Opinion The calm after the storm - commentary

[Black_White]

I've never seen a commentator as biased towards Collingwood than Gerard Healy. Chief is hit and miss. He can call a good play as he sees it, and did have some good things to say about us - however he can get caught up in the Pies hate.

Funnily enough I find channel 7 praises us a lot, but can't stand to listen to anyone but Dennis.

You do know this is Dennis's last season?

 

[joff]

Press red for Ed every week would be fantastic

 

[The_Anvil]

You do know this is Dennis's last season?

Sadly, I do. Channel 7 would do well to poach Michael Christian as a play by play instead of Rompingwins.

 

[Swanny2010]

At least Dermott barracked for Collongwood as a child, so a soft spot there somewhere

 

[Dynamics]

But Eddiebetts, Eastonwood and Farrenray are all just one word names aren't they?
I never hear them called any differently

Do you ever remember Lockyer ever being called Lockyer? It was always "Tarkynlockyer". I know it's an unusual name, but what the hell?

 

[Swanny2010]

Bruce,Lingy and Dermot don't draw breath even under water.Lings special comments now is just a running commentary

Why don't fellow commentators answer any of the 84 questions B r u c e asks during the game???

 

[Aishofhearts]

Would be nice if they could be envious of something again.
Like lots of flags

4 clubs have won a flag in the last decade, we are one of those privileged few and just quietly 15 flags is quite a lot (the 2 cheaters aside)

Or would you prefer to be a Bulldog or Demon fan waiting over half a century and knowing they'll most likely die before ever seeing a single flag in their entire lives?

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Why don't fellow commentators answer any of the 84 questions B r u c e asks during the game???

Because he's painful so they go via the ignore him route

 

[Saintly Viewed]

4 clubs have won a flag in the last decade, we are one of those privileged few and just quietly 15 flags is quite a lot (the 2 cheaters aside)

Or would you prefer to be a Bulldog or Demon fan waiting over half a century and knowing they'll most likely die before ever seeing a single flag in their entire lives?

Two I've seen is better than none.
15 overall is better than 14 etc.

I am what I am, pure Collingwood.

It's just, I want to be greedy and win lots of flags. I'm awaiting a list of enough elite to draw numerous flags or an era of multiple success.
I'm greedy if somewhat realistic the footy arithmetic is a complicated business. Only one team wins once a year.

 

[Dynamics]

Why don't fellow commentators answer any of the 84 questions B r u c e asks during the game???

You just feel like one of them could ask those questions aaany minute now, don't yeeew?

Ooh, especially the questions about Poppy.

Poppy? POPPY! POPPAAAAAAAAEEE!

 

[Anzacday]

I dislike most commentators as majority of them don't call the game.
As an aside, it must be terrible to be blind and listen to some of them.
I don't usually take much notice of any perceived bias however, they were disgraceful in this instance.
It sounded like our bad decision making was the reason we were losing - ironically we were a couple of goals up at the time.

 

[Vicky Park]

Ah, I wanted to avoid starting a new thread for this, but I couldn't find an appropriate thread to post.

We all (well most of us) love to complain about bias commentary, we've got our game faces on and any criticism of our team is taken on as a personal insult. I'm just watching the replay of the West Coast game, and now that I know the result, I can sit back an analyse a little better what's actually occurring.

Unfortunately for me, I have to endure the commentary again.

It really does make me laugh watching it back, how many stupid and inaccurate comments they actually make.

Eg. During the last quarter, Jeremy McGovern picks off a ball coming in long. He decides to play on quickly and pinpoint a kick down to a team mate, and Gerard Healy says "great kick from McGovern". But he spoke too soon, Brayden Maynard intercepts, then ends up going back and kicking a goal. Healy ends up eating his words and he knows he looks like a fool because then he goes searching for an excuse.

About 15 minutes later, we've got the ball up on the wing and Aish has to stall because he's got really nothing coming at him. He ends up kicking long to a contest between Varcoe and BUTLER, a like for like contest, not a mismatch of any kind. Gerard Healy chimes in again with "terrible play by Collingwood", and Jason Dunstall adds "why kick long to Varcoe on MCGOVERN? That makes no sense." The play rolls on, the ball trickles over the boundary line and then Dunstall starts to expand. "These are the decision errors that would have Nathan Buckley sitting up in his box thinking why would you do that?"

I know they're only minor things and everyone makes mistakes, but like I said, when you can look back without the emotion of the game, it really just makes you laugh at how much they seem to want one team to prosper and they'll constantly bash one side regardless of the fact that this side has dominated all the key areas and is winning the game.

I'm probably reading too much into it, but I just hate how the media really dictates what people like. We constantly see highlights of and hear about guys like Betts, Stringer, Wingard, Rioli, Bontempelli like they're the only 5 players in the league. All great players yes, but if Eddie Betts kicked the goal that Steele Sidebottom did last week, we'd still be hearing about it. I watch a lot of football, and I rarely ever feel that commentary is neutral, they always have a lean towards one team and it shouldn't matter about ladder position etc, call the game as it is. Collingwood were winning the game, they're the team worthy of praise, but rather we hear about how many opportunities we're blowing or how we're "just hanging in there". West Coast are a top 8 side, the heat should have been on them, not the other way round. Instead we just continue to hear about how West Coast are still playing well enough to run over the top of us.

