Off The Ball Official Thread <Mod Note - Post #1, #533, #6651>

Higgins5473

Deleted User wrote: »

Wow, that smacks of pure misogyny. I'm not a massive fan as I find she can allow herself to be dominated and can contribute little outside of GAA issues, but she was strong yesterday as GAA matters dominated, and seemed to be well on top of her brief. Enjoyed her contribution.

Misogyny? I said her content was muck and the sound quality was dire, the first of my criticisms is debatable so convince me otherwise with this comment of yours:

"well on top of her brief"...


The second, I stand by, the sound quality is dire at time for lengthy calls. It sounded like she wasn't even on a any kind of headset.

Misogyny...you'll have to explain that one. She was female, I found what I was able to hear of her content to be fairly useless.

Please explain on that accusation

Higgins5473

Higgins5473 wrote: »

Misogyny? I said her content was muck and the sound quality was dire, the first of my criticisms is debatable so convince me otherwise with this comment of yours:

"well on top of her brief"...


The second, I stand by, the sound quality is dire at time for lengthy calls. It sounded like she wasn't even on a any kind of headset.

Misogyny...you'll have to explain that one. She was female, I found what I was able to hear of her content to be fairly useless.

Please explain on that accusation

Grand, maybe you're an arrogant and aggressive di*k to everyone so. Happy to take a ban for that one!

cms88

Higgins5473 wrote: »

Misogyny? I said her content was muck and the sound quality was dire, the first of my criticisms is debatable so convince me otherwise with this comment of yours:

"well on top of her brief"...


The second, I stand by, the sound quality is dire at time for lengthy calls. It sounded like she wasn't even on a any kind of headset.

Misogyny...you'll have to explain that one. She was female, I found what I was able to hear of her content to be fairly useless.

Please explain on that accusation

You should know at this stage you can't disagree with anything a female says in the media. You have to agree with ti all the time.

cms88

Faugheen wrote: »

I thought MT was bang on the money calling out Colm O’Rourke and Pat Spillane for their entitled bollocks and unnecessary attacks towards Ronan Glynn.

But she’s a woman so the losers here will hate that lefty liberal soap-boxing wokeness.

:rolleyes:

CertifiedSimp

Wonder will they discuss the basketball this evening?

BPKS

CertifiedSimp wrote: »

Wonder will they discuss the basketball this evening?

Listening to OTB AM on the topic now.

The usual glossing over the incident that led to the shooting - no mention of the knife the fella had and that his wife had called the police to report a domestic crime and that her husband had left with 3 kids in the car.

Bit like the one sided story that Ritchie did of the conclusion of the FBI investigation into the NASCAR noose story.

Ahwell

CertifiedSimp wrote: »

Wonder will they discuss the basketball this evening?

Why wouldn't they? It has already been discussed on OTB AM.

cms88

cms88 wrote: »

You should know at this stage you can't disagree with anything a female says in the media. You have to agree with ti all the time.

I literally said a few posts back that I didn't think she was a good contributor to the paper review and am not a huge fan of hers.

There is disagreeing and over the top like the post I had a go at. A bit of balance would be good, and I would stand over my position that a lot of the discussion of women on this thread is borderline misogyny.

Pauliedragon

I know this is trivial but that ad with the guy ranting on about how great Giles is drives me demented. It's the most over the top ad I've heard in a long time. Painful stuff and I've nothing against Giles except maybe he's a bit past it.

CertifiedSimp

I think at this stage they're just afraid of hurting Giles feelings. He's awful to listen to. Anytime I know he's coming on I switch over.

He was asked for his best Everton 11 of all time and he just filled it with lads from the 60s and 70s. Maybe it's true but wo wants to listen to that when they don't know any of the plaeyrs or seen them play?

Abel Ruiz

CertifiedSimp wrote: »

He was asked for his best Everton 11 of all time and he just filled it with lads from the 60s and 70s. Maybe it's true but wo wants to listen to that when they don't know any of the plaeyrs or seen them play?

Awwwww. Are you okay?????
Big Hugs hunnybunch!

BPKS

CertifiedSimp wrote: »

I think at this stage they're just afraid of hurting Giles feelings. He's awful to listen to. Anytime I know he's coming on I switch over.

