This is an open question and not a direct criticism of Matthew Lloyd who is a highly decorated champion of the game with a premiership medal, 5 x All Australian, 3 x Coleman Medals to name some of his achievements. But does anyone share my opinion that he seems to take a negative view or puts a negative spin on nearly all of his football media commentary?
Lloyd seems to target negative aspects of the game or pick out teams or individual players who are going through form slumps. He doesn't pull any punches either, he will point fingers and name names when stating why a certain team isn't up to the standard of the better teams in the competition.
A lot of his neutral articles have been on Essendon's trials and tribulations over the past few years and he also writes a lot about the role of key forwards, which only seems fair based on his playing career.
Melbourne seem to cop the brunt of his criticism and some of his articles over the 2015/2016 seasons include:
Melbourne a team in need of a heart: "Melbourne have not won two home and away games in a row for almost five years, Yes, that's right, five years. It's a sad statistic."
Melbourne Demons coach Paul Roos out of form and running out of time: "Paul Roos has had a horror fortnight as coach of the Melbourne Football Club."
Paul Roos must now take Melbourne to the next level: "Melbourne's long-term future rests solely in the hands of senior coach Paul Roos."
He seems very harsh for a recently retired player. At times it's almost as if he expects every player to play a better game than the week before for their entire career. The other thing I have noticed in his spoken/live media he really tries to be positive, but a positive comment will be phrased as "This is the sort of stuff that Player X needs to be doing week in week out." A backhanded compliment of sorts.
Damien Barrett is the only one who easily surpasses him in bringing down my mood each time I hear him speak or read something he has written. But Barrett should not be the benchmark as Barrett is widely regarded as a gutter journalist.
Even the fans that perhaps take their footy a bit too seriously would agree that as a spectator footy is meant to be a leisure activity. I want footy to be an outlet where I can feel good about something just for a moment, or a weekend, or even an entire season. There is a reason why the supporters from clubs that disappoint year after year still get excited about a new season, the fans are looking for something to give them a bit of hope and joy. I think there is an opportunity for the footy media to exploit this or at least take advantage of what the public want to read about. Even another article on how Nick Smith is the game's most underrated player is more captivating than reading about another form slump from Travis Cloke.
Compare Matthew Lloyd to Robbo. Lloyd is smarter, more in touch with the game, more articulate in that he can actually put together a sentence. Robbo's opinion pieces are often showering praise on A-Graders time after time, in awe of their talent. For this (along with his obvious "common man" appearance and persona) he is viewed as a much loved "man of the people" by many.
Is my perception of Lloyd accurate or have I misunderstood his intent?
If you agree that he can be overly critical or negative, do you think this is his natural character or is he possibly influenced or guided by the frowning Caroline Wilson, the chief football writer at The Age?
Lloyd seems to target negative aspects of the game or pick out teams or individual players who are going through form slumps. He doesn't pull any punches either, he will point fingers and name names when stating why a certain team isn't up to the standard of the better teams in the competition.
A lot of his neutral articles have been on Essendon's trials and tribulations over the past few years and he also writes a lot about the role of key forwards, which only seems fair based on his playing career.
Melbourne seem to cop the brunt of his criticism and some of his articles over the 2015/2016 seasons include:
Melbourne a team in need of a heart: "Melbourne have not won two home and away games in a row for almost five years, Yes, that's right, five years. It's a sad statistic."
Melbourne Demons coach Paul Roos out of form and running out of time: "Paul Roos has had a horror fortnight as coach of the Melbourne Football Club."
Paul Roos must now take Melbourne to the next level: "Melbourne's long-term future rests solely in the hands of senior coach Paul Roos."
He seems very harsh for a recently retired player. At times it's almost as if he expects every player to play a better game than the week before for their entire career. The other thing I have noticed in his spoken/live media he really tries to be positive, but a positive comment will be phrased as "This is the sort of stuff that Player X needs to be doing week in week out." A backhanded compliment of sorts.
Damien Barrett is the only one who easily surpasses him in bringing down my mood each time I hear him speak or read something he has written. But Barrett should not be the benchmark as Barrett is widely regarded as a gutter journalist.
Even the fans that perhaps take their footy a bit too seriously would agree that as a spectator footy is meant to be a leisure activity. I want footy to be an outlet where I can feel good about something just for a moment, or a weekend, or even an entire season. There is a reason why the supporters from clubs that disappoint year after year still get excited about a new season, the fans are looking for something to give them a bit of hope and joy. I think there is an opportunity for the footy media to exploit this or at least take advantage of what the public want to read about. Even another article on how Nick Smith is the game's most underrated player is more captivating than reading about another form slump from Travis Cloke.
Compare Matthew Lloyd to Robbo. Lloyd is smarter, more in touch with the game, more articulate in that he can actually put together a sentence. Robbo's opinion pieces are often showering praise on A-Graders time after time, in awe of their talent. For this (along with his obvious "common man" appearance and persona) he is viewed as a much loved "man of the people" by many.
Is my perception of Lloyd accurate or have I misunderstood his intent?
If you agree that he can be overly critical or negative, do you think this is his natural character or is he possibly influenced or guided by the frowning Caroline Wilson, the chief football writer at The Age?
