Ch 7 Commentary - is it intervention time?

Remove this Banner Ad

ROORAGE said:
Don’t stop there.

Ling And Bartel no geelong games
Richardson no richmond games
Darcy no dogs games
Macavaney no hawthorn games cause it’s fukn creepy
brainless Taylor no games...ever...period
Hamish cause nepotism is just plain wrong

Let’s push on:

Caroline Wilson should never be allowed to even mention football
Matthew llloyd should never opine on Essendon
Spam Maclure should never, ever be allowed to defend his beloved Carlton under the guise of ‘commentary’
Judd the spud should be sacked immediately from fc. How a director can sit on a panel and it not be seen as conflict of interest is beyond me
Huddo should never call Geelong games
Fanboy robbo shouldn’t write about Essendon

Shall I go on?

JB can call all the north games he likes. And he can defend every single swipe taken at north or anything north related as long the aforementioned all retain their positions.
Click to expand...
having people on footy talk shows with no allegiances is unrealistic.

but commentators with obvious allegiances should be removed from calling games involving their team and their rivals. Eddie McGuire really tries hard to sound uber excited every time charlie curnow takes a pack mark but everyone sees right through it. it's cringeworthy honestly
 
I listened to Ling and Richo wrap up the Melbourne v Adelaide game on 3AW and their analysis was even more shallow than when they are on Seven. They literally just listed the highest possession getters as the best players. No mention of Lever who was almost certainly one of the best three or four players on the ground. But his 15 possessions didn’t leap off the page so no mention.

Who were the best players for Adelaide? The two highest possession getters.

What illustrated Melbourne’s dominance? The difference in disposal numbers.

A six year old could read a stat sheet and pick out the highest number of disposals. It’s actually embarrassing that they think this garbage passes as analysis.
 
Ive tuned out of all AFL media (except BF of course) for the last 2 weeks
Its been highly refreshing.
You really get to understand its mostly negative and it actually starts to frustrate you.

The only games I've watched in full are Tigers games. Besides that ive only watch games in 10 minute parts. The commentary is a massive turn off.
Especially pre and post games. Its awful!!
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Sprout said:
I listened to Ling and Richo wrap up the Melbourne v Adelaide game on 3AW and their analysis was even more shallow than when they are on Seven. They literally just listed the highest possession getters as the best players. No mention of Lever who was almost certainly one of the best three or four players on the ground. But his 15 possessions didn’t leap off the page so no mention.

Who were the best players for Adelaide? The two highest possession getters.

What illustrated Melbourne’s dominance? The difference in disposal numbers.

A six year old could read a stat sheet and pick out the highest number of disposals. It’s actually embarrassing that they think this garbage passes as analysis.
Click to expand...
I guess you are one of the best posters here with over 11000 posts so ..... good post!
Signed Lingy an Richo
 
captain cotch 9 said:
Ive tuned out of all AFL media (except BF of course) for the last 2 weeks
Its been highly refreshing.
You really get to understand its mostly negative and it actually starts to frustrate you.

The only games I've watched in full are Tigers games. Besides that ive only watch games in 10 minute parts. The commentary is a massive turn off.
Especially pre and post games. Its awful!!
Click to expand...
Agree completely. It's all hyperbole.
 
Sprout said:
I listened to Ling and Richo wrap up the Melbourne v Adelaide game on 3AW and their analysis was even more shallow than when they are on Seven. They literally just listed the highest possession getters as the best players. No mention of Lever who was almost certainly one of the best three or four players on the ground. But his 15 possessions didn’t leap off the page so no mention.

Who were the best players for Adelaide? The two highest possession getters.

What illustrated Melbourne’s dominance? The difference in disposal numbers.

A six year old could read a stat sheet and pick out the highest number of disposals. It’s actually embarrassing that they think this garbage passes as analysis.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this. They're apparently employed because of their experience in the game, yet the minute they turn on a microphone all that insight disappears. Any nuffie from BigFooty could read the stat sheet and tell us who won the contested possessions or topped the disposals.

It pretty much says the whole reason they're employed - their time in the game - is not necessary.

I think it's time to employ some real commentators who can call the flow of the game, and get one ex-player sidekick to chip in with some colour commentary occasionally. Piss the rest of them off.

Maybe we need some kind of column like Geoff Lemon did about how shite the Channel 9 cricket commentators were in the Brad MacNamara era. Although that would require some journalistic ability and insight from AFL journalists, and **** knows they haven't got any either.
 
Luv_our_club said:
Hitchens was a self important, pompous, speaking circuit wannabee celebrity, who did little more than burn the straw man with popular bubble gum arguments against theology. Similar to Richard Dawkins.

But that is just my opinion.
Click to expand...
At least he didn't mix his metaphors champ. (How exactly do you burn a straw man with bubble gum..?)
 
Bruce hasn't been the same since Ch 7 got the rights back in 2007.

I think this is attributable to both the manner in which the game is played along with congestion - neither are conducive to his style. Ditto the camerawork.

Not dissimilar to his main squeeze Winx, it doesn't let him get into his stride. Next time he commentates, count how often he says "belting forward" and you'll be alarmed.

Listen to him rattle off a 30 sec piece of wizardry in the mid-90s culminating in something like a "Play for us Tony....SENSATIONAL!" (a la 96 GF) and you'll wonder what happened.