He was asked for his best Everton 11 of all time and he just filled it with lads from the 60s and 70s. Maybe it's true but wo wants to listen to that when they don't know any of the plaeyrs or seen them play?

He was asked last night about Thiago signing for Liverpool and he went off on a tangent as to why Gerrard and Lampard could not play on the same England team together.

He thinks the lad De Brew-knee has a bad attitude as well in case you hadn't heard this before!

CatFromHue

I don't listen to Giles for cutting current football affairs stuff.

I do listen to him as I like hearing his stories from over the years.

As for his best ever teams, that's exactly what they are. His best ever teams and he's been around a long time so of course he's going to have players from in the 60's and 70's. They won some stuff back then too.

Ol' Donie

CertifiedSimp wrote: »

I think at this stage they're just afraid of hurting Giles feelings. He's awful to listen to. Anytime I know he's coming on I switch over.

He was asked for his best Everton 11 of all time and he just filled it with lads from the 60s and 70s. Maybe it's true but wo wants to listen to that when they don't know any of the plaeyrs or seen them play?

Remarkable.

Anyway, Giles is the only bit of OTB I regularly listen to still. Bit like the way you listen to your mates talking about football, even if they're not professional statisticians or tacticians.

Dowend

Infighting in OTB House?


https://twitter.com/RichieMcCormack/status/1299397976666918912?s=20

https://twitter.com/MaireTNC/status/1299405820321554432?s=20


I usually like Johnny when he's on but have lost a lot of respect for him recently due to his views on lockdown etc.

Tell me how

Dowend wrote: »

Infighting in OTB House?

I usually like Johnny when he's on but have lost a lot of respect for him recently due to his views on lockdown etc.

I'd be largely of opposing view to him on lockdown as well but I can also see his point.

Everyone saw what happened in March and April in terms of infection rates, deaths etc.
Measures were put in place to mitigate against that.
Infection rates and deaths dropped.
Cue outrage at measures in place for mitigation.

Hard to fathom really. Damned if you do, and damned if you don't.
The reaction to the lockdown is turning in to civil war politics, many friends and family members on opposing sides and both sides 100% convinced their view is correct.

CertifiedSimp

"rocket surgery" :pac::pac::pac:

These lads really show what's in between the ears if given the chance.

Ward has a point anyways. Whole point was to "flatten" the curve and not overload the health system. It was never "get 0 Covid and not have any patients in hospitals" like the current actions seem to suggest.

There hasn't been a single case in Leitrim for over 2 weeks yet pubs still closed.

The hospitals have never been so quiet.

If you google Ireland trolley hospitals and go to HSE website you'll see numbers on trolleys. This day last year there were 313 on trolleys. This year 78. A 75% decrease.

What's going on like????

Jayesdiem

Johnny is 110% correct. He is correct because in refutation of Richie, the virus is not an especially dangerous one given the stat he quoted and also that, in the UK at least, flu has killed more people than CV19 in the month of August (unsure of that figure for Ireland but let’s assume it’s fairly similar). Now at least Richie’s point has logic, if not validity. I can’t even begin to decipher what it is that MaireT is attempting to say because the concept of the hospitals coming under pressure was really only a fear at the outset of the virus and it never actually transpired. She assumes the role of the Japanese soldier found wandering and delirious in the forests of the South Pacific in the 70s, adamant that WW2 was still proceeding. But why not? Better to be inaccurate than correct if it tows the party line. Not surprising from her though - safe, safe, safe, safe. Make sure to p1ss nobody off and hence the reason she is such a substandard contributor to the show.

CertifiedSimp

As for MNTC, she seems to think Irish hospitals aren't empty. They are. Even back in March I spoke to nurses in some hospitals who said it was never so empty.

