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

Dots1982

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

It's nowhere near the levels of when Molloy and Gilroy get into full flow. Not even close in the slightest.[/quote]

To each team their own I guess.

Jayesdiem

Dots1982 wrote: »

I drop into this thread from time to time to remind some of its posters, who need reminding, if it wasn’t for newstalk and OTB, radio sports coverage in Ireland would be ****e

But at least it would be sport instead of sport through a sociological lens. Who wants that?

podmu80

"I don't think Newstalk or Second Captains have an agenda as such, naturally some of the presenters are more inclined to lean further one way than others but that doesn't mean it's a conspiracy at a board level. In my view anyway."

They all lean in the same way though. It makes for dull radio in my opinion.

gormdubhgorm

Tell me how wrote: »

To each their own.

You're right not all questions have to be unnecessarily padded.
The point of the excerpt I posted was that Joe is also aware of that point.

Fair enough.

Dots1982

I would say on the Irish podcasts i listen to it makes me think we are a very opinionated people until someone in the same room has a different opinion.

Far too much agreement on second captains and Wooly’s show. I probably need to be specific to show what I’m talking about.

Jayesdiem

Tell me how wrote: »

Dots1982 wrote: »

I’m curious the people who post here who dislike the OTB agenda...do any of them subscribe to second captains? Because their liberal agenda grates on me. It was a factor when I unsubscribed.

I used to post here fairly regularly but until today hadn't for a number of months. I stopped posting and unfollowed the thread because I was sick of 80% of posts being about how bad the show was and how the posters were moving the dial and yet when I come back, I see the same posters, posting the same dislike for the show.

People have a right to an opinion, and to voice it but I don't understand persisting to listen to any show if you dislike it so much.

I don't think Newstalk or Second Captains have an agenda as such, naturally some of the presenters are more inclined to lean further one way than others but that doesn't mean it's a conspiracy at a board level. In my view anyway.

I think a lot of people, including myself, don't tune in anymore. All OTB podcasts used to be on subscribe in my iTunes. It was unmissable. Now, I'll scan the podcast description and if it contains the names Molloy or Gilroy or is one of those all too common and mundane GAA/rugby player interviews, I'm not downloading. I'll usually make an exception for the paper review because of the quality of some of the guests who I like (Declan Lynch) and dislike (Paul Kimmage) in equal measure and if the 'highlights' podcast has a unique angle I *might* listen. Conveniently, each politically-correct OTB show has a sports-centric alternative elsewhere and if I want to listen to current affairs or human interest shows, they exist too. None of this negates my feelings towards Gilroy and Molloy as objectionable individuals. Not that they'd want to but I just couldn't have a pint with them because I'd have offended them in 60s because I am independent of thought.

Slipperydodger

How do ye think Molloy is doing on TV3 today?

anthonyjmaher

I think he's doing okay. Having ROG and Jennings on the panel is not necessarily helping him though, as they are not the most animated of panelists. But he's doing okay.

But if I hear that f**king Shane Williams advert one more time I'm gonna put my boot through the TV.

duffman13

Dots1982 wrote: »

I’m curious the people who post here who dislike the OTB agenda...do any of them subscribe to second captains? Because their liberal agenda grates on me. It was a factor when I unsubscribed.

I subscribe to second captains aswell as listening to OTB. I liked both shows but I'm finding the OTB presenters grating more and more in the last few months.

I think at the end of the day my main issue with the show is that they are almost taking it too seriously now. Peak OTB both before second captain's and after, the shows best spells were when it was balanced banter with great contributors. The contributors have gotten worse while the lads have begun taking themselves way too seriously. I'll probably fall back into the show in a while and it may be cyclical but I'm expressing my opinion on the show as of late.

anthonyjmaher

Tell me how wrote: »

I don't think Newstalk or Second Captains have an agenda as such, naturally some of the presenters are more inclined to lean further one way than others but that doesn't mean it's a conspiracy at a board level. In my view anyway.

My issue is that it is labelled as a sports show, and far too often the story is about people not wearing colourful boot laces to support gay pride, or how oppressed a certain women's game is, or how badly black players were treated in Boston in the 1970s, or how a player should have been barred for life for taking drugs. It's a contrived effort to force their "superior" morals down our throats.

