O/T:- MOTD Commentary

[cher1]

Some good points made.

The worst of all are the female cricket commentators. No real idea of the game's history as most are too young. The fact is they'll never have experienced playing at the highest level as they can't physically compete. I would lay money that the English women's team wouldn't stand a chance against a South Notts league team nevermind one from the Notts Prem league! I'm all for women's cricket and happy for them to commentate at their level but not to commentate at men's Test level.

Did you make the same comment about Henry Blofeld? He wasn't exactly a top class cricketer, but commentated for years. And then we have the delightful Geoff Boycott, who might have had the career, but the TV companies rather glossed over his conviction for domestic violence.

Looking at football, I can't think of any male commentators who have played at the highest level. Even if you look locally, Charlie Slater is no footballer. Somehow I don't think Colin Slater was a nippy winger, or solid centre half either.

I guess that's a long winded way of saying that past experience often appears to be irrelevant, and the s e x of the commentators is (or should be) entirely irrelevant. Being good at your job is all that should matter.

[i961pie]

Did you make the same comment about Henry Blofeld? He wasn't exactly a top class cricketer, but commentated for years. And then we have the delightful Geoff Boycott, who might have had the career, but the TV companies rather glossed over his conviction for domestic violence.

Looking at football, I can't think of any male commentators who have played at the highest level. Even if you look locally, Charlie Slater is no footballer. Somehow I don't think Colin Slater was a nippy winger, or solid centre half either.

I guess that's a long winded way of saying that past experience often appears to be irrelevant, and the s e x of the commentators is (or should be) entirely irrelevant. Being good at your job is all that should matter.

She does grate on your nerves though.

[cher1]

She does grate on your nerves though.

Lots of commentators get on my nerves, regardless of s e x. Mostly ones who carry on too long when they are well past their best, such as Murray Walker and Colin Slater.

[andy6025]

Quote Originally Posted by meoldlaner:
I cannot bare listening to these new commentators especially the one being referred to.

Keep your clothes on, MeOldLaner, the commentary will be more comfortable.

Drllier’s post was great but this little gem from Sid that slipped under the radar gave me quite a chuckle.

[drillerpie]

You’re over complicating matters as usual. It’s actually very very simple. I don’t think people should have a pop at female football commentators simply on the basis that they’re women. Women can commentate on men’s football matches just as well as men. It’s historical fact that they haven’t had the same chance to do so.

I must say, after reading some of the contributions to this thread( BFP has psychological problems, you can’t commentate on cricket unless you’ve played at ‘the highest level’, women should commentate on women’s sport, men should commentate on men’s sport) the fact that you’ve decided to write a treatise on my views is odd.

Let's get the facts straight: the OP didn't "have a pop at the commentator in question simply on the basis that she's a woman" at all. He had a pop at her on the basis that he thought her commentary was amateurish. He described her as the female commentator because he didn't know her name and he wanted to make a distinction between her and the other non-female human commentating.

You then jumped in two-footed and accused him of ***ism. You then rather inexplicably, but not unexpectedly, also brought race into it, as you invariably do. In my view this was totally unnecessary.

Of course women CAN commentate as well as men, but seeing as the OP wasn't suggesting otherwise I'd say that's a straw man argument.

As regards the rest, I think your fall back argument that I don't contest every post on here is a weak one, and typical of your debating style (little substance, lot of mud-slinging), but for the record, here goes:

I think playing at the highest level can be an advantage in terms of knowledge of what is happening, but isn't a guarantee of a good speaker. Blofeld was an articulate, eloquent, interesting speaker, and his accent and background (while being very different from mine) were brilliantly evocative for the sport he was commenting on. He wasn't an all round sports commentator, and would've been a fish out of water commenting on rugby league for example, and vice versa with a rugby league commentator doing TMS. I always listened to TMS on when Blofeld was on it, but rarely tune in to hear the inane laddish banter that has taken over in the past few years.

You're right that I didn't comment on the 'BFP has psychological issues' posts. Make of that what you will.

[LaxtonLad]

Did you make the same comment about Henry Blofeld? He wasn't exactly a top class cricketer, but commentated for years. And then we have the delightful Geoff Boycott, who might have had the career, but the TV companies rather glossed over his conviction for domestic violence.

Looking at football, I can't think of any male commentators who have played at the highest level. Even if you look locally, Charlie Slater is no footballer. Somehow I don't think Colin Slater was a nippy winger, or solid centre half either.

I guess that's a long winded way of saying that past experience often appears to be irrelevant, and the s e x of the commentators is (or should be) entirely irrelevant. Being good at your job is all that should matter.

Being good at your job should include not screeching like a t££nage gel at a Take That concert.

[upthemaggies]

You then rather inexplicably, but not unexpectedly, also brought race into it, as you invariably do. In my view this was totally unnecessary.
.