CertifiedSimp

Jayesdiem wrote: »

Johnny is 110% correct. He is correct because in refutation of Richie, the virus is not an especially dangerous one given the stat he quoted and also that, in the UK at least, flu has killed more people than CV19 in the month of August (unsure of that figure for Ireland but let’s assume it’s fairly similar). Now at least Richie’s point has logic, if not validity. I can’t even begin to decipher what it is that MaireT is attempting to say because the concept of the hospitals coming under pressure was really only a fear at the outset of the virus and it never actually transpired. She assumes the role of the Japanese soldier found wandering and delirious in the forests of the South Pacific in the 70s, adamant that WW2 was still proceeding. But why not? Better to be inaccurate than correct if it ties the party line. Not surprising from her though - safe, safe, safe, safe. Make sure to p1ss nobody off and hence the reason she is such a substandard contributor to the show.

I could hear her annoying voice while reading the tweet.

As you said, she's safe safe safe. Doesn't have the spine to take a brave decision.

The median age of those getting it is 30 now. The elderly are safe if they follow precautions.

If we stop match going and pubs from opening when there's 50+ cases then they may never happen again.

Brock Turnpike

Tommy Conlan on the paper review yesterday. A good writer he may be. A good talker he is not.

Brock Turnpike

Brock Turnpike wrote: »

Tommy Conlan on the paper review yesterday. A good writer he may be. A good talker he is not.

Not good. The first time I heard him I thought he was drunk, but it turns out he always speaks in riddles like that.

I thought Conor McKeon, on the other hand, was very good.

CertifiedSimp

CertifiedSimp wrote: »

"rocket surgery" :pac::pac::pac:

These lads really show what's in between the ears if given the chance.

Ward has a point anyways. Whole point was to "flatten" the curve and not overload the health system. It was never "get 0 Covid and not have any patients in hospitals" like the current actions seem to suggest.

There hasn't been a single case in Leitrim for over 2 weeks yet pubs still closed.

The hospitals have never been so quiet.

If you google Ireland trolley hospitals and go to HSE website you'll see numbers on trolleys. This day last year there were 313 on trolleys. This year 78. A 75% decrease.

What's going on like????

Bed blockers are a huge problem in Irish hospitals as there is very little respite care available for people after they leave hospital. Older people especially tend to spend huge amounts of time in hospital as they have nowhere else to go, but they haven't been presenting to hospitals for obvious reasons since the pandemic.

I think it's fair to say 'rocket surgery' was a joke. A mix of brain surgery and rocket science.

dr.kenneth noisewater

Brock Turnpike wrote:

Tommy Conlan on the paper review yesterday. A good writer he may be. A good talker he is not.

Thought the very same listening today

bamayang

Brock Turnpike wrote: »

Tommy Conlan on the paper review yesterday. A good writer he may be. A good talker he is not.

I started counting the ‘eh’ and ‘ahs’, I’d say 3-400 wouldn’t be far off!

Boredmichael

What do you think of Team 33 since Raf left? Did a lot of LOI during lockdown which was good but is a lot different to what it used to be.

Harry lyme

Darragh McManus in today Irish Independent review section sums up exactly how I feel about Off The Ball and sports broadcasting in general these days.

https://www.independent.ie/entertainment/radio/darragh-mcmanus-on-radio-no-fun-and-games-when-sports-radio-gets-too-political-39501879.html

The FAI was dominating sports radio again, with that seismic extraordinary general meeting warding off insolvency and involving yet another kerfuffle over the rights or wrongs of a high-level appointment, chairman Roy Barrett.
It got me thinking about how sport is covered on radio. With the honourable exception of a really juicy controversy like the Rio ticketing affair, I prefer them to stick to actual events on the field, court or race-track.
A lot of broadcasters, though, seem more enamoured of rows, meetings, statements, press conferences, strikes, reconciliations, budgets, transfers, commercial deals, legal moves and whatever else - in short, the political side of sport.
I accept that some listeners will find this stuff fascinating. But I find most of it determinedly uninteresting; and worse, it changes the nature of sports radio. It kind of destroys the reason we listen in the first place.
Sport is an escape from the grind and drudgery of real life and, more to the point here, public life. We follow teams and games and competitions, not in spite of the fact they ultimately don't matter, but precisely because of it.
That's the beauty of sport: it's a distraction, a balm, a consolation. It's something to get passionate about, without the accompanying feelings of dread that civilisation is about to end.
Dragging in endless politics just makes it feel like the news, and there's way too much of that in the world already. And whatever about something like that EGM, often the justification is slight and the connection tangential.
Off the Ball (Newstalk, Mon-Thu 7pm), for instance, spoke for half an hour to an American sociologist about NBA boycotts and a "Fifth Wave of sports activism in the US". Why is an Irish radio programme delving so deeply into racial politics in a country 3,000 miles away? Genuine question.
This all cheapens sport, somehow, stripping away some of the magic and mystery. I don't want someone to reveal, in nerdy point-by-point fashion, exactly what was in that fax sent by Lionel Messi, how Barcelona responded, the minutiae of the Spanish legal system.
I want them to rhapsodise about Messi's genius and ponder how is it even possible for a human being to do these wondrous things with time and space and moving objects.
That said, you can take a sideways view on sport and make it refreshing, engaging and relevant. A Very Irish Coup, on Documentary on One (Radio 1, Sat 6pm) explored an infamous sting on Irish bookies in 1978.
Conor Keane and Donal O'Herlihy's documentary was informative and good fun, with a nice measure of "truth stranger than fiction". Best of all, it felt like sport - not news.

