Reanne Evans Slams WPBSA Over Transgender Ruling Communication Failures
Evans Demands Answers From Governing Body
Twelve-time women's world champion Reanne Evans has launched a stinging public rebuke of the World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association (WPBSA), accusing the governing body of failing to communicate a significant policy change to players on the women's circuit. Evans took to X on Friday to express her frustration after discovering that a revised Eligibility Policy — one that introduces a biological sex requirement for women's tournaments — had been quietly implemented without any apparent direct notification to players or their management teams.
The updated WPBSA policy, which came into effect on 12th March 2026, states explicitly that "in women's tournaments there is an eligibility requirement based on biological sex." The ruling follows the Supreme Court's April 2025 determination on the legal definition of a person's sex, as well as a subsequent case involving transgender pool player Harriet Haynes and the English Blackball Federation in August 2025. Despite those developments providing a clear legal and regulatory backdrop, Evans — the most decorated player in the history of women's snooker — indicated that neither she nor her fellow competitors had received so much as an email from the WPBSA or World Women's Snooker (WWS) informing them of the change.
What the Policy Change Means for Women's Snooker
"So women snooker players (of all levels) and their teams have been asking if a decision has been made with no reply," Evans wrote on X. "Players have quit/stopped entering events because of no ruling. I was sent this tonight, and no one knew about it. Why no announcement/email to let players know?" The post quickly drew widespread attention, resonating with those who have long called for clarity on a topic that has visibly affected participation levels on the women's tour.
It is worth noting that an article outlining the WPBSA's revised policy does appear on the governing body's own website, dated 26th March — though no corresponding statement or announcement features on the WWS site. Whether that constitutes adequate communication to active players and their teams is a matter Evans and others are clearly contesting. The absence of any proactive outreach — whether via direct email or official announcement through World Women's Snooker's own channels — has drawn particular criticism given the sensitivity and significance of the policy shift.
The Wider Context: Departures and Disputes Across Cue Sports
The controversy is not without considerable background. Maria Catalano — a former women's world number one, five-time World Women's Championship runner-up, and cousin of seven-time world champion Ronnie O'Sullivan — departed the women's circuit in the wake of transgender player Jamie Hunter winning both the US Women's Open and the Australian Women's Open in 2022. Catalano's absence has been a notable one; at her peak she was among the most consistent performers on the circuit, and the circumstances surrounding her withdrawal prompted sustained debate about the need for formal governance on the issue.
Cue sports more broadly have seen related disputes escalate in recent seasons. In 2023, pool player Lynne Pinches refused to compete against transgender opponent Harriet Haynes in the Champion of Champions final — an incident that underscored the increasingly urgent need for governing bodies across the discipline to establish clear, communicated frameworks. The WPBSA's updated policy appears to be, at least in part, a direct response to these cumulative pressures. Whether it has been handled with sufficient transparency, however, is now very much in question.
Analysis: A Policy Without a Proper Launch
From a governance standpoint, the WPBSA's position is an awkward one. The policy itself — grounding women's tournament eligibility in biological sex — aligns with the direction taken by a growing number of sporting bodies following the Supreme Court ruling, and is likely to find support among a significant proportion of players and stakeholders. The problem, as Evans makes abundantly clear, is not what was decided but how it was communicated. Or rather, how it was not.
If players at all levels of the women's game — including its most decorated champion — were unaware that a fundamental eligibility criterion had changed, that represents a significant failure in member communication. Evans's intervention is unlikely to be the last word on the matter. With the women's calendar ongoing and player eligibility now carrying clearer legal and regulatory weight, the WPBSA and WWS will need to address this communication gap directly, and swiftly, if they are to retain the confidence of the players they govern.
