Whateley looks like Monty Burns though.
Mega Thread Port Forum General AFL Thread Part 29
- Thread starter Magpiespowaz
- Start date
- Tagged users None
Scodges
Club Legend
- Sep 22, 2023
- 1,389
- 1,649
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
][emoji[emoji6
][emoji6]]
[emoji[emoji6]]" data-quote="edgie" data-source="post: 0"
class="bbCodeBlock bbCodeBlock--expandable bbCodeBlock--quote js-expandWatch">
Balme might not attack things with the same vigour he has in the past but the guy has high standards and a professional thoroughness about him that doesn't wither with age.
Sent from my Nokia [emoji[emoji6
]
]. using Tapatalk
Sent from my Nokia [emoji[emoji6
]]. using Tapatalk
One voice isn’t gonna do much, just look at Tredders.
Sent from my iPhone using BigFooty.com
Scodges
Club Legend
- Sep 22, 2023
- 1,389
- 1,649
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
Dylan8
Bar Up
Robbo is a deeply flawed man who could barely articulate himself a lot of the time but I always appreciated that he'd usually come out on the right side of moral issues. Often very funny, great buddy cop dynamic with that nerd Whateley. What sticks out is that we won't have anyone like him again. Absolutely painful, characterless dorks and muckrakers like Tom Morris are the future.
- Apr 27, 2008
- 65,931
- 80,417
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Chael Sonnen: Moral Champion
Robbo was staunch essendon and Hird defender, probably the biggest loudest one, so for that he can get ****ed.
chiwigi
I’ll make tears from your Wines.
How anyone can watch any of that shit is beyond me.
There’s not a single footy show worth watching.
Not one.
There’s not a single footy show worth watching.
Not one.
"Is Stephen Rowe an imbecile?" is my favourite Robbo moment, albeit a clearly rhetorical question.
Dylan8
Bar Up
Some of you need to open your hearts and minds to Robbo and maybe watch him with a little bit of detached irony. He's a character in a landscape of bores
- Mar 10, 2014
- 10,230
- 11,894
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
- Other Teams
- Man Utd, Celtic, Tanunda
Both of these narratives are correct, and not mutually exclusive.
Dylan8
Bar Up
Gillon was at the pub the other day. He is massive. Wearing shorts though which reduced his aristocratic air significantly.
I agree, but this is the lowest bar to clear in the history of low bars.
Whateley is pretty good at calling games but he is bloody awful on a footy show, his opinions are always holier than thou. He has a very high opinion of himself and loves sitting up on his high horse giving lectures to the great unwashed football folk and thinks that every home viewer is captivated by his pearls of wisdom.
As entertainment, they were barely worth watching in the days before all the cheap streaming services, youtube, twitch etc.
As informed and insightful discussion on games and the football industry in general, they are neither insightful or informing us, 99% of the time, of anything that can't be found on the AFL website, any news site or posted here on BigFooty days earlier.
Those in the media are all scared of biting the hand that feeds them, so they toe the company line by and large. Then add in they are 90%+ Victorian based, with token coverage of other teams. Then those outside Victoria are fluffers for their local sides, and rarely ask challenging questions of them, or call out (with facts) the Victorian bias in all areas of the competition.
So why would anyone inflict them, on themselves? Unless they are masochistic.
Last edited:
chiwigi
I’ll make tears from your Wines.
Spot on!
I actually watch this stuff for other sports I like. So it’s not the format or the idea that I don’t like.
The AFL though is absolutely atrocious in every way but the game itself which when played well is absolutely sublime.
Agree with all of what you said. But be careful about having an opinion which differs from one or two on this board or you will get checked again.
First Crack is the closest I've seen to actual analysis.
However, they fall into the trap that many of these shows fall into: they feel like they have to touch on all 9 games and have something to say about each one, which means even if they do uncover something interesting tactically (I remember them talking about how Sam Mitchell was the first to come up with a counter for Melbourne's Langford and his running power, as an example) they spend two minutes on it then move on to talk something far less interesting for 'balance'.
Give me a weekly, one hour deep dive into a single interesting tactical phenomenon over 9 3 minutes snippets and some poorly thought out clickbaity opinion segments any day of the week.
Did you leave liver off the end of this sentence?
Similar threads