Indo Review 05/09/2020

Tell me how

Harry lyme wrote: »

Darragh McManus in today Irish Independent review section sums up exactly how I feel about Off The Ball and sports broadcasting in general these days.

https://www.independent.ie/entertainment/radio/darragh-mcmanus-on-radio-no-fun-and-games-when-sports-radio-gets-too-political-39501879.html

Off the Ball (Newstalk, Mon-Thu 7pm), for instance, spoke for half an hour to an American sociologist about NBA boycotts and a "Fifth Wave of sports activism in the US". Why is an Irish radio programme delving so deeply into racial politics in a country 3,000 miles away? Genuine question.

So, someone listening to a sports radio show, can't understand why the 2nd biggest topic worldwide this year is being discussed in a sports context?

I mean, the answer is in his own sentence.....

Ahwell

What live sports were actually on this week? Bulgaria v Ireland and Leinster v Munster. Both of which were cover extensively on the show. What are OTB supposed to fill the other 4 x 3 hours with?

He praises A Very Irish Coup, but the rest of the article gives the impression he would not be interested in listening to a report on a similar sting on Irish bookies if it happened today because he would be too busy "trying to escape from the grind and drudgery of real life". I think article the is pure bollox, but each to his own.

Harry lyme

Ahwell wrote: »

What live sports were actually on this week? Bulgaria v Ireland and Leinster v Munster. Both of which were cover extensively on the show. What are OTB supposed to fill the other 4 x 3 hours with?

He praises A Very Irish Coup, but the rest of the article gives the impression he would not be interested in listening to a report on a similar sting on Irish bookies if it happened today because he would be too busy "trying to escape from the grind and drudgery of real life". I think article the is pure bollox, but each to his own.

I think it's a general criticism of the way sport media has gone in recent years.

It used to be treated in a relatively easy going non serious manner and in the past decade it's treated like current affairs i.e real news. Sport is a pleasant distraction for most people , the fact that it is essentially meaningless is exactly why people like it so much. It's now taken far too seriously by broadcasters in general these days and I've stopped listening, watching and reading a lot of sports media in recent years because of this. If I want to be made miserable I'll watch the real news.

Ahwell

Harry lyme wrote: »

I think it's a general criticism of the way sport media has gone in recent years.

It used to be treated in a relatively easy going non serious manner and in the past decade it's treated like current affairs i.e real news. Sport is a pleasant distraction for most people , the fact that it is essentially meaningless is exactly why people like it so much. It's now taken far too seriously by broadcasters in general these days and I've stopped listening, watching and reading a lot of sports media in recent years because of this. If I want to be made miserable I'll watch the real news.

It is a radio column, so he is talking specifically about radio. Ten years ago is almost pre-0TB, where our only options were RTE Radio 1, Talksport and Radio 5 live. Talksport and Radio 5 live haven't changed a whole lot. RTE Radio 1 is still churning out the same deadly dull stuff it always has. I'm struggling to remember these "relatively easy going non serious" sports shows from the past.

The only time sport makes me feel miserable is when the team I support loses. The coverage of sport in general has never had that affect. I just don't get it, sorry.