More and more of the content is based around Global Village type subjects, where Ger and Joe get to shake their heads and look down their noses at the behaviour of lesser civilized human beings. Well I don't tune in to improve my moral values. If it's a sports show then cover f**king sports, and leave the SJW stuff to every other program on the damned station.

Tell me how

anthonyjmaher wrote:

More and more of the content is based around Global Village type subjects, where Ger and Joe get to shake their heads and look down their noses at the behaviour of lesser civilized human beings. Well I don't tune in to improve my moral values. If it's a sports show then cover f**king sports, and leave the SJW stuff to every other program on the damned station.

My issue is that it is labelled as a sports show, and far too often the story is about people not wearing colourful boot laces to support gay pride, or how oppressed a certain women's game is, or how badly black players were treated in Boston in the 1970s, or how a player should have been barred for life for taking drugs. It's a contrived effort to force their "superior" morals down our throats.

We have different views on this.

I don't think it's contrived to be anything, there are elements where sports overlap with real life and of course the participants are all human, that makes it interesting to discuss some of these items in a sports context.

Also, I don't think social elements come in to it as much some feel they do.

I much rather this type of show than the banal, mundane yawn fest with topics limited to elements that include phrases like "give it 110%, at the end of the day and it's the result that counts". We have Sky Sports News for that.

Some here don't like them turning a light on drugs in sport, I think that topic is both very interesting, and very relevant.

Jayesdiem

It's not comparable with Sky Sports News because that is a factual (supposedly) news reporting show. The human interest angle taken by OTB is ok from time to time, if that were only the case.....I your grasp of the show is the wrong way around. This is not a sports show that reports on social issues; it is a show on social issues that thread through sport. Most stories regress to that no matter what the sport or who is presenting. The objective of this show is to tell us how we should be living our lives and to educate us on the burning social issues in life that should concern us. How ludicrous is that? The overt focus on drugs in sport is just the wide base from which they pursue that objective. The two guys see themselves as 'broadcasters', not 'sports journalists' which is why they can't just sit back and enjoy the sport for what it is. This is why they expect professional sports people to be "role models" when these people are not that and probably don't want to be.

ballsymchugh

I think the problem might be that the show is just too long. There's no reason whatsoever for the football show, when they're just regurgitating the same schpiel from earlier in the show, with different contributors.
someone asked earlier if OTBAM was an attempt at a sports radio station... i really hope not. 5 live in the UK is about the best and they don't stretch it out. if kilbane wasn't part of the show, they wouldn't have had the interviews with the ex footballers over the past few months (waddle, shearer, neville etc) to pad the show out, and then refer back to them for the rest of the week.

the only time the show is any good nowadays is when Nathan is presenting, or if you're lucky, Dave.
when second captains presented, i never got the feeling that there was an agenda, just ken's ramblings on the football show were quality. i haven't listened to their podcast since some time in 2014, when i gave up hope of a bit of league of ireland coverage.

Jayesdiem

I do like Dave McIntyre but even he falls into the trap of pontification. Joe was away for the paper review recently but you'd never have known it because McIntyre did such a good impersonation of him. Outrage, compassion and concern all round.

gormdubhgorm

Tell me how wrote: »

We have different views on this.

I don't think it's contrived to be anything, there are elements where sports overlap with real life and of course the participants are all human, that makes it interesting to discuss some of these items in a sports context.

Also, I don't think social elements come in to it as much some feel they do.

I much rather this type of show than the banal, mundane yawn fest with topics limited to elements that include phrases like "give it 110%, at the end of the day and it's the result that counts". We have Sky Sports News for that.

Some here don't like them turning a light on drugs in sport, I think that topic is both very interesting, and very relevant.

I can't agree with this all.
The show is terribly contrived at this stage.
The point where the show went off the cliff for me was the faux animated discussion about the Cork fans using Rebel flags.
There was no nuanced debate on it all and it really showed them up for thier lack of research on the issue.

