Jump to content
Total Rugby League Fans Forum
Sign in to follow this  
OldManMarley

SKY Coverage/Commentators

Recommended Posts

So, a bit of negative one because am sure the job is harder than it looks but is anyone else frustrated with the SKY coverage?

Terry O'Connor and Barrie McDermot do a fine job, they are ex players and like the no nonsense style of players, they also encourage the game to be played in the right manner.

The others leave me perplexed, they make so many mistakes and the utter garbage that they come out with is crazy. Phil Clarke and Brian Carney argue and come across like they don't like each other. They constantly sound frustrated in the game they are watching and the sport.

Phil Clarke is completely bias when Wigan are on and god forbid him talking about Championship Clubs, he has an incredibly poor attitude towards them.

You also have 5 commentators!? Clarke, Carney, O'Connor, McDermot and Hemmings all chipping in and usually disagreeing with each other usually about laws and rules of the game that they think should change....blah blah blah!

An old pal of mine (from London) came up to mine last week and we watched Fev vs Hull, he mentioned how bad he thought it was so it got me thinking, I wonder what the rest of the RL Community think?

I think when SKY officials are commentating on a game being unprofessional because of the yellow and red cards shown in it, they should probably watch their coverage back and listen to how daft some of them sound on a weekly basis. Maybe we could red card a couple them from the coverage!?

Anyone else watch the games on mute aswell? Hahaha!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Biggest for me is l. briscoe being called Burgess 5 times. We're the others frightened of highlighting error

  • Like 3
  • Haha 3

'Shaw cross juniors, Birkenshaw, Mirfield, Heckmondwike Panthers, Stainland Stags and then the Heavy woolen donkeys... WARDY, STOZZA, GT, KARL OR KEAR MUST OF DROPPED A DIGIT FROM MY MOBILE NUMBER! :clapping:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, OldManMarley said:

So, a bit of negative one

Surely not on this positive, productive and forward thinking forum ........

1 hour ago, Jacko45 said:

Just well out dated

Sell by date aided by the focus being on another sport now.

Then, when you've heard Aussie commentators well ......

1 hour ago, OldManMarley said:

topics of conversation

While the game continues!

Edited by Oxford

  Job's worth, job's worth more than my job's worth         

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sky IMO are really out-dated

I thought todays Cas v Saints game was far, far more postively presented without the constant focus on refs. IMO its what Sky want to do in their 'take' on the game.....and its far from a good watch

Won't ever be resuming my Sky subscription in their present format and negative attitude to the game. They have an influence on the way the game is reffed and played and its a turn off

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Classic case of familiarity breeding contempt with Sky. Same old 90s presentation by same old 90s presenters and same old 90s players.

Where are the Sinfields and Peacocks, ie recently retired greats, on Sky? It’s always the same old faces.

Why can’t they bin off one of the contracted pundits and have a guest every game?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Oxford said:

Surely not on this positive, productive and forward thinking forum ........

Sell by date aided by the focus being on another sport now.

Then, when you've heard Aussie commentators well ......

While the game continues!

Sell by or use by? Some folks can get quite confused, even when it comes to callers. Most RL commentators seem to have a long shelf life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Often in cases like this it boils down to who you personally like more so than what they offer.

O'Connor and Hemmings would be first in the bin for me. The others bring something to the table as far as I'm concerned.


The%20Warriors%2060.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like Carney as a presenter. Not so much as a commentator. As mentioned he is one of the worst for drifting away from the game to have an arguement about a decision or whatever.

Wells' analysis is very good. Probably the only thing you can say that about.

I have a lot of time for Eddie but I think his time is up now.

Clark is an idiot, would be first to go for me. Closely followed by Cummings. Nothing against him personally but this thing of having a ref to pour over every marginal decision really annoys me.

Barrie and Terry are better suited to the little skits and interviews they used to do when they first got on Sky. Barrie is passable as a commentator. Terry is rubbish. His idea of commentating seems just to be telling us every player is great, excellent or outstanding.

It all needs a serious rethink.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO Barrie, Terry and Phil could follow the adage ‘less is more’.   Speaking too quickly with strong dialects isn’t good for presentation.  

John Wells is good with the analysis and brief segments.  For me he’s the better of the group.

Eddie can do it.  Where he slips up, is engaging BM & TO’C ad hoc and neither can think quickly enough to say anything meaningful sometimes.  

Carney is ok, but no more, no less.  Not good enough to replace Eddie.

