Moved Thread The standard of commentary is hurting our great game

[ming65]

Great thread and some great bagging of a few people who sorely deserve it.

I just got back from a few weeks in the UK, USA and NZ and the poor standard of Aussie sports commentary sticks out like blue-heeler balls in comparison. How a country with such a proud tradition in sport can get this area of sports broadcasting so wrong just amazes me. We look up to people like Commetti but on a world standard he's average at best - and the rest on TV are somewhere way below that. I just can't watch footy with the sound up any more.

We all went to school with one - the annoying, attention-seeking, try-hard idiot with no craic and who nobody could stand - well it's seems that they've all ended up calling footy on TV.

 

[workhorse]

Channel 7 commentary is nothing short of a disgrace. The last three weeks listening to those muppets call Collingwood games has made the viewing experience near unbearable.

* BT, Basil, Rompingwins, Bruce even Denis are just terrible. BT actually makes me sick the way he just rambles on about unnecessary bullsh*t like players' haircuts, or rattling off stupid nicknames or ways of pronouncing names. (i.e Mon-freeze)
* Luke Darcy is the worst special comments man by far. Tom Harley and Leigh Matthews seem to get worse. MM offers some insight but just generally creeps me out.
* I actually don't mind Richo. In fact I actually think he almost is as sick of BT's crap as everyone else is. Lingy is alright as well.

Foxtel isn't as bad, there are a few sh*t talkers but generally most of the guys aren't egotistical jackasses trying to be comical instead of actually calling the game.

What really urks me is how commentators think they know things about umpiring and comment on why a decision was paid when in fact, it was paid for a completely different reason. Or say, 'the umpire was in perfect position' when clearly they were not.

I know it's not something that should create such a fuss but when they are brutalising and humiliating the quality of this great game, something has to happen.

 

[Son of Skeletor]

with the exception of hudson and healy all other victorian commentators should not call fremantle games. lack research and don't hid their agendas/bias. shockers include david parkin, gerard whately, tony shaw, dwayne russell, luke darcy, david schwarz, jason dunstall, dermott brereton etc etc

Dwayne Russell is South Australian.

Commentators frequently lack polish and research, but they rarely have an agenda.

 

[Son of Skeletor]

Up there with the greatest AFL commentary of all time. Huddo and Christian, absolutely brilliant.

I thought Huddo carried that Ch10 team tbh. Christian (generally) just tended to shout a lot, Silvagni was woeful.

 

[Gizza]

* BT, Basil, Rompingwins, Bruce even Denis are just terrible. BT actually makes me sick the way he just rambles on about unnecessary bullsh*t like players' haircuts, or rattling off stupid nicknames or ways of pronouncing names. (i.e Mon-freeze)

CLAN-CEEE, Ugh!

* I actually don't mind Richo. In fact I actually think he almost is as sick of BT's crap as everyone else is. Lingy is alright as well.

I almost enjoy watching when Richo is on the boundary and BT is commentating just because of the amount of shit Richo gives him. Good for a bit of a laugh if nothing else, which is about the best you can hope from the commentary these days.

 

[Ian Dargie]

The quality across the board is at an all time low. A shitload needs to be done for the good of the competition.

How does TV commentary hurt the AFL?

Show me the effect. Surely, if commentary is sub-standard, it is the networks who wear it, not the competition. Again, show me the effect on the code. Or is the damage you allude to completely imagined?

It seems like every week there's something else to criticise and, without fail, it's ruining "our great game". Ducking is the ruining the game. Umpiring is ruining the game. Expansion teams are ruining the game. And now, of course, commentary is ruining the game. Sorry, our great game. That's the obligatory cliche, isn't it?

It's just shrill tabloid bogan hyperbole. It's possible to object to something without going overboard and bleating that "our great game" is in dire peril.

I would suggest that as long as the broadcasters of "our great game" put up another billion-plus next time the rights are up for grabs, the AFL will be pretty damn happy with the arrangement.

 

[Roobs321]

The current crop of ex-players trying to make it in the media are atrocious. Jakovich, Ling, Darcy, Kirk, even Voss before he went into coaching, all bloody horrible and sometimes even struggle to put a sentence together. Richo is ok, but still mostly just states the obvious as his special comments, but at least I get a laugh out of him every now and then. Actually, Ling probably isn't that bad either to be honest, but the rest need to go.

