Second Captains

Brock Turnpike

yosser hughes wrote: »

If I ever need counselling, I won't be looking Ritchie up.

You certainly won't if you're spelling it like that.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

Utopia Parkway

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Next Tuesday I believe.

yosser hughes

Brock Turnpike wrote: »

You certainly won't if you're spelling it like that.

Nothing wrong with my spelling Einstein.
Scarlet for you and the eejit who thanked your post.

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

Brock Turnpike wrote: »

You certainly won't if you're spelling it like that.

yosser hughes wrote: »

Nothing wrong with my spelling Einstein.
Scarlet for you and the eejit who thanked your post.

He's probably thinking of the County CounCil...

Embarrasing.

dulux99

I really enjoyed the Kimmage interview. I admire his conviction but he also seems like a deeply unhappy guy, I get the sense that it's not just doping in sports that he's angry about either. His comparison of the Dublin footballers using some gamesmanship to the fixing of a bike race was absurd also, the two situations are nothing alike. Non the less he's a very interesting fella and I could have listened to him speaking for another hour.

Icemancometh

I think the spelling jibe was to do with Ritchie (sic) rather than Richie.

lawred2

Icemancometh wrote: »

I think the spelling jibe was to do with Ritchie (sic) rather than Richie.

That's what I would have thought

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

yosser hughes

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Good man Pat you're a follower, run with the hare and hunt with the hound
Phucking dunce

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

yosser hughes

yosser hughes wrote: »

"Hippo wrote: »

so far ahead of the competition it's unreal. I'm really not sure what some people expect from it.

I agree with you that it's well ahead of the competition.
I don't expect much either,it's good value.
I just disagree with your view on the Kimmage interview.
You can understand that, can't you?

Read the last sentence and thought "Good lad".

Patww79

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Without us followers there can't be leaders.[/quote]
Mourinho-esque comment I would say

Brock Turnpike

yosser hughes wrote: »

Nothing wrong with my spelling Einstein.
Scarlet for you and the eejit who thanked your post.

Whoosh!

yosser hughes

Brock Turnpike wrote: »

Whoosh!

Nope.
Let's be clear, you wrote a smart arse comment referring to my spelling. Which is lame enough in itself.
You didn't know 'counselling' was spelled that way.
Now you're trying to pretend it was something else.
Anyway, good luck to you.

Aidric

dulux99 wrote: »

I really enjoyed the Kimmage interview. I admire his conviction but he also seems like a deeply unhappy guy, I get the sense that it's not just doping in sports that he's angry about either. His comparison of the Dublin footballers using some gamesmanship to the fixing of a bike race was absurd also, the two situations are nothing alike. Non the less he's a very interesting fella and I could have listened to him speaking for another hour.

It’s hard to love Kimmage but you have to respect him. He is a bit like that friend who is so relentlessly negative that they eventually get dropped, probably unfairly. The interview itself was brilliant and pushed Kimmage in to a lot of self reflection.

I got the impression that he himself often struggles with the lonely plow he furrows but the anger drives him forward.

All things considered we need journalists like Kimmage asking the tough questions. God knows we have enough sheep in the media these days, most of them bought and paid for.

Dread Pirate Roberts

The Grand slam coverage was biased and sycophantic.No one does back slapping/self congratulating like the rugby boys. No mention of Rob Kearney's knock on or Aki's shoulder charge.Horgan,Hick and Thornley had nothing to say. It was arselickology.
Every player is the best in the world in their position ,cheerleading, myopic nonsense devoid of any objective scrutiny. More of that fare and I will be unsubscribing.

dulux99

Dread Pirate Roberts wrote: »

The Grand slam coverage was biased and sycophantic.No one does back slapping/self congratulating like the rugby boys. No mention of Rob Kearney's knock on or Aki's shoulder charge.Horgan,Hick and Thornley had nothing to say. It was arselickology.
Every player is the best in the world in their position ,cheerleading, myopic nonsense devoid of any objective scrutiny. More of that fare and I will be unsubscribing.

Christ. The team won the grand slam ffs. They literally couldn't have been any more successful. Second captains are an Irish podcast run by Irish people and therefore Irish fans.

Ol' Donie

Dread Pirate Roberts wrote: »

The Grand slam coverage was biased and sycophantic.No one does back slapping/self congratulating like the rugby boys. No mention of Rob Kearney's knock on or Aki's shoulder charge.Horgan,Hick and Thornley had nothing to say. It was arselickology.
Every player is the best in the world in their position ,cheerleading, myopic nonsense devoid of any objective scrutiny. More of that fare and I will be unsubscribing.

As you wish

Dread Pirate Roberts

dulux99 wrote: »

Christ. The team won the grand slam ffs. They literally couldn't have been any more successful. Second captains are an Irish podcast run by Irish people and therefore Irish fans.