Anywho, rant over.

Got any moments that you've heard commentators get too involved and go the early crow on something only be made to look foolish?

I'm of the view that the apparent anti-Collingwood bias of most commentary is over stated. For instance, I haven't been all that convinced of Healy's bias against us. But, in watching the replay, I'd have to agree with you. He and King maintained a consistent 'West Coast will win this' commentary throughout the fourth quarter, despite mounting evidence to the contrary. It was only in the dying minutes, when all hope was lost (to them), that much praise was given to the Pies. Disappointing.

 

[Markfs]

Ah, I wanted to avoid starting a new thread for this, but I couldn't find an appropriate thread to post.

We all (well most of us) love to complain about bias commentary, we've got our game faces on and any criticism of our team is taken on as a personal insult. I'm just watching the replay of the West Coast game, and now that I know the result, I can sit back an analyse a little better what's actually occurring.

Unfortunately for me, I have to endure the commentary again.

It really does make me laugh watching it back, how many stupid and inaccurate comments they actually make.

Eg. During the last quarter, Jeremy McGovern picks off a ball coming in long. He decides to play on quickly and pinpoint a kick down to a team mate, and Gerard Healy says "great kick from McGovern". But he spoke too soon, Brayden Maynard intercepts, then ends up going back and kicking a goal. Healy ends up eating his words and he knows he looks like a fool because then he goes searching for an excuse.

About 15 minutes later, we've got the ball up on the wing and Aish has to stall because he's got really nothing coming at him. He ends up kicking long to a contest between Varcoe and BUTLER, a like for like contest, not a mismatch of any kind. Gerard Healy chimes in again with "terrible play by Collingwood", and Jason Dunstall adds "why kick long to Varcoe on MCGOVERN? That makes no sense." The play rolls on, the ball trickles over the boundary line and then Dunstall starts to expand. "These are the decision errors that would have Nathan Buckley sitting up in his box thinking why would you do that?"

I know they're only minor things and everyone makes mistakes, but like I said, when you can look back without the emotion of the game, it really just makes you laugh at how much they seem to want one team to prosper and they'll constantly bash one side regardless of the fact that this side has dominated all the key areas and is winning the game.

I'm probably reading too much into it, but I just hate how the media really dictates what people like. We constantly see highlights of and hear about guys like Betts, Stringer, Wingard, Rioli, Bontempelli like they're the only 5 players in the league. All great players yes, but if Eddie Betts kicked the goal that Steele Sidebottom did last week, we'd still be hearing about it. I watch a lot of football, and I rarely ever feel that commentary is neutral, they always have a lean towards one team and it shouldn't matter about ladder position etc, call the game as it is. Collingwood were winning the game, they're the team worthy of praise, but rather we hear about how many opportunities we're blowing or how we're "just hanging in there". West Coast are a top 8 side, the heat should have been on them, not the other way round. Instead we just continue to hear about how West Coast are still playing well enough to run over the top of us.

Anywho, rant over.

Got any moments that you've heard commentators get too involved and go the early crow on something only be made to look foolish?

I've been in WA for far too long and the accusations of bias against the Eagles from Melbourne people havent stopped since day one.

However, I thought the Fox people were half barracking for the Pies on the weekend. That is my honest opinion. I hate Dunstall and he seems to commentate us every week. He seems to work at Fox to promote the Hawks and their agenda. I doubt that he's off the Hawks payroll. However, I thought he was barracking for us a bit on the weekend. In fact, I was less frustrated listening to Dunstall than any other game this season. And believe me, when I turned on the tv and heard him speak, my eyes rolled and i let out a sigh so its not as if its a joy for me to listen to him. Thats my view on it..

One thing, I didnt particularly like how they laughed at Ed's passion. I'm getting sick of it. It's an old joke

 

[Markfs]

I'm of the view that the apparent anti-Collingwood bias of most commentary is over stated. For instance, I haven't been all that convinced of Healy's bias against us. But, in watching the replay, I'd have to agree with you. He and King maintained a consistent 'West Coast will win this' commentary throughout the fourth quarter, despite mounting evidence to the contrary. It was only in the dying minutes, when all hope was lost (to them), that much praise was given to the Pies. Disappointing.

Is that bias? I thought that they were just trying to be "experts" and predict the future..... I'm sure people at BF can empathise with that. Actually, I thougtht they were lamenting our lost opportunities. Funny how people can interpret things differently

 

[Jasper84]

The poor commentary raised it's head again last night. The one that stood out for me was after a review, we were awarded a goal. The way Dennis said "It's a draw", I could have sworn that he must have been watching his puppy get run over.

 

[SuperSub17]

Wayne Carey can never call another game as far as I'm concerned. The bias that dribbles from his mouth is unbelievable.

Every time Bontempelli went near the ball it was an immediate circle jerk. In the last quarter apparently he dropped a mark deliberately

Then of course they highlighted all the questionable decisions in our favour but not the other way...