The use of Cummings just doesn’t work.  Voice doesn’t come across clear, information can be garbled.  Changes his mind too much and adds nowt for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Desperately poor production.Hemmings sounds bored and gives the impression hewould rather be watching a football match or drinking gin and tonic at his golf club.He offers absolutely nothing,at least Bill Arthur is enthusiastic.O'Connor and McDermott are illiterate clowns who just stutter and stumble over every phrase.Clarke is relatively intelligent but just tries to be contraversal for some unknown reason - 'was that a knock on','did it go forward?' That woman has to be the worst sports presenter in the world.Carney I can accept,at least he is presentable,intelligent and enthusiastic but he doesn't seem to have improved as much as I expected.

Frankly the overall team are very poor,which means the real problem is the producer,who effectively appoints them - get rid of him and I suspect awhole new team would be appointed.I watched a terrible game of union yesterday - 5 kicks to 4 - yet the commentator/analysts made it seem exciting and compelling,which it certainly wasn't.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Mister Ting said:

Sell by or use by? Some folks can get quite confused, even when it comes to callers. Most RL commentators seem to have a long shelf life.

The thing is twofold Memories of Eddie Waring and peoples'(fans) predisposition to find something to dislike somewhere.

Eddie is okay when not engaged in conversation. I hate having a go at people who love the game no matter how much they may seem to deserve it.

The conversation is like being on the terraces which is not what you want from commentary.

Yes they do have a long shelf-life.

 

 


  Job's worth, job's worth more than my job's worth         

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hemmings has always looked for controversy, it's his thing. Same for Bill Arthur. O'Connor and McDermott struggle to complete a coherent sentence. They'd be at home with the guys presenting the NCL coverage on Freesports. Cummings was a terrible ref, an even worse ref's boss, and is a complete waste of space in the commentary box. Clarke, Carney and Wells are at least articulate, and present the game in a better light.

But the main issue, as others have mentioned, is the clownish way Sky treat their coverage. Everything's a lark, everything's lowest common denominator. We're never treated as a serious sport. 


"Just as we had been Cathars, we were treizistes, men apart."

Jean Roque, Calendrier-revue du Racing-Club Albigeois, 1958-1959

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eddie is a good commentator, but unfortunately they don't do much commentating on SKY, it's just 80 minutes of babble and ######, with sometimes a mention about what's happening on the pitch.

You don't mind the odd funny moment that brings laughter, but i don't want it all the game, it doesn't need to be a comedy sketch.

Terry is the worse one for me, he is just awful, nice bloke I'm sure but he has a book of about 10 phrases that he constantly wheels out during the game "Turned up for each other" "put his hand up" " body on the line" etc etc, he's just monotonous, Barrie can be decent when he's not trying to be Peter Kay on car share, but he does struggle to get his words out sometimes.

Wells, and Carney are fine, articulate, passionate, Clarke isn't as bad as others make out,but again he's passionate about the game, if, slightly, biased towards Wigan, and which ever team he takes a shine to that day.

Cummins, i actually don't mind him sometimes, i know they shouldn't analyse every slightly controversial ref decision, but if there's something people aren't sure of, such as why a try was allowed/disallowed etc or why a certain penalty was given that's not clear then i don't mind him explaining that.

Angela Powers is awful, just awful, she's only there to tick gender/diversity boxes and offers nothing, she struggles to get words out coherently, struggles to make sense with most things and just comes across a soppy fan in front of her heroes.

I don't mind Bill Arthur too much, although again, he struggles to get his words out, struggles with players names and isn't all that coherent.

Rod Studd is decent, but talks too fast and gets over over excited and a bit too shouty for me.

 

It was far better for me when you had Eddie commentating, Stevo being Stevo and then AN Other, like Kear, Rea, Cullen etc adding a bit when asked for opinions, now it's like a morning birdsong, just constant noise going through you!

Edited by meast

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, meast said:

Eddie is a good commentator, but unfortunately they don't do much commentating on SKY, it's just 80 minutes of babble and ######, with sometimes a mention about what's happening on the pitch.

You don't mind the odd funny moment that brings laughter, but i don't want it all the game, it doesn't need to be a comedy sketch.

Terry is the worse one for me, he is just awful, nice bloke I'm sure but he has a book of about 10 phrases that he constantly wheels out during the game "Turned up for each other" "put his hand up" " body on the line" etc etc, he's just monotonous, Barrie can be decent when he's not trying to be Peter Kay on car share, but he does struggle to get his words out sometimes.

