Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Eddie Rombo

Presenting the game

73 posts in this topic

A viewing panel of 'general sports fans'???

Just to be clear, it is not just for sports fans. It is a panel of viewers, and not just Sky subscribers, that regularly get sent questionnaires by a research agency about Sky's programmes and channels and occasionally asked to comment on pilots or review ideas for new features for the Sky box or their apps. I have no idea how many people are part of it. I'm not sure what other detail you need?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why does either man or woman have to be "eye candy"? Clare Balding has been one of the best rugby league hosts in broadcasting and is not usually to be found in the FHM top 100 sexiest. Let's be a bit more progressive and have people there on merit, not looks.

 

I'm in complete agreement with this. The thing that people love(d) about Clare Balding was her boundless positivity and enthusiasm, who cares what the presenters look like?

 

Tim Smith's pass to Ben Cockayne hardly got a mention in the Trinity Catalan game, except by Stevo saying it was forward and then conceding it wasn't, and yet it was a sublime piece of skill worthy of the entry fee alone to many of the Trinity fans.  The commentary team chose instead to focus on how many players Catalans were missing (time and time again) as if to devalue the Trinity performance and portray the match itself as second rate,  bad enough you'd have said had the not been simultaneously praising Widnes getting a win against a similarly depleted St Helens side.

 

Had that ball been passed in say a Rugby Union game, it'd be shown time and time again on SkySports news, maybe even make CNN's play of the day etc.  No wonder the game has such an image problem when the people who supposedly love it and get pad to talk about it cannot talk about the positives in front of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to be clear, after last season Sky polled their viewing panel about their Super League coverage which included explicitly asking about each of their main presenters. Just because rugby fans on forums and social media may dislike Eddie and Stevo it does not means general sports fans feel the same way. That Sky will obviously want the best possible ratings and that they do research these matters suggests that the audience is mostly happy or they would have made changes.

Just to be clear, is this Eddie or Stevo posting?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in complete agreement with this. The thing that people love(d) about Clare Balding was her boundless positivity and enthusiasm, who cares what the presenters look like?

 

Tim Smith's pass to Ben Cockayne hardly got a mention in the Trinity Catalan game, except by Stevo saying it was forward and then conceding it wasn't, and yet it was a sublime piece of skill worthy of the entry fee alone to many of the Trinity fans.  The commentary team chose instead to focus on how many players Catalans were missing (time and time again) as if to devalue the Trinity performance and portray the match itself as second rate,  bad enough you'd have said had the not been simultaneously praising Widnes getting a win against a similarly depleted St Helens side.

 

Had that ball been passed in say a Rugby Union game, it'd be shown time and time again on SkySports news, maybe even make CNN's play of the day etc.  No wonder the game has such an image problem when the people who supposedly love it and get pad to talk about it cannot talk about the positives in front of them.

This is exactly what I mean, we need the game to be presented as the excellent game it is, could you imagine how Barnes and Will Greenwood would have praised that pass in a union game? It should have been shown on sky sports news for the rest of the day, with the commentators going crazy over it, not descended into an argument over whether it was forward.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Errr... in your very first post, at the top of the page, you suggested they could come up with their own nicknames for players - and then inflict them on the viewing public. I was merely pointing out this was a terrible, terrible, terrible idea. 

 

Perhaps there is a worse idea though - having a marketing department come up with a player's nickname.  

 

That's almost the dictionary definition of a bad idea.

Fair enough, obviously you feel this is a bad idea, do you have any ideas on how the presentation could be improved or do you think it is perfect as it is?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd bin Terry O'Connor as my number one priority. And find new blood for Eddie and Stevo. Let Rod Studd stick to darts, and also ditch Graham Beecroft. Put Phil Clarke on a "don't mention Wigan unless they are playing" ban. Teach Brian Carney to read an autocue for scripted stuff. Bring in new expert analysis blood rather than Cullen and McRae. Barrie McDermott, Bill Arthur and John Kear are fine by me. Enquire at least about using more British coaches currently in the game like Kear and Brian Noble, but also Brian McDermott, Francis Cummins and Paul Anderson, etc. If (when) Daryl Powell gets the Castleford job, 9 1/2 coaches in Super League will be British or French, use them more, schedule depending. (The half being Tony Smith who has been a British citizen for a few years now.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

... oh and more ex-players for commentary analysis. And Jon Wells is better now he's stopped shouting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd also suggest getting some brand consistency. Something essential in my opinion. Its no good having a particular style of graphics (for instance) that shows the team line ups, and then having a bad attempt at reproducing something similar to those graphics to present the individual players to the viewers, and then something completely different looking to showcase the try scorers after tries have been scored. it just ends up looking like a mish-mash and unattractive, which it currently is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd also suggest getting some brand consistency. Something essential in my opinion. Its no good having a particular style of graphics (for instance) that shows the team line ups, and then having a bad attempt at reproducing something similar to those graphics to present the individual players to the viewers, and then something completely different looking to showcase the try scorers after tries have been scored. it just ends up looking like a mish-mash and unattractive, which it currently is.