This was the reason I went for him in support of a team mate who might have been seriously injured by that cowardly kick to the head following an appalling tackle.
Fword fans aside, I don't think I've ever previously got personal with anybody on here but he's the one Notts fan I wish had been born a r*d, I don't want to be associated with people like this,
We all talk $h!t, I'm certainly guilty of that, and there are views expressed here that go too far, but his reply to Navy the other week was absolutely sickening. I think he only got away with it because it was Navy, who has rubbed a fair number of people up the wrong way, but at least he has redeemable qualities, he comes across as a decent human being when he's not p!$$ed.
It feels like BFP is sat at his keyboard all day just waiting for any hint of an opportunity to try and smear somebody here or look for some dirt on anybody that is quoted in a discussion, it's as if he expects every single person on the planet to meet his warped and impossible standards at all times. What sort of person behaves like this?
This thread has turned into a bit of a pile on but I'm sorry to say that it's fully deserved, he needs calling out on his behavior. It's totally unacceptable in my view.

[SwalePie]

Being good at your job should include not screeching like a t££nage gel at a Take That concert.

That lot over the river don't seem to mind a bit of that from their radio commentator on occasion.

[BigFatPie]

Let's get the facts straight: the OP didn't "have a pop at the commentator in question simply on the basis that she's a woman" at all. He had a pop at her on the basis that he thought her commentary was amateurish. He described her as the female commentator because he didn't know her name and he wanted to make a distinction between her and the other non-female human commentating.

You then jumped in two-footed and accused him of ***ism. You then rather inexplicably, but not unexpectedly, also brought race into it, as you invariably do. In my view this was totally unnecessary.

Of course women CAN commentate as well as men, but seeing as the OP wasn't suggesting otherwise I'd say that's a straw man argument.

As regards the rest, I think your fall back argument that I don't contest every post on here is a weak one, and typical of your debating style (little substance, lot of mud-slinging), but for the record, here goes:

I think playing at the highest level can be an advantage in terms of knowledge of what is happening, but isn't a guarantee of a good speaker. Blofeld was an articulate, eloquent, interesting speaker, and his accent and background (while being very different from mine) were brilliantly evocative for the sport he was commenting on. He wasn't an all round sports commentator, and would've been a fish out of water commenting on rugby league for example, and vice versa with a rugby league commentator doing TMS. I always listened to TMS on when Blofeld was on it, but rarely tune in to hear the inane laddish banter that has taken over in the past few years.

You're right that I didn't comment on the 'BFP has psychological issues' posts. Make of that what you will.

if yesterday’s analysis scored only 5/10 because of over-complication, today’s effort scores 3/10 for fabrication and misrepresentation. My first two contributions to this thread were these;

‘I’ve heard some terrible pundits/presenters/commentators in my time but I’ve never heard any of them been referred to by ‘the male commentator’.’

‘ My point is that I very much doubt you’d have started a new thread about a relatively obscure Sunday night match to slag off the commentator if he were a bloke. And your last sentence confirms this. By not naming her and describing her as the ‘female commentator’ you’ve invited others to come in and have a go at female commentators in general rather than this individual, which is probably the idea of the thread. Would you have started a thread about a ‘black commentator’? I hope you wouldn’t.’


After this the thread was diverted by some amateur psychology, silly pictures, and personal abuse from upthemaggies. After reading this exchange you unbelievably and laughably say it’s me doing the mud slinging. I wonder why that would be?

I didn’t outrightly accuse the OP of ***ism, but IMO there’s no doubt they started the thread as a way to start having a go at female football commentators, and even if it wasn’t, others did just that. Dog whistle ***ism as it were. Someone started a thread last week criticising Jermaine Jenas, which I agreed with. If however they had entitled the thread ‘that mixed race bloke off the telly is a bit dull’, it would have been a different matter.

Again, as I’ve said already, I don’t think it’s fair or right to criticise female commentators simply because they’re women. Do you agree or disagree with that statement?

[BigFatPie]

This was the reason I went for him in support of a team mate who might have been seriously injured by that cowardly kick to the head following an appalling tackle.
Fword fans aside, I don't think I've ever previously got personal with anybody on here but he's the one Notts fan I wish had been born a r*d, I don't want to be associated with people like this,
We all talk $h!t, I'm certainly guilty of that, and there are views expressed here that go too far, but his reply to Navy the other week was absolutely sickening. I think he only got away with it because it was Navy, who has rubbed a fair number of people up the wrong way, but at least he has redeemable qualities, he comes across as a decent human being when he's not p!$$ed.
It feels like BFP is sat at his keyboard all day just waiting for any hint of an opportunity to try and smear somebody here or look for some dirt on anybody that is quoted in a discussion, it's as if he expects every single person on the planet to meet his warped and impossible standards at all times. What sort of person behaves like this?
This thread has turned into a bit of a pile on but I'm sorry to say that it's fully deserved, he needs calling out on his behavior. It's totally unacceptable in my view.

I haven’t got a keyboard, I’ve got me phone. And wanting me to be a Forest fan, now that’s out of order.

Lifetime ban for Utm immediately!