes down to a panel of judges, and people in suits, it will all come down to things that don't really have anything to do with personality. Obviously my face doesn't fit, and I don't have the right media persona with the people making the final call.

I obviously don't tick the boxes, and they don't appreciate the skill of snooker. I'm not going to get their vote. I just have to accept that is not the type of award I'm going to win.

I'd rather win an award that is voted for by the fans, and probably ex-professional sports people because they know what it takes to succeed at the highest level.

If former professionals who played at a decent level were on the panel, I could take the criteria a bit more seriously because then you could make a case for their decisions. You could say it is people who know what is it like to win or lose, and they know what is needed to stay at the top level for a long period of time.

As professionals, they'd appreciate what a sportsman has done for their sport. When you have men and women in suits who don't really know anything about snooker then you are not going to get the right decision.

They probably read the newspapers, hear who does a lot of good work for charity, who has a good agent and tick the right boxes because they say and do the right things in interviews.

For me, that is voting for someone for all the wrong reasons.

I'm not big on it. I have never been to Sports Personality of the Year and I won't go as long as I'm a professional.

I don't watch it. I think Steve Davis won it in the 1980s and Stephen Hendry finished second or third at some point.

Just give me another three world titles, another Masters and another UK, and I'll be happy. I don't really need any awards to be happy with myself.

I don't want an OBE or an MBE, either. I'm not knocking it because I know it is nice for some people to get because they appreciate it.

But I wouldn't really thank you for one. It is not for me. The only medals I want are from what I've achieved on my own.

MBEs are a bit like the Sports Personality. They are down to someone making the call. I don't feel like I've achieved anything to warrant an MBE.

A few players like Hendry, Mark Williams, John Parrott and John Higgins have got them. You can't help but think there is a reason behind the decisions. It would be interesting to hear the reasons why I'm not nominated. I just hope it is not because of a sniffy attitude towards snooker.

All I'm interested in is continuing to play open expressive snooker for the masses. I feel that I've given a lot to snooker over the years. I'm passionate about entertaining the fans who pay their hard earned money to come and watch me.

I compare it to Daniel Day-Lewis in acting. He is so committed to the role that he can't appear in too many films because it is exhausting.

I can only peak for so many tournaments because it can get very tiring trying to hit your best form all the time. Sometimes if it doesn't come off, I can get a bit frustrated and annoyed.

I hope the public realise I get annoyed sometimes only because I love the game. Nobody likes to lose.

I didn't realise I was so near to Stephen's record. I'm only 23 centuries behind him, and I have been giving it some thought.

It would be a nice record to achieve. I'll try to achieve that in the next tournaments in Chengdu and Coventry...

Seriously, I won't be thinking of it during tournaments as I think that could occupy your mind, and put you off your game.

I just want to enjoy playing, and see where it takes me. If I win a few matches and maybe a tournament or two, I won't be far off the mark this season, but we'll see.

I mean, you can win frames with 70 breaks, but of course it would be nice to reach such a terrific record.

I like competing, and winning tournaments. For me, it is always going to be more about winning tournaments than making century breaks.

When I was watching Neil (Robertson) chase the 100 centuries in a season at the World Championship, I wouldn't have enjoyed it because he kept getting asked about it.

At the end of the day, it is only a 100 break. I'd rather win a lot of close frames, and win with 50s and 60s.

I've made brilliant 30 breaks that have been better than 147s. It all depends on the way the balls are lying.

I've had more of a buzz out of that so I don't get caught up in all the hyperbole surrounding the 100 breaks.

I'm not knocking it, but it's not one of my top priorities. I'd take another three world titles all day long because that is the real mark you want to reach.

Hendry is the 'Guv'nor', and I want to get to seven alongside him. That is the king of the records. I'm not overly keen on what the century break record means, but of course I'll take it if, or when, it comes along.