Agreed, keep Richo and Ling, get rid of the rest.

Although I am detecting an increasing amount of victorian bias in Richo's comments.

 

[Rod Stroker]

lol, sortof. Ideally they'd be well spoken women who know something about the sport, but the role itself doesn't require a greta deal of background knowledge beyond player names, which can be learned quickly. Just report things that happen on the boundary. Interchanges, injuries, subs and weather.

Like what Fiona Darmody used to do?
Yeah you'd probably get a few more viewers if she was kitted out in this:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/68651012@N00/253940486/

 

[RodneyMaynard]

Like what Fiona Darmody used to do?
Yeah you'd probably get a few more viewers if she was kitted out in this:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/68651012@N00/253940486/

Watching American sports recently and seeing that nearly all of the boundary riders and interviewers are proffessional women is what started my thought process on this. The ideal is a Michele Tafoya type, who knows the game well, can speak clearly, and just does her job. From Australia, a Sarah Jones or Alicia Loxley type would be good, or just hire some of the dozens of educated, intelligent women trying to break into news presenting/TV journalism and offer them an opportunity.

 

[qman]

I would've thought Peter Donegan had booked himself a spot on the Fox Footy coverage, starting immediately, after his sterling effort calling the track in London.

No histrionics, no long-winded anecdotes, no frivolous and unconnected statistics passed off as somehow meaningful and no inserting himself in the action. Allowed the action to be the centrepiece and he merely added to it when he thought it necessary to do so.

Instead he comes back and is stuck calling Werribee vs. Frankston at some suburban dump.

It's a crazy world when a class caller like Pete is calling those games while these other hack's are at the main event

 

[qman]

The Seven Saturday afternoon team wins hands down for the worst commentary unit ever assembled. Basil, Hamish and last but not least Brett Kirk.

The most cringeworthy of AFL commentators ever. They make Taylor and Darcy sound like John Madden calling the NFL.

Channel 10 had a few spuds in their time. I remember when Silvagni went into special comments. Bloody awful.

Agreed , hamish and zemp , worst ever and Silvagni was shockingly bad especially when on camera .

 

[bloodsbigot]

For me the best commentators are Anthony Hudson and Eddie McGuire. The rest just suck (With emphasis on McAvaney and Brian Taylor).

 

[Peter maxwell]

Fox Footy and Channel 7 could do a lot worse than employ former ABC commentator Glenn Mitchell. He calls the match as it is and doesn't use nicknames or talk about mindless crap. Always unbiased and knows his stuff. Seems to have all the relevant info at his fingertips. Has plenty of TV experience aside form his years of AFL calling. He used to host and be lead commentator of ABC TV's WAFL coverage for years. Having fought back from severe depression and an attempt at suicide last year it would be a great reward for a to commentator.

 

[THRILLHO]

How does TV commentary hurt the AFL?

Show me the effect. Surely, if commentary is sub-standard, it is the networks who wear it, not the competition. Again, show me the effect on the code. Or is the damage you allude to completely imagined?

I think the commentary affects the code as it influences how it is perceived by the general public and how the code can be advertised.

Simple, understated commentary always enhances the game and how it is remembered in the future. Would you rather:

"Oh, Jesaulenko! You Beauty"
"Gary Ablett steps to the big stage and kicks the clutch goal of the year!"
"I SEE IT BUT I DON'T BELIEVE IT!"

Or

"OH BOY WOWEE! BIG BOY MCEVOY FROM THE CALDER CANNON FOOTBALL FACTORY SELLING SOME OF THAT HAND CANDY! HANDPASSES TO AHMED SAAAAAAAAAD THE BOY WHO LIVES IN A GARAGE AND KICKS THE GOAL! OH BOY CHECK OUT BARREL BOY!!!!"

"Wouldn't you love to be tackled by Juddy?"

 

[Ian Dargie]

I think the commentary affects the code as it influences how it is perceived by the general public and how the code can be advertised.

Turn it up.

People are going to be influenced by the game, by the spectacle, not the commentary.

Simple, understated commentary always enhances the game and how it is remembered in the future. Would you rather:

"Oh, Jesaulenko! You Beauty"
"Gary Ablett steps to the big stage and kicks the clutch goal of the year!"
"I SEE IT BUT I DON'T BELIEVE IT!"

