maxdacat
Nicholas Shehadie (39)
That was Kepu & Moore tackle. Kepu was stuck under other players but Moore was on top and could have moved away. Relatively fair call.
i agree it was a fair call but why not just single out the perp ie Moore?
That was Kepu & Moore tackle. Kepu was stuck under other players but Moore was on top and could have moved away. Relatively fair call.
Missed the game. I have 3 questions
1. How did Higgers go?
2. Did Elsom silence his critics or fall short once again?
3. Did Samo make an impact off the bench?
Did anyone else know that Beale was sick with gastro yesterday morning?
http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-new...tml?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
But the point with commentators is that when their national team is playing, a tendancy to bias is reasonably expected. They are in theory commentating to a largely captive audience who is going for the same team.
But ours can't do it with any attempt to even be slightly even handed or give credit where it's due. When we get the NZ and SA feeds for test matches, their commentators as a general rule are much more even handed.
i agree it was a fair call but why not just single out the perp ie Moore?
Some of the Kiwi and Saffer commentators are good but generally they are as bad as ours.
There have been a lot of very good commentators in past years who have been able to comment and hide or minimise their bias. Cyril Towers was the first I heard that I really liked, though he and I both loved the Randwick style of backline play so maybe I didn't notice his bias as much. In the 70's and 80's he was what got me in to watching rugby. Bill McLaren was great to listen to when international games overseas were on. Gordon Bray is sometimes limited but admirably fair and reasonable. On the ABC I know Papworth likes Eastwood from his commentary but its not obtrusive. I'm not sure who the others follow but all to me seem to be very fair and even-handed. Adam Freier is always interesting without having to heap abuse on others and often has a different point of view. So it is possible to do commentary without being jingoistic and biased.
Marto and Robbie should get on, they both are incomprehensible sometimes and both are fruitcake material. Kearns is obsessed with scrums and was one of Australia's best ever hookers, but sometimes I wonder if he is watching the same game as me. Last week our scrum was a massive improvement but was behind all match and when the Franks brothers were on we were owned, but you'd never know it from the comments. Kafer is knowledgable, but nowhere near the god-like status conferred on him by Fox and so Brumbies biased that he does not evaluate all players to the same standard. Cannon doesn't know where the line is in criticising other teams as a commentator and Horan is just plain wrong too many times. World's best ever 12 but seems to have no idea of what's happening sometimes.
I think the idea is wrong that someone who has been an international and seems to talk OK will be a naturally good commentator. What is always left out of the job description is the need to be able communicate clearly what is happening on the ground and why. The two key paper qualifications needed are refereeing certificates and coaching qualifications with the absolute requirement that a commentator should be ably to think and analyse deeply about the game. This game is not mungo. You need an IQ over 90 and you have to have some real analytical depth to be able to communicate why particular game plans are or are not working for both sides.
To contradict all that I do love listening to Murray Mexted.
Charger, I think a big part of our problem is finishing and goal kicking. I think we are making enough breaks to score more than 14 but the support isn't there or the pass goes to ground etc.
Hmmm... probably the first thing he's passed in a couple of seasons.