Wells, and Carney are fine, articulate, passionate, Clarke isn't as bad as others make out,but again he's passionate about the game, if, slightly, biased towards Wigan, and which ever team he takes a shine to that day.

Cummins, i actually don't mind him sometimes, i know they shouldn't analyse every slightly controversial ref decision, but if there's something people aren't sure of, such as why a try was allowed/disallowed etc or why a certain penalty was given that's not clear then i don't mind him explaining that.

Angela Powers is awful, just awful, she's only there to tick gender/diversity boxes and offers nothing, she struggles to get words out coherently, struggles to make sense with most things and just comes across a soppy fan in front of her heroes.

I don't mind Bill Arthur too much, although again, he struggles to get his words out, struggles with players names and isn't all that coherent.

Rod Studd is decent, but talks too fast and gets over over excited and a bit too shouty for me.

 

It was far better for me when you had Eddie commentating, Stevo being Stevo and then AN Other, like Kear, Rea, Cullen etc adding a bit when asked for opinions, now it's like a morning birdsong, just constant noise going through you!

Tony Rea very good.  Impartial and brings in detail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Man of Kent said:

Where are the Sinfields and Peacocks, ie recently retired greats, on Sky? It’s always the same old faces.

Judging by yesterday's match, Sinfield and Peacock are on the Beeb, with Wilkin almost certainly lined up to join them on a more permanent basis once he retires.


Millions long for immortality who don't know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon. (Susan Ertz)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Sinfield’s the broadcasting answer I don’t know what the question is !

Edited by DavidM
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had more enjoyment watching an NRL game with French commentary (that I didn’t understand) than listening to a lot of what comes out on Sky at the minute 

The whole production needs an overhaul, the RFL should recognise this at the next contract negotiations

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DavidM said:

If Sinfield’s the broadcasting answer I don’t know what the question is !

He's improving gradually. Remember that the BBC persisted with Kear and Noble, despite many stilted punditry performances in the early years. Now they are really comfortable on camera.

Sinfield's an intelligent guy with tons of playing experience, and he'll loosen up in time.


Millions long for immortality who don't know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon. (Susan Ertz)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Futtocks said:

He's improving gradually. Remember that the BBC persisted with Kear and Noble, despite many stilted punditry performances in the early years. Now they are really comfortable on camera.

Sinfield's an intelligent guy with tons of playing experience, and he'll loosen up in time.

Yeh I guess , one thing with all of this is I’m damn sure it’s a thousand times more difficult than it looks . It’s just the best like the lynams , linekers and greats from the past like Brian Moore just make it look so easy . Wilkin looks a bit of natural and Carney did 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually think Hemmings is best as a presenter and id have retired him from commentating over presenting.

Hemmings fronting the show. Guests to rotate and be topical.

Tactical analysis presented by Carney and Wells.

Commentary team with main commentator plus Carney and Wells tactical and I dont mind Clarke when he is in the mood. Or replace him with a guest expert. The likes of Cullen, Rae, Kear all do well.

Sack Barrie and Terry or use them sparingly as guests.

Angela Powers as featuees presenter.

I think they have talent there, but dont use it quite right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, DavidM said:

Yeh I guess , one thing with all of this is I’m damn sure it’s a thousand times more difficult than it looks . It’s just the best like the lynams , linekers and greats from the past like Brian Moore just make it look so easy . Wilkin looks a bit of natural and Carney did 

Carney's got the Blarney, while the other names you mention had decades to hone their screen presence. And Lineker came from a sport where players got far more media exposure than RL, even before they retired and moved into broadcasting. The number of times I've seen normally confident RL players look like rabbits in the headlights when faced by a TV camera tells you much about the British media.

Edited by Futtocks
  • Like 1

Millions long for immortality who don't know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon. (Susan Ertz)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mind Carney as a presenter. I also think its good for the games image an Irish voice presenting the show rather than an all Northern English team with strong accents. Wells is quite good in his analysis and is articulate to boot.

As for the rest they can all go for me. McDermott and O'Connor are embarrassing at times and do absolutely nothing for the games image. Condoning high tackles, joking about foul play etc is just all a bit childish and the sort of talk you'd hear on a building site. It just isn't professional in the slightest and would just put many off the game. They also aren't articulate enough either to be on TV. I find Clarke boring and he is often embarrassing with his bias, not just to Wigan but his bigging up over the years of young players contracted to his brother Andy. I have heard many players interviewed over the years that would do a far better job than these three.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...