DrSerious3

There is now too much time to fill and they have to manufacture controversy to stay relevant. The fact that we are discussing them shows that it works.

Ol' Donie

Tell me how wrote: »

So, someone listening to a sports radio show, can't understand why the 2nd biggest topic worldwide this year is being discussed in a sports context?

I mean, the answer is in his own sentence.....

Jeeehaaaysus.

I give OTB plenty of stick, but that's the best kind of thing they do. What a shìte thing to criticise them for.

Although it has reminded me to sign up to their gridiron podcast now.

Harry lyme

Ahwell wrote: »

It is a radio column, so he is talking specifically about radio. Ten years ago is almost pre-0TB, where our only options were RTE Radio 1, Talksport and Radio 5 live. Talksport and Radio 5 live haven't changed a whole lot. RTE Radio 1 is still churning out the same deadly dull stuff it always has. I'm struggling to remember these "relatively easy going non serious" sports shows from the past.

The only time sport makes me feel miserable is when the team I support loses. The coverage of sport in general has never had that affect. I just don't get it, sorry.

The coverage has gone so ultra serious I just don't bother with most of it anymore.

Jayesdiem

Harry lyme wrote: »

The coverage has gone so ultra serious I just don't bother with most of it anymore.

I use in here as a temperature gauge. If the logical, sports-minded lot are complimentary of a segment, I’ll seek out the podcast. If the SJW crusaders are crowing about a piece, I’ll avoid. You know who you are.

Ol' Donie

Can't seem to find their NFL podcast. Anyone know exactly what it's called?

Ahwell

Ol' Donie wrote: »

Can't seem to find their NFL podcast. Anyone know exactly what it's called?

https://www.otbsports.com/podcasts/the-snap

Ol' Donie

Ahwell wrote: »

https://www.otbsports.com/podcasts/the-snap

Great, thank you.

Gilroy annoys me, but yet I'm still quite fond of him.

Harry lyme

Harry lyme wrote: »

I think it's a general criticism of the way sport media has gone in recent years.

It used to be treated in a relatively easy going non serious manner and in the past decade it's treated like current affairs i.e real news. Sport is a pleasant distraction for most people , the fact that it is essentially meaningless is exactly why people like it so much. It's now taken far too seriously by broadcasters in general these days and I've stopped listening, watching and reading a lot of sports media in recent years because of this. If I want to be made miserable I'll watch the real news.

I think this is just an inevitable result of having so many hours to fill. Very often the OTB am show does all the analysis - they had lots of post Bulgaria game analysis on Friday morning - and so the evening show is having to branch out a bit more to fill the three hours.

Personally, I think it's overkill but I do like some of the sports in a wider cultural context pieces too. Mostly, I still prefer deep analysis of actual sport involving games and teams I have an interest in but each to their own.

EmmetSpiceland

Maybe OTB should just be on for two hours on Saturday and Sunday. A brief “discussion” about any games that have taken place during the week.

Could have a buzzer or some form of alarm to prevent any presenter, or guest, getting too far off the on field “action”.

Would leave a bit of a hole for midweek evenings but they could probably just replay old episodes of ‘Talking History’ or ‘Talking Books’ in its place.

Might lower the blood pressure of a few of the more “angry” heads around here. Saving that they might look into putting a “health warning” at the beginning of every show warning listeners with “sensitive” ears to turn off now.

Harry lyme

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

Maybe OTB should just be on for two hours on Saturday and Sunday. A brief “discussion” about any games that have taken place during the week.

Could have a buzzer or some form of alarm to prevent any presenter, or guest, getting too far off the on field “action”.

Would leave a bit of a hole for midweek evenings but they could probably just replay old episodes of ‘Talking History’ or ‘Talking Books’ in its place.

Might lower the blood pressure of a few of the more “angry” heads around here. Saving that they might look into putting a “health warning” at the beginning of every show warning listeners with “sensitive” ears to turn off now.

To be honest the only person who seems to be angry is yourself.

People are perfectly entitled to criticise the show if they want

I (and I imagine) a lot of others find a lot of the quasi political stuff shoehorned into sports media in the last decade or so absolutely tedious and I've got to the stage now where if I know that sort of topic may be coming up on any sports show I just avoid it.