On the player icon thingies, I think the best two are the Premier League and RU Premiership. Keep the video element of it a la the Premier League, add stats like the RU Premiership and group them by positions like both do. Oh and have them in away kits if they are playing in it that match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why does either man or woman have to be "eye candy"? Clare Balding has been one of the best rugby league hosts in broadcasting and is not usually to be found in the FHM top 100 sexiest. Let's be a bit more progressive and have people there on merit, not looks.

100% agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure I will be in for a pasting on here, but my perspective as a southerner and who has discussed rl with friends/colleagues in my area is that whilst this is a National game, it is still  seen by lots of people south of Warford gap as a Northern game,  We need people on tv from all over the UK to be commentators, summarisers, interviewers - not just people with northern accents who just add to the northerness of the game.... and don't get me started on the players being interviewed, (in studios, not after games) Is there a competition on to see who can talk with the most graveliest, northern accent and throw in a few 'we got us tactics right',  'anyroad',  'it dunt hurt'.

If you want the game to appeal nationally, and it should on its own merits of being a great game to watch, I'm affraid the game has to try to show an 'all inclusiveness' in its presentation. 

(Yes, I know we have one Irishman on the Sky team and the lovely Claire on the BBC, but we need more).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair enough, obviously you feel this is a bad idea, do you have any ideas on how the presentation could be improved or do you think it is perfect as it is?

 

Sky's coverage almost gives me a physical pain.  The single biggest improvement they could do would be to pension-off Eddie & Stevo and throw money at Dave Woods. 

 

Unfortunately this won't happen unless Neville Smith steps aside.  So we're stuck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to be clear, it is not just for sports fans. It is a panel of viewers, and not just Sky subscribers, that regularly get sent questionnaires by a research agency about Sky's programmes and channels and occasionally asked to comment on pilots or review ideas for new features for the Sky box or their apps. I have no idea how many people are part of it. I'm not sure what other detail you need?

 

Forgive me if I'm not entirely convinced by a research agency's 'questionnaire' - sent to people who don't watch rugby league or subscribe to Sky - asking for their detailed opinion on Sky's rugby league commentary team.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgive me if I'm not entirely convinced by a research agency's 'questionnaire' - sent to people who don't watch rugby league or subscribe to Sky - asking for their detailed opinion on Sky's rugby league commentary team.

Just to be clear, the panel is a cross-section of viewers, how does that equate to them not watching rugby league? Obviously those who have no interest in rugby will not respond, but maybe some of those who do not is because they find Eddie and Stevo off putting. After all, that is the claim being made, that more people would watch with better presentation so surely their opinion is relevant. And those who do not subscribe to Sky could still watch Sky Sports on Virgin, BT, or Topup TV. They may be Premier Sports subscribers who like rugby league but do not have Sky Sports because they do not like how they present it, a claim some have made on this forum.

That fact is Sky have a system in place to consulate with general viewers to get unbiased opinions. It will certainly be a lot more reliable than a forum with a few dozen people deciding that because they do not like something that no one else does. The idea that a change of presentation will suddenly make more people want to watch rugby league based on no evidence at all is hardly convincing. Heck, this thread started with someone suggesting that Sky would get more viewers if they plastered advertising throughout its coverage.

P.S. I'm not Eddie or Stevo, or anything to do with Sky.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

P.S. I'm not Eddie or Stevo, or anything to do with Sky.

But you are refereeing t'Bulls on Friday night... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to be clear, the panel is a cross-section of viewers, how does that equate to them not watching rugby league? Obviously those who have no interest in rugby will not respond, but maybe some of those who do not is because they find Eddie and Stevo off putting. After all, that is the claim being made, that more people would watch with better presentation so surely their opinion is relevant. And those who do not subscribe to Sky could still watch Sky Sports on Virgin, BT, or Topup TV. They may be Premier Sports subscribers who like rugby league but do not have Sky Sports because they do not like how they present it, a claim some have made on this forum.