Cue State Of The Game round table II...
 
Never thought I'd say this but they are better than Dunstall was during the Geelong v Carlton game
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Luv_our_club said:
burning the straw man is not a metaphor buddy. Just because it is not literal does not make it a metaphor.
Click to expand...
Oh dear, you've just committed the 'Red Herring' fallacy. It doesn't stop the fact that using 'burning' and 'bubble gum' in the same sentence was misguided. Uncle Hitch would be turning in his grave. (He was obviously a great man; and if you can't see that then I can't do nothin' for ya...)
Do I win anything?
 
Surely Paul said:
Oh dear, you've just committed the 'Red Herring' fallacy. It doesn't stop the fact that using 'burning' and 'bubble gum' in the same sentence was misguided. Uncle Hitch would be turning in his grave. (He was obviously a great man; and if you can't see that then I can't do nothin' for ya...)
Do I win anything?
Click to expand...

So you backed down from your original critique regarding "mixed metaphors" because you were incorrect....good on you for admitting that...

especially considering you popped up out of nowhere to make that critique of me, and considering your critique was all about maintaining the standards of the English language.


But wait! You now have new criticisms....to save face.... oh how sad! Now you merely say that my sentence was "misguided"...no rule is identified that i have breached.... my sentence is just "misguided".

If you are going to be so bold as to critique another poster for use of the English language, then i think that you would really need to be accurate in your criticism the first time, and you do not want to retreat into vagueness the second time, because you end up looking odd.


p.s. You don't know what "red herring fallacy" means. I am not entering the rabbit hole of discussing this error with you... otherwise we will be here forever....
 
Last edited:
Luv_our_club said:
So you backed down from your original critique regarding "mixed metaphors" because you were incorrect....good on you for admitting that...

especially considering you popped up out of nowhere to make that critique of me, and considering your critique was all about maintaining the standards of the English language.


But wait! You now have new criticisms....to save face.... oh how sad! Now you merely say that my sentence was "misguided"...no rule is identified that i have breached.... my sentence is just "misguided".

If you are going to be so bold as to critique another poster for use of the English language, then i think that you would really need to be accurate in your criticism the first time, and you do not want to retreat into vagueness the second time, because you end up looking odd.


p.s. You don't know what "red herring fallacy" means. I am not entering the rabbit hole of discussing this error with you... otherwise we will be here forever....
Click to expand...
Oh Christ.
 
AcuteWhistle said:
Option1

Get Foxtel IQ3 box
Start recording AFL game
Stream radio coverage of choice from AFL Match Center
Play recording AFL game
Pause recording AFL game for ~ 10 seconds to sync with radio broadcast
Never have to listen to CH7 or Foxtel coverages again

Option 2

Start thread or post on thread on BF whinging about AFL TV commentary.


You have the power people!!
Click to expand...

Mute button. If people watched more and listened less they learn a whole lot more about what’s really happening out there.
 
Luv_our_club said:
We know how bad they can be, but watching tonight they put me to sleep. Monotone, sparse, disinterested commentary.

Darcy, Brayshaw, and Richo....

It was a possible top 4 clash between the Cats and Power... and there was plenty of drama during the game. The Power were in the contest until the last 7 minutes.
Click to expand...
 
I can't help but notice that the commentators for the NBA, NFL and EPL are all professional, career commentators. There are precious few pro commentators when it comes to AFL, which is a great pity. Dennis was a world class pro and Bruce is clearly a professional (while at times annoying), but it is a struggle to find a pro after that. Ex players can make good comments presenters (Gerard Healy and Jonathon Brown are excellent), but it would be difficult to develop players into competent commentators unless they come from a broadcasting background. A professional commentator will never allow bias to show through and won't lower themselves to barrack - like Dwayne Russell, Eddie Maguire, Sean Darcy etc. often do. Perhaps Channel 7 and Fox should get Dennis to train and mentor the few current potential career commentators and then develop some others. That way they could get rid of Eddie, Dwayne, Sean and the like. I am sure that the long suffering AFL viewers deserve better.
 
Comettis last couple of years on 7 were cringeworthy... him and bruce got worse.

I felt like Cometti was constantly trying to fit in some song lyrics/one liner into every passage of play instead of just calling.
Was glad to see him go at the end which is a shame coz he was great in the 90s/2000s.



On [device_name] using BigFooty.com mobile app
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Ch 7 Commentary - is it intervention time?

Similar threads

Frigate
Victoria Bias in Fixturing and Commentary Continues
2 3
Replies
56
Views
2K
windyhill
windyhill
sthmelb_dimmies
The state of AFL Commentary- a solution
2 3 4
Replies
88
Views
4K
calculon559
calculon559
GOTHELIONS16
When is 4K coming to 7AFL coverage?
Replies
5
Views
461
enzso
E
PerthBoy86
Moved Thread Biased commentary
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
Colonial
Colonial
S
What is it with the ‘Sams’?
Replies
9
Views
1K
SuperMal
S
E
Channel 7 - Everything, Everywhere, All at Once
Replies
0
Views
649
enzso
E
Reg Grundy35
Where are the big media boys on the GWS issue?
Replies
2
Views
372
XhazzafootyX
XhazzafootyX

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top