There is a you tube channel I listen to called tifo football.
It discusses soccer tactics well researched etc.
It has interesting sports guests and no cliches.
You can tell that the presenters are left leaning politically.
It is not as polished as some media outlets.
But they do not preach they do not sneer at those with opposing views.

Example:

Wolverhampton Wanderers tactics

Example:

podcast with C.Regis:

In contrast I would now view OTB as a "banal, mundane yawn fest".

They are like the spotty teenagers who are trying to be clever to impress the girl, but they don't know what they are talking about in thier rush to sound 'interesting'.

To me they are not real sports journalists, they are Arts/English students, who fell into journalism and happen to like sport. Unfortunately for them they were not good enough to play it at a pro level, so they ended up presenting a 'sports show'.
In thier getting 'behind the issues of sport' the bread and butter stuff is ignored in favour of soliloquies and platitudes.
The basics should not be forgotten.
Inform the listener, get good guests, let the story be told.

Otherwise, it is the presenters that become the story, like a bad ref at a football match looking to get the attention.

monstermag

"Drink Heineken sensibly" How many pieces of silver OTB?

monstermag

"Drink Heineken sensibly" How many pieces of silver OTB?

Quintis

monstermag wrote: »

"Drink Heineken sensibly" How many pieces of silver OTB?

I mentioned it previously too, they also promote gambling without any hesitation, gambling has ruined more lives than and doping in sport. The odd piece with a former sportsperson who had an addiction doesn't hide this

Ol' Donie

Aye caramba.

OTB when Wes Houlahan retires = The Tom Dunne Show when David Bowie died.

gormdubhgorm

Ol' Donie wrote: »

Aye caramba.

OTB when Wes Houlahan retires = The Tom Dunne Show when David Bowie died.

I listened to a bit of it where Giles was talking to Nathan Murphy about him.
It was alright. I even managed to learn that both Giles and Bremner scored lots of goals each from midfield.
There was no such thing as defensive midfield player in those days Nathan.

I did like Giles take on small players and how managers don't trust them.
I stopped listening to it then.
Was there any mention of Pep and the all the small players Barcelona had?

siblers

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

I can't agree with this all.
The show is terribly contrived at this stage.
The point where the show went off the cliff for me was the faux animated discussion about the Cork fans using Rebel flags.
There was no nuanced debate on it all and it really showed them up for thier lack of research on the issue.

There is a you tube channel I listen to called tifo football.
It discusses soccer tactics well researched etc.
It has interesting sports guests and no cliches.
You can tell that the presenters are left leaning politically.
It is not as polished as some media outlets.
But they do not preach they do not sneer at those with opposing views.



In contrast I would now view OTB as a "banal, mundane yawn fest".

They are like the spotty teenagers who are trying to be clever to impress the girl, but they don't know what they are talking about in thier rush to sound 'interesting'.

To me they are not real sports journalists, they are Arts/English students, who fell into journalism and happen to like sport. Unfortunately for them they were not good enough to play it at a pro level, so they ended up presenting a 'sports show'.
In thier getting 'behind the issues of sport' the bread and butter stuff is ignored in favour of soliloquies and platitudes.
The basics should not be forgotten.
Inform the listener, get good guests, let the story be told.

Otherwise, it is the presenters that become the story, like a bad ref at a football match looking to get the attention.

The above is applicable to Ger Gilroy and to an extent Joe Molloy but when Dave and Nathan are on, it's a totally different show. It's actually a proper sports show with no agenda.

The most annoying thing about Joe is that some of the best interviews come from him, he did a very good interview with Anthony Crolla on Tuesday night and I have zero interest in boxing but the problem is, I could tune into him the following day and he will be offended or upset by something and all his good work is instantly undone.

Although, as bad as Ger Gilroy is, no one and I mean no one is as painful as Adrian Barry. Can't stand him

DEFTLEFTHAND

siblers wrote: »

The above is applicable to Ger Gilroy and to an extent Joe Molloy but when Dave and Nathan are on, it's a totally different show. It's actually a proper sports show with no agenda.

The most annoying thing about Joe is that some of the best interviews come from him, he did a very good interview with Anthony Crolla on Tuesday night and I have zero interest in boxing but the problem is, I could tune into him the following day and he will be offended or upset by something and all his good work is instantly undone.