If they are taking my money every month I have a right to an opinion.
I am just sick of the singing when your winning approach to Irish Rugby.
Best appearing at the trial up north, the journalists being frozen out, the Grobelaar drugs issue and selecting players who are only here because of the dosh are all issues I feel have been glossed over.

I expect measured coverage. They are quick to point the finger at a ref or at perceived cheap shots when they lose.
I witnessed the same on the fence approach on OTB from BOD regarding Aki and Stander's selection and similar from Irish commentators regarding the Grobbelar vs zero tolerance drugs policy. It took an outsider in Paul Kimmage to speak up, something he doubled down on in his latest pod on Second Captains,so i give the pod its dues for airing that.

But its just sunshine lollipops and rainbows with Horgan,Thornley et al and then you have Matt Williams referring to Ireland as "we" , the poor fella has Stockholm Syndrome.
It's such a blatant circle jerk.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8qQrCVu--U

Even in the comments below the video you can se people commenting that BOD hasn't given an opinion at all.

To be fair my issue probably isn't Second Captains specific but more of a rugby coverage issue on the whole with Murray Kinsella being the cheerleader in chief.

lawred2

Nobody is taking your money. You freely subscribed. They are just collecting the agreed subscription fee.

As for the rugby coverage... I'm not sure what else you expect really.

Imagine if the Ireland soccer team won the Euros, would you expect an analysis of a possibly dodgy tackle midway though the final? Or a celebration of the team's success?

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

Dread Pirate Roberts

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Oh I genuinely love the podcast. I really do. But when you start to notice how bad and unbalanced the rugby coverage is you cannot unhear it.

dr.kenneth noisewater

Dread Pirate Roberts wrote:

Oh I genuinely love the podcast. I really do. But when you start to notice how bad and unbalanced the rugby coverage is you cannot unhear it.

They're very open to ways of improving the pod or content they cover so maybe drop them a mail

Dread Pirate Roberts

lawred2 wrote: »

Nobody is taking your money. You freely subscribed. They are just collecting the agreed subscription fee.

As for the rugby coverage... I'm not sure what else you expect really.

Imagine if the Ireland soccer team won the Euros, would you expect an analysis of a possibly dodgy tackle midway though the final? Or a celebration of the team's success?

I have already alluded to what i expect. Balanced coverage .A shoulder charge to the head , that has been sanctioned in many other games and an illegitimate try in the first few minutes are not the same as the example you proffered.

I freely subscribed and I am freely criticising as is my right.

Most of SC's coverage is top notch but the atmosphere turns once the rugby is on.Maybe because Ken isn't there to call them on it.

Ruggamatrix on youtube is the best rugby coverage I have encountered but unfortunately they couldn't continue on due to lack of finances with a prevailing disinterest among their local audience in Australia.
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=ruggamatrix
They spoke about every country Ireland included through objective eyes from a distance.Not the winks and nods we get up here.

The Irish coverage is incestuous jobs for the boys stuff. Dont upset the lads or i might not get the next scoop.Too friendly.

Dread Pirate Roberts

dulux99 wrote: »

Christ. The team won the grand slam ffs. They literally couldn't have been any more successful. Second captains are an Irish podcast run by Irish people and therefore Irish fans.

World Service

Utopia Parkway

Of course the coverage for the rugby win is glowing. Only the 3rd Irish Grand Slam ever and they were comfortably the best side in the tournament. I wouldn't expect them to be agonising over a slight knock on in one of the 20 tries they scored. There are decisions in every tournament that go for you or against you. England had one in the Wales game.

The coverage has been glowing because they kept winning impressively. Did you expect them to have the pitchforks out for them or something?

It's just odd to think they should focus on the negatives more after a Grand Slam win. They don't come around very often so people want to hear about what the team and management did right. Not on what went wrong. And not much went wrong so they deserve a bit of praise for it before we all get on with our lives.

Brock Turnpike

yosser hughes wrote: »

Nope.
Let's be clear, you wrote a smart arse comment referring to my spelling. Which is lame enough in itself.
You didn't know 'counselling' was spelled that way.
Now you're trying to pretend it was something else.
Anyway, good luck to you.

Read it again. You were talking about not using Richie Sadlier for counselling. I pointed out you wouldn't be if you were spelling it "Ritchie".

yosser hughes

Brock Turnpike wrote: »

Read it again. You were talking about not using Richie Sadlier for counselling. I pointed out you wouldn't be if you were spelling it "Ritchie".

Yeah,whatever pal.
Richard is his name. The shortened version of Richard can be spelled many ways and commonly spelled Ritchie. It's called hypocoristic.
For example: Ritchie Blackmore; Ritchie Valens etc. Pretty pathetic if you are commenting on that anyway.
I don't believe you though. Pointless discussion. Maybe try to be less of a smartarse anyway?
Off topic,so apologies to everyone else.
I'm done.

Dots1982

Is richie sadlier a clinical psychologist? Do you not need a doctorate to be qualified do that? Is he Doctor Richie?

Not related to argument above.