Archived

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

Bomballey

Comical Cummings' Critical Commentary

36 posts in this topic

Sky feed on what they see and hear from fans and what they are interested in.

We feed negativity they bite on it and grow fat on it,

If the viewing public in general showed they wanted to discuss the positives then Sky would follow that trend,

Sky operates like the Sun 'newspaper', it will follow the popular view. It doesn't create the view, but feeds the trend.

,

Interesting, I'd not thought about it in those terms.

Is Sky's main concern not viewing figures and number of subscribers? Would not promoting the many positives the game has to offer rather than the over critical analysis of referees attract more new viewers to the game?

I don't know the answer, but a combination of listening to the pantomime commentary and over zealous video refereeing is about to lose them at least one customer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stevo's 'analysis' of a try,invariably amounts to little more than a random call of 'forward pass?'.

 

It's certainly true that the idiots Hemmings and Stevo,make far more mistakes in a game than any referee.Even when Stevo is continuously shown to be wrong by Clarke etc,he still desperately tries to justify his 'opinion'.

 

He does now appear to have learnt a third adjective - after years of confused and furious,he has now learnt pathetic - he truely is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like Stuart Cummings comments, he knows the rules.

Previously we were given Mike Stevenson's opinion on what he thought the rules should be but not what they are.

If SC tells what the rules are and the ref goes against it, well so be it.

At least we've been informed as to what the rule was in a given situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, all rules start with  - "if in the opinion of the referee". So, what actually happens isn't totally relevant - it's more to do with what appears to happen from the referee's position on the field. I assume all referees are tested on their knowledge of the rules but sometimes there is just no accounting for what an individual does, as I'm sure many players could also testify.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If only everybody who has to make a decision,could be sat in an armchair,view every incident six times,each from a different angle and in slow motion,I tend to believe most decisions would be correct.Unfortunately,that cannot be the case.

 

If only Stevo would leave with some dignity but unfortunately,he still wants another pay day and unbelievably,Sky seem happy to give him it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In either Open Rugby or RLW (can't remember what it was called at the time), Greg McCallum used to have a monthly column where he responded to fans' queries about controversial decisions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why have we made celebrities out of the match officials?

Endless posts on the internet expounding half-baked theories about how one referee or other is biased against the poster's team. 

 

A total lack of endless posts on the internet expounding half-baked theories about how one referee or other is biased in favour of the poster's team.

 

Hyperbolic commentary from Eddie'n'Stevo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that was Robin Whitfield.

I said on the Widnes/Warrington thread I would like to see Sky revamp their commentary style.

When a call is made for a VR decision switch of the commentary teams microphones. On some nights you can have up to six people giving their opinion on the replays, with at least two of them not having a clue what they are on about. It almost becomes a competition to see who guesses what the VR's verdict will be and you are often bombarded with misleading information.

At the end of the day the only blokes opinion who counts is the VR. Let him explain his thought process and analysis in the manor Ian Smith used to do on Premier Sports Championship coverage. It worked well and was allowed to due to Dave Woods not itching to get his twopennarth in like Eddie does.

This method would also eradicate a lot of Stevo's need to apologise to the ref when he has totally mis-called an incident which the on field ref was far better placed to make. It sheds a poor light on the refs who I genuinely believe are the envy of a lot of other sports.

I once heard an interview with Martin Tyler the football commentator. He said he was paid to comment on the action being played out in front of him, not to provide opinion on tatics or refereeing decisions, that was the job of his co-commentator. Eddie could learn something there.

Stuart Cummings' role is baffling to me. What other sport had an ex-referee to explain the laws of the game all the time. It seems an open admission by Sky that their two chief commentators are not very clued up on Rugby League. Perhaps a refereeing course may help them?

Them 2 clowns were arguing with each other at the weekend, and they are that used to doing it, they were both arguing the same point.

The coverage was much better when Eddie was missing those couple of games, it gave Baldy no one to argue with.

HW

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Without entering into a diatribe - it might be easier if the emphasis on the laws of the game wasn't changed every season!

It's got to be baffling for fledgling fans when they change it from one season to the next and occasionally mid season.

 

Some laws are enforced with vigour and others totally disregarded (Moving off the mark).

 

I'd prefer all the laws to be used or at least left to the referees to make their own decisions so you know what you'll get.

 

The comments by Wayne saying he sets the Wigan side up differently for televised games to none televised games rather sums it up for me!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If only everybody who has to make a decision,could be sat in an armchair,view every incident six times,each from a different angle and in slow motion,I tend to believe most decisions would be correct.Unfortunately,that cannot be the case.

 

If only Stevo would leave with some dignity but unfortunately,he still wants another pay day and unbelievably,Sky seem happy to give him it.

Well, yes of course they do. He is controversial and gets people talking [hence threads like this one] and the more outlandish his outbursts the more we rise, like moths to a flame, to put him down. Many years ago someone said, "there is no such thing as bad publicity", and for Stevo and Sky they were absolutely correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I the only one who finds that when Ben Thaler is the Video Referee, he always comes to the exact opposite decision that I do?

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