That fact is Sky have a system in place to consulate with general viewers to get unbiased opinions. It will certainly be a lot more reliable than a forum with a few dozen people deciding that because they do not like something that no one else does. The idea that a change of presentation will suddenly make more people want to watch rugby league based on no evidence at all is hardly convincing. Heck, this thread started with someone suggesting that Sky would get more viewers if they plastered advertising throughout its coverage.

P.S. I'm not Eddie or Stevo, or anything to do with Sky.

 

 

I've never claimed getting rid of Eddie & Stevo would increase viewers.  It may do, it may not.  I'm more concerned that many people who presently watch the game appear to do so through gritted teeth - and they deserve much, much better for their Sky dollars.  Stevo is simply incapable of communicating effectively with an audience - he appears to understand almost nothing of the modern game, is incapable of reading what happens on the field of play and explaining or analysing things for the viewer, and spends every single game repeating the same tired old cliches he has for the past 25 years.  I could pick any game this season and he'd be saying exactly the same old nonesense he always does - a commentator who only ever uses three adjectives (superb, poor, silly) should not be employed.  He hasn't uttered an original thought in years.  'Simple as that' - as Stevo would tediously and robotically say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never claimed getting rid of Eddie & Stevo would increase viewers.  It may do, it may not.  I'm more concerned that many people who presently watch the game appear to do so through gritted teeth - and they deserve much, much better for their Sky dollars.  Stevo is simply incapable of communicating effectively with an audience - he appears to understand almost nothing of the modern game, is incapable of reading what happens on the field of play and explaining or analysing things for the viewer, and spends every single game repeating the same tired old cliches he has for the past 25 years.  I could pick any game this season and he'd be saying exactly the same old nonesense he always does - a commentator who only ever uses three adjectives (superb, poor, silly) should not be employed.  He hasn't uttered an original thought in years.  'Simple as that' - as Stevo would tediously and robotically say.

 

 

I too don't think that getting rid of Eddie and Stevo would would increase viewers, it would however increase my enjoyment and perhaps stop the drift towards the NRL on Premier, if indeed that drift is real or detectable.

 

I think you have to lay down one criteria for sports commentators (in any sport) in addition to whether they can present; would they pay to watch the sport out of their own pocket were they not employed to talk about it?  I can't imagine Stevo or Eddie at a game queuing in a the turnstyles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you have to lay down one criteria for sports commentators (in any sport) in addition to whether they can present; would they pay to watch the sport out of their own pocket were they not employed to talk about it?  I can't imagine Stevo or Eddie at a game queuing in a the turnstyles.

Probably chuck the majority of journo's under that blanket too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably chuck the majority of journo's under that blanket too.

 

Oh I'm not so sure about that.  Most clearly love the game and talk about it relentlessly.  I have seen a number at various non-heartland clubs over the years, there in their own time and expense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I'm not so sure about that. Most clearly love the game and talk about it relentlessly. I have seen a number at various non-heartland clubs over the years, there in their own time and expense.

i've been at events where Eddie has given his time free of charge for the good of the game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i've been at events where Eddie has given his time free of charge for the good of the game.

 

His retirement party...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you have to lay down one criteria for sports commentators (in any sport) in addition to whether they can present; would they pay to watch the sport out of their own pocket were they not employed to talk about it?  I can't imagine Stevo or Eddie at a game queuing in a the turnstyles.

 

And as Stevo set up the RL museum at Huddersfield, it's a bit harsh to criticise him considering what he's done away from the commentary box.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sky's coverage almost gives me a physical pain.  The single biggest improvement they could do would be to pension-off Eddie & Stevo and throw money at Dave Woods. 

 

Unfortunately this won't happen unless Neville Smith steps aside.  So we're stuck.

I agree Dave Woods is a good commentator.

 

Who else would members get if we could put together a dream team for the super league presentation on sky?

 

Clare Balding- good presenter, well spoken, loves the game?

 

Tanya Arnold- Does a good job on the super league show?

 

Craig Doyle- on itv for the rugby union highlights, a good presenter, good knowledge, give him time and would be the same about rugby league?

 

Any other suggestions?

 

What ex players would we like to see give analysis?

 

Would anyone be kept from the team now?

 

What sort of analysis and information from commentators are you looking for?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



League Express - Mon 24th July 2017

Rugby League World - August 2017