Although, as bad as Ger Gilroy is, no one and I mean no one is as painful as Adrian Barry. Can't stand him

This is what frustrates me about him also. He's a talented broadcaster imo and has a bright future in this industry but he has to stop preaching and pontificating.

His boss should pull him aside and say listen son you're doing a good job but keep the political and social opinions to yourself, you're a sports broadcaster ok not a Talking Head, don't divide your audience.

Faugheen

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

This is what frustrates me about him also. He's a talented broadcaster imo and has a bright future in this industry but he has to stop preaching and pontificating.

His boss should pull him aside and say listen son you're doing a good job but keep the political and social opinions to yourself, you're a sports broadcaster ok not a Talking Head, don't divide your audience.

His boss is Ger Gilroy isn't it?

DEFTLEFTHAND

Faugheen wrote: »

His boss is Ger Gilroy isn't it?

I don't know to be honest.

gormdubhgorm

siblers wrote: »

The above is applicable to Ger Gilroy and to an extent Joe Molloy but when Dave and Nathan are on, it's a totally different show. It's actually a proper sports show with no agenda.

I agree 100% is a decent show to listen to when Gilroy and Molloy are not on it.

As I said before I would love if Newstalk put up a rota for who is anchoring the show,

Tell me how

gormdubhgorm wrote: »

I agree 100% is a decent show to listen to when Gilroy and Molloy are not on it.

Molloy is the main reason I enjoy the show. Enjoy Nathan, Dave, also but Molloy does the very good interviews and any time he hosts the papers review it is worth listening to.

Utopia Parkway

siblers wrote: »

The above is applicable to Ger Gilroy and to an extent Joe Molloy but when Dave and Nathan are on, it's a totally different show. It's actually a proper sports show with no agenda.

The most annoying thing about Joe is that some of the best interviews come from him, he did a very good interview with Anthony Crolla on Tuesday night and I have zero interest in boxing but the problem is, I could tune into him the following day and he will be offended or upset by something and all his good work is instantly undone.

Although, as bad as Ger Gilroy is, no one and I mean no one is as painful as Adrian Barry. Can't stand him

Ger, Joe and Richie are definitely the main social justice crusaders on OTB. Ger and Joe are obvious but I remember Richie having an absolute conniption on twitter over the Ireland fans in Copenhagen last year. Joe in fairness has talent as an interviewer compared to the other two.

I always get the sense that Dave and Nathan would rather just stick to sport and much eye rolling ensues at times with them.

siblers

Utopia Parkway wrote: »

Ger, Joe and Richie are definitely the main social justice crusaders on OTB. Ger and Joe are obvious but I remember Richie having an absolute conniption on twitter over the Ireland fans in Copenhagen last year. Joe in fairness has talent as an interviewer compared to the other two.

I always get the sense that Dave and Nathan would rather just stick to sport and much eye rolling ensues at times with them.

I downloaded a recent Sunday paper review, saw Richie was doing it and immediatley deleted it. I had a look at his twitter feed over the Copenhagen incident, it was painful to say the least

Conservative

The interview with A Crolla was a great example how good Joe can be when cuts out all the SJW stuff.

Dave McIntyre is my favourite of all the presenters - usually a great job on commentary too. I don't hear Nathan as often but he seems fine when I do catch him.

If Ger or Richie are presenting I turn the show off.

ballsymchugh

Utopia Parkway wrote: »

Ger, Joe and Richie are definitely the main social justice crusaders on OTB. Ger and Joe are obvious but I remember Richie having an absolute conniption on twitter over the Ireland fans in Copenhagen last year. Joe in fairness has talent as an interviewer compared to the other two.

I always get the sense that Dave and Nathan would rather just stick to sport and much eye rolling ensues at times with them.

there was a couple of seconds of radio gold some time last week, when nathan and richie were doing the sportsround, and the subject of the cleveland indians ditching their logo came up. richie was very right on about it, until someone texted in asking if Notre Dame should ditch their fighting Irish logo. there was a couple of seconds of silence where richie was thinking why the hell this would be an issue, before realising the situation he has put himself in.