Or

"OH BOY WOWEE! BIG BOY MCEVOY FROM THE CALDER CANNON FOOTBALL FACTORY SELLING SOME OF THAT HAND CANDY! HANDPASSES TO AHMED SAAAAAAAAAD THE BOY WHO LIVES IN A GARAGE AND KICKS THE GOAL! OH BOY CHECK OUT BARREL BOY!!!!"

"Wouldn't you love to be tackled by Juddy?"

I actually enjoy Brian Taylor's commentary. Vastly preferable to deadbeats like Shaw and Walls.

Either way, I think it's a crazy exaggeration to suggest that any kind of commentary hurts the game. I get irritated by dumb commentary as well but it's incidental to the status and appeal of the code.

 

[TheGreatGrundy]

Knowing when to be silent, to say nothing and allow the moment to speak for itself, is a skill that the best commentators are able to employ. Instead of speech, the crowd noise and visuals following a great piece of play or goal are there for the viewers to absorb. The worst commentators are those who feel the need to talk incessantly, like Luke Darcy and BT. Darcy speaks so fast that he actually cuts off the end of words and sentences in his rush to get out his next sentence.

 

[legend166]

Are people in this thread seriously saying that Quartermain is a good commentator?

Am I in some bizzaro universe right now?

 

[workhorse]

Are people in this thread seriously saying that Quartermain is a good commentator?

Am I in some bizzaro universe right now?

Someone mentioned that before and I thought the same. Even Tim Lane was average. Hudson and Christian were the only two good ones on Ch10.

 

[Ian Dargie]

I know it's not something that should create such a fuss but when they are brutalising and humiliating the quality of this great game, something has to happen.

Sheer bloody nonsense.

How do commentators affect the quality of "this great game"?

OMG, something has to happen!

Who are you blokes kidding?

 

[workhorse]

Sheer bloody nonsense.

How do commentators affect the quality of "this great game"?

By making it unbearable to watch when they spend more time talking about dribbling nonsense instead of doing what they're paid to do.

 

[Ian Dargie]

By making it unbearable to watch when they spend more time talking about dribbling nonsense instead of doing what they're paid to do.

Let's assume that actually happened and isn't just a bullshit exaggeration - which it is. Let's assume that viewers found the commentary so unpalatable that they began switching off in their thousands. The networks would be the losers. How exactly would it hurt the AFL or the clubs? Would it be a bad thing if more people were persuaded to actually go to the games?

Show me the damage done to the game by supposedly inadequate commentary. Or is the damage completely imagined?

If you want to talk about the interests of the code – sorry, the interests of "our great game" – then they have already been well and truly served by the last broadcast deal. If the broadcasters pay a billion-plus for the rights, that's all that matters. The fact that some of you wingnuts object to the commentary is of zero significance and zero concern to anyone who matters.

Some people just want an excuse to pretend their petty whinges are more than that: "OMG - the commentary is ruining our great game". It's embarrassing.

 

[workhorse]

Let's assume that actually happened and isn't just a bullshit exaggeration - which it is. Let's assume that viewers found the commentary so unpalatable that they began switching off in their thousands. The networks would be the losers. How exactly would it hurt the AFL or the clubs? Would it be a bad thing if more people were persuaded to actually go to the games?

Show me the damage done to the game by supposedly inadequate commentary. Or is it completely imagined?

If you want to talk about the interests of the code – sorry, the interests of "our great game" – then they have already been well and truly served by the last broadcast deal. If the broadcasters pay a billion-plus for the rights, that's all that matters. The fact that some of you wingnuts object to the commentary is of zero significance and zero concern to anyone who matters.

Some people just want an excuse to pretend their petty whinges are more than that: "OMG - the commentary is ruining our great game". It's embarrassing.

Well I would like to think that thousands turning off their TV's would generate some form of concern to the AFL. But I think your missing the point. The point I'm making is that we have people in positions of importance, as much as you love to state that commentary isn't important, who are simply not up to the job. You have your own opinions of the callers but I think that from the reaction of the people that use this website, it's frighteningly obvious that the people calling the games are completely ruining them with the utter nonsense that they talk.

Have your own opinion, but the commentary standard of our game is one of the worst in the world. Surely you can recognise that people, who may be new to the game or not as passionate as most, will simply be put off by it.

