Roast Dermott Brereton: "Wayne Carey is a better analyst than Daisy Pearce"

[Bostonian]

certainly interesting stats - were there bugger all people watching sport in the US the year prior? Or less sport to watch due to covid?

Yes to both. Viewer figures were right down in the preceding years.

 

[Fadge]

??

Hiring someone because they bring complimenting experience, perspective and/or skills is forced and not organic?

I find that logic difficult to understand.


Who's the best player in the comp right now?

Petracca? Cripps? Hawkins? I don't know, pick one.

Now imagine picking 'the best person for the job' in the same context. You'd have 22 Petraccas. He's the best player. So each time you hired someone, you'd pick the best player.

And....you'd get flogged every single week. Absolutely mauled.

So when building a team, you hire a diverse range of people. Speed, experience, size, height, skills, athleticism etc.

And if you identify gaps, you hire someone who can bring that. You don't hire 'the person for the job', you hire people that will form part of a diverse group that provides all the assets you need to succeed.

That's all diversity is. I don't know why people are so scared of it.

It's just common sense and smart business logic.

Diverse and complimentary skills (including technical skills, soft skills, management experience and approach, etc.) is very different diversity based on gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc.

Also, you could hire a female who has all the traditional traits of a male and you may have 'checked a box' but you don't have the 'diverse hire' that you are targeting....

 

[morsie]

Neither Daisy or Carey add anything I cant see for myself and dont get me started on Jobe Watson.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

A point of difference is a skill or talent you have in a field that nobody else does.

What gap was Daisy filling?

A female perspective on footy, I presume.

A female, mother, player. That's a fairly unique perspective I'd imagine.

She's not blokey. Different tone of voice. People may find her attractive. People may find her engaging and endearing, as opposed to combative and masculine. I don't know. Considering commentators and 'special comments' guys have always been middle aged straight white guys, there's probably heaps of gaps she fills just by not being a middle aged straight white guy.

If you're presenting an entertainment product, which is purely what Ch7 are doing, you need to entertain your audience.

People find her entertaining. Presumably.

Clearly old angry white guys don't, but Ch7 (and the AFL) care little for the dinosaurs. They know what their cash cow is.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Diverse and complimentary skills (including technical skills, soft skills, management experience and approach, etc.) is very different diversity based on gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc.

I wouldn't say it's very different. And they're not necessarily mutually exclusive.

Also, you could hire a female who has all the traditional traits of a male and you may have 'checked a box' but you don't have the 'diverse hire' that you are targeting....

Of course.

Not sure what you're adding to the discussion to be honest.

Sounds like you're simply agreeing with me that diversity is a good thing. You could have just hit the Like button.

 

[JM#1]

It doesn't take much to be a special comments person. Simply comment on how good/bad a team's pressure is. That's pretty much it.

 

[Bombermania]

There's lots of reasons for this.

And have you wondered why, when crowds are down and less people are watching - that they have responded by adding more female representation?

I wonder why that is?

Crowds are down for a few reasons including the introduction of the digital ticketing system and the cost of ticketing and food at games.

There's no notable drop off in club memberships with several clubs enjoying record or near record membership numbers, and crowds are going to local footy.

There's been an increase in the number of women playing footy, this is being watched closely by other sports that traditionally benefit from the girls not playing beyond under 13s.

 

[Bostonian]

A female perspective on footy, I presume.

A female, mother, player. That's a fairly unique perspective I'd imagine.

How is that in anyway relevant to a men's game of football though?

She's not blokey. Different tone of voice. People may find her attractive. People may find her engaging and endearing, as opposed to combative and masculine. I don't know. Considering commentators and 'special comments' guys have always been middle aged straight white guys, there's probably heaps of gaps she fills just by not being a middle aged straight white guy.

The reason why those middle aged white men have been so successful is because most of not all have played the game.

People saw them play, saw their talent and know them. People like that the most.

The fact you mentioned her looks is very funny. I don't think I've heard anyway say what we need is more eye candy representation.

The irony.

If you're presenting an entertainment product, which is purely what Ch7 are doing, you need to entertain your audience.

People find her entertaining. Presumably.

Clearly old angry white guys don't, but Ch7 (and the AFL) care little for the dinosaurs. They know what their cash cow is.

The cash cow is the people you keep trying to put down.

If you think any other wise you're delusional.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

How is that in anyway relevant to a men's game of football though?



The reason why those middle aged white men have been so successful is because most of not all have played the game.

People saw them play, saw their talent and know them. People like that the most.

The fact you mentioned her looks is very funny. I don't think I've heard anyway say what we need is more eye candy representation.

The irony.



The cash cow is the people you keep trying to put down.

If you think any other wise you're delusional.

Once again, yet again, you're being naive and short sighted. And you're missing the point entirely.