EmmetSpiceland

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

Maybe OTB should just be on for two hours on Saturday and Sunday. A brief “discussion” about any games that have taken place during the week.

Could have a buzzer or some form of alarm to prevent any presenter, or guest, getting too far off the on field “action”.

Would leave a bit of a hole for midweek evenings but they could probably just replay old episodes of ‘Talking History’ or ‘Talking Books’ in its place.

Might lower the blood pressure of a few of the more “angry” heads around here. Saving that they might look into putting a “health warning” at the beginning of every show warning listeners with “sensitive” ears to turn off now.

I don't like the constant negativity, but it's also ok to critique the show as well. People seem to take opinions expressed that differ from their own as an affront, which seems to be a very modern phenomenon. People used to have healthy debate before, now we just seem to shout at each other online.

Tell me how

Deleted User wrote: »

I don't like the constant negativity, but it's also ok to critique the show as well. People seem to take opinions expressed that differ from their own as an affront, which seems to be a very modern phenomenon. People used to have healthy debate before, now we just seem to shout at each other online.

I enjoy debate, and really enjoy discussion, exploration of topics, but I feel the amount of time any topic on the show is the starting point for that topic to be discussed/debated here is virtually non-existent.

I have introduced topics previously which I felt merited discussion to be met with 'You do nothing except praise the show'.

It probably is a modern phenomenon given the internet lends itself to anonymity.
Although, that being said, I understand Facebook is similar but I'm not a user so can't say.

Tell me how

Tell me how wrote: »

I enjoy debate, and really enjoy discussion, exploration of topics, but I feel the amount of time any topic on the show is the starting point for that topic to be discussed/debated here is virtually non-existent.

I have introduced topics previously which I felt merited discussion to be met with 'You do nothing except praise the show'.

It probably is a modern phenomenon given the internet lends itself to anonymity.
Although, that being said, I understand Facebook is similar but I'm not a user so can't say.

I'm not sure this is ever going to be a place for nuanced debate on topics that are raised on the show. By its nature, the thread is just going to be a place where people say what they like and don't like about the show. Boards seemed to be dominated by conservative males so the nature of the criticism is probably going to be overwhelmingly negative given the show's approach.

elefant

Harry lyme wrote: »

To be honest the only person who seems to be angry is yourself.

I mean, this is just laughable. This thread is brimming with upset and anger.

Harry lyme

elefant wrote: »

I mean, this is just laughable. This thread is brimming with upset and anger.

Criticism does not equal anger. I don't care enough about the show to get angry about it.

Harry lyme

Deleted User wrote: »

I'm not sure this is ever going to be a place for nuanced debate on topics that are raised on the show. By its nature, the thread is just going to be a place where people say what they like and don't like about the show. Boards seemed to be dominated by conservative males so the nature of the criticism is probably going to be overwhelmingly negative given the show's approach.

Don't think boards is dominated by conservative males (no more than would be reasonable), it probably has a more reasonable balance of opinion compared to other sites. I don't think the world is quite a lefty liberal as the internet would have you believe as various election results all over the world in recent years have show. There's also the fact that you can post anonymously here which means you can express opinion that people might fin unpopular and not be labelled a monster for having a mildly conservative view, which is what happens on a lot of other social media platforms.

BPKS

I wonder how long a honeymoon period the lads will give Stephen Kenny? Listening to them fawn over the Under 21s during the last 12 months I was thinking that these young lads were going to be bringing Ireland to tournament after tournament. Or is there a bit of delusion there similar to the #greatestleagueintheworld crap?

deisedude

BPKS wrote: »

I wonder how long a honeymoon period the lads will give Stephen Kenny? Listening to them fawn over the Under 21s during the last 12 months I was thinking that these young lads were going to be bringing Ireland to tournament after tournament. Or is there a bit of delusion there similar to the #greatestleagueintheworld crap?

Its only after 2 maqtches for fcuk sake. Give the man a chance

BPKS

deisedude wrote: »

Its only after 2 maqtches for fcuk sake. Give the man a chance

Yes I know that but they were on Mick McCarthys back after the first two games - just wondering if this change in style will be enough to placate the critics and will they cut him way more slack than his predecessors?