Anyway, continue to be the antagonist if it makes you feel good. I've got an opinion, you have one. I simply cannot be bothered wasting my time in some ridiculous argument.

 

[Ian Dargie]

Well I would like to think that thousands turning off their TV's would generate some form of concern to the AFL.

Do you not grasp the fact that this would be a problem for the broadcaster more than the code?

The AFL have already sold their product and did some pretty good business. They got more than a billion dollars. The AFL's interests have already been served. Do you really think that some ripple of discontent about certain commentators would move the needle at all?

But I think your missing the point. The point I'm making is that we have people in positions of importance, as much as you love to state that commentary isn't important, who are simply not up to the job. You have your own opinions of the callers but I think that from the reaction of the people that use this website, it's frighteningly obvious that the people calling the games are completely ruining them with the utter nonsense that they talk.

More ridiculous exaggeration. These people are "completely ruining" the games, are they? It's all just so unbearable, isn't it? Please. Get over it. You sound like a shrill old lady.

But more importantly, how exactly does this hurt the game?

Show me the damage that this commentary does to the code. Because if you think the commentary is having a negative effect then you should be able to point to that effect.

When I take my car to the mechanic, I can point to the busted tail-light. When I go to the doctor, I can point to my broken toe. Likewise, if you reckon the code is being damaged, show me where and how. Or is this damage a complete figment of your imagination?

Have your own opinion, but the commentary standard of our game is one of the worst in the world. Surely you can recognise that people, who may be new to the game or not as passionate as most, will simply be put off by it.

I seriously doubt the commentary would be the decisive factor. Let's make at least a token effort to remain grounded in reality.

Anyway, continue to be the antagonist if it makes you feel good. I've got an opinion, you have one.

Indeed. My point is that your opinion is a poorly constructed and unconvincing one.

 

[TheGreatGrundy]

Let's assume that actually happened and isn't just a bullshit exaggeration - which it is. Let's assume that viewers found the commentary so unpalatable that they began switching off in their thousands. The networks would be the losers. How exactly would it hurt the AFL or the clubs? Would it be a bad thing if more people were persuaded to actually go to the games?

Show me the damage done to the game by supposedly inadequate commentary. Or is the damage completely imagined?

If you want to talk about the interests of the code – sorry, the interests of "our great game" – then they have already been well and truly served by the last broadcast deal. If the broadcasters pay a billion-plus for the rights, that's all that matters. The fact that some of you wingnuts object to the commentary is of zero significance and zero concern to anyone who matters.

Some people just want an excuse to pretend their petty whinges are more than that: "OMG - the commentary is ruining our great game". It's embarrassing.

So you're saying we can't bag the commentators if they are irritating? Or that commentary can't ruin the game? If the former, then I say you are wrong. If the latter, then you are right, commentary can't in itself ruin a game.

Irrespective of your response, Luke Darcy and BT are more than 'a petty whinge'. You make a good point in reference to the hyperbole of the OP but the 'wingnut' label worked like a red rag to a bull. I found unsettling the notion that I might be or become a 'zero person of zero significance'.

Perhaps the fact that my post did not address the title, but rather scratched an itch in public, will allow me to fall short of wingnut status. And though it was a whinge, it was not a 'petty' one.

 

[amer]

Do you not grasp the fact that this would be a problem for the broadcaster more than the code?

The AFL have already sold their product and did some pretty good business. They got more than a billion dollars. The AFL's interests have already been served. Do you really think that some ripple of discontent about certain commentators would move the needle at all?

More ridiculous exaggeration. These people are "completely ruining" the games, are they? It's all just so unbearable, isn't it? Please. Get over it. You sound like a shrill old lady.

But more importantly, how exactly does this hurt the game?

Show me the damage that this commentary does to the code. Because if you think the commentary is having a negative effect then you should be able to point to that effect.

When I take my car to the mechanic, I can point to the busted tail-light. When I go to the doctor, I can point to my broken toe. Likewise, if you reckon the code is being damaged, show me where and how. Or is this damage a complete figment of your imagination?

I seriously doubt the commentary would be the decisive factor. Let's make at least a token effort to remain grounded in reality.

Indeed. My point is that your opinion is a poorly constructed and unconvincing one.

You've set a new standard in whining, I'll give you that. What a girl's blouse.