AFL is an entertainment product. Ch7 present that product, and attempt to make it as appealing as they can to as many people as they can, and they sell those eyeballs to advertisers.

Playing football, knowing about football, being a good analyst etc. etc. is barely relevant.

Ch7 will present the footy however they can in order to make as many people watch it as they can.

Believe it or not, a relatively small amount of their viewers are washed up old losers that actually care about the detailed, technical analysis of the game.

The rest are people that want to sit back and be entertained by watching a game of football on a Friday night.

The AFL gave up on the diehard footy fans decades ago. They know that they're tragic losers that will love their club no matter what, and keep watching regardless - but they're a dying breed and they don't pay the bills.

The 'theatre goers', families, and the 'three Gs' (Grannies, Girls, Gays) are who they target. That's where the cash is.

It's like going to a 'gaming venue' these days. You can see how much they value the old school punter betting on the horses, compared to the pokie players, cocktail drinkers and cashed up millennials having a night out.
The TAB used to be the epicentre of the joint - now it's tucked away in the corner and the old punters are considered vermin just annoyingly taking up space.

That's exactly how the networks and the AFL view all the angry, bitter old grey haired has-beens.

They don't cater the game for them. And Ch7 sure as hell don't cater their coverage for them.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

As Barham notes, there’s a huge advantage to having diverse callers and experts in the coverage, as they bring a different view that attracts a different, and potentially bigger, audience.

“So if you’re commercially focused, I would have thought it’s a really good way to go.....

 

[Tas]

Once again, yet again, you're being naive and short sighted. And you're missing the point entirely.

AFL is an entertainment product. Ch7 present that product, and attempt to make it as appealing as they can to as many people as they can, and they sell those eyeballs to advertisers.

Playing football, knowing about football, being a good analyst etc. etc. is barely relevant.

Ch7 will present the footy however they can in order to make as many people watch it as they can.

Believe it or not, a relatively small amount of their viewers are washed up old losers that actually care about the detailed, technical analysis of the game.

The rest are people that want to sit back and be entertained by watching a game of football on a Friday night.

The AFL gave up on the diehard footy fans decades ago. They know that they're tragic losers that will love their club no matter what, and keep watching regardless - but they're a dying breed and they don't pay the bills.

The 'theatre goers', families, and the 'three Gs' (Grannies, Girls, Gays) are who they target. That's where the cash is.

It's like going to a 'gaming venue' these days. You can see how much they value the old school punter betting on the horses, compared to the pokie players, cocktail drinkers and cashed up millennials having a night out.
The TAB used to be the epicentre of the joint - now it's tucked away in the corner and the old punters are considered vermin just annoyingly taking up space.

That's exactly how the networks and the AFL view all the angry, bitter old grey haired has-beens.

They don't cater the game for them. And Ch7 sure as hell don't cater their coverage for them.

Is it lonely on your soapbox?

A corporate doesn't give a s**t about anyone, only money. It is very rare for a sport to have approximately 50/50 split in viewership between men and women, AFL is in that position. It would be fair to assume Carey isn't popular with the ladies given his off-field antics, it makes sense to dump him no matter how good his views are on football.

The reality is the average guy isn't going to lose any sleep if Carey is there or not, we wouldn't care if they put the testicle biter on as special comments. I am not sure if women care or not if Carey is there, or if they care or not if there is more female representation. I couldn't give a s**t if everyone in the broadcasting side was female as long as they do a half decent job. I don't know if any of this s**t means anything or not to a woman, I am not a woman so I don't have an opinion. I think corporations pandering to me would irk me more than just ignoring me though but it's hard to tell, I don't have that lived experience. I watch AFLW, I expect the vast majority in that side of broadcasting to be women, I'd be disappointed if they forced in some sausage into that for diversity.

 

[Lavender Bushranger]

Is it lonely on your soapbox?

A corporate doesn't give a s**t about anyone, only money. It is very rare for a sport to have approximately 50/50 split in viewership between men and women, AFL is in that position. It would be fair to assume Carey isn't popular with the ladies given his off-field antics, it makes sense to dump him no matter how good his views are on football.

The reality is the average guy isn't going to lose any sleep if Carey is there or not, we wouldn't care if they put the testicle biter on as special comments. I am not sure if women care or not if Carey is there, or if they care or not if there is more female representation. I couldn't give a s**t if everyone in the broadcasting side was female as long as they do a half decent job. I don't know if any of this s**t means anything or not to a woman, I am not a woman so I don't have an opinion. I think corporations pandering to me would irk me more than just ignoring me though but it's hard to tell, I don't have that lived experience. I watch AFLW, I expect the vast majority in that side of broadcasting to be women, I'd be disappointed if they forced in some sausage into that for diversity.

Cool post, but I don't know why you responded to me?