Very disappointed with the Irish Times this morning

Kermit.de.frog

Sir/Madam,

I would like to register a protest against the shocking and offensive use of language in your article on the Rugby (Monday 28th of September). Who do you think you are, the Sunday Independent?

Cesil Brooke,

Dublin 6W

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/international/tv-view-tv3-s-lack-of-a-****-stirrer-not-helping-them-on-gainline-1.2368947?__vfz=c_pages%3D11000002670848

Pink Fairy

Strings!!

pmasterson95

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Sir/Madam,

I would like to register a protest against the shocking and offensive use of language in your article on the Rugby (Monday 27th of September). Who do you think you are, the Sunday Independent?

Cesil Brooke,

Dublin 6W

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/international/tv-view-tv3-s-lack-of-a-****-stirrer-not-helping-them-on-gainline-1.2368947?__vfz=c_pages%3D11000002670848

Jesus theres delicate people around.

NachoBusiness

Sure they always talked shit, figuratively at least.

Omackeral

The real reason he's p*ssed off is because his parents named him Cecil.

blinding

In Ireland we revere the the S**T-stirrer.

You would be wasting your time knowing what your talking about.

The S**t-stirrer is God.

donegaLroad

the Times and the Indo are for lighting the fire.

cml387

donegaLroad wrote: »

the Times and the Indo are for lighting the fire.

Remarkably appropriate comment, given there's a lighting f*rt joke later on the the column.

Ellie2008

I suppose your latte was disappointing as well #firstworldproblems

kneemos

Haven't listened to the panel but there's one guy on the telly commentary that shouldn't be there.

osarusan

If it does something that causes that journalistic joke that is Brian O'Connor to get dumped, or at least relegated back to the racing articles where he used to be, that's fine with me.

The guy is a truly woeful columnist.

I tend to agree with the thrust of the argument even if he is being too much of a drama queen about it.

Having an obscenity in a headline of a quality newspaper is quite sad. Surely professional writers should have the articulacy/wit to make the same point without the swear word no?

Nodin

Deleted User wrote: »

I tend to agree with the thrust of the argument even if he is being too much of a drama queen about it.

Having an obscenity in a headline of a quality newspaper is quite sad. Surely professional writers should have the articulacy/wit to make the same point without the swear word no?

No, bollocks to that.

Deathwish4

Cesil B. Demented

Riddle101

Reading that article makes me think about The Simpsons episode when Homer becomes a food critic. At first he writes good things about everywhere he eats, but is later encouraged by others to be more critical about the places, so he starts writing bad reviews. So the article basically says they need a s*it stirrer on the panel to liven it up more, and for entertainment purposes. But I feel like by doing that, they're just pandering to people for the sake of it, and not doing it because of the importance of discussing Rugby.

Scipio_Hib

His monocle probable fell out into his Earl Grey when he read it.

blinding

The dunphy bulls**t on rte for all these years has led the Irish viewers to believe that some of these bulls**tters are talking sense(Why else would they be on telly ? ? ?).

These long winded time fillers make dirt cheap tv (panel shows or a few people yapping is actually cheap tv).

My name is URL

I'd have thought that the lack of HD was more deserving of comment but whatever... sure, it's the lack of the decrepit windbag George Hook and his audible masticating that ruins coverage.

Scipio_Hib

My name is URL wrote: »

I'd have thought that the lack of HD was more deserving of comment but whatever... sure, it's the lack of the decrepit windbag George Hook and his audible masticating that ruins coverage.

Yeah, the TV3 coverage is pretty good - I like that they're providing analysis rather than just staging a panto.

Dr. Mantis Toboggan

It's quite possible that TV3 would have bloody ad breaks during the game if they could get away with it.

Awful coverage.

Bulbous Salutation

I like George Hook. He tends to annoy people who are in a permanent state of being annoyed about something or other.

Scipio_Hib

Bulbous Salutation wrote: »

I like George Hook. He tends to annoy people who are in a permanent state of being annoyed about something or other.

He's just there to play the curmudgeon - and he undoubtedly plays it very well, but he has no concept of rugby in the 21st Century.

jamesbere

Dr. Mantis Toboggan wrote: »

It's quite possible that TV3 would have bloody ad breaks during the game if they could get away with it.

Awful coverage.

They should just Park the land-rover in the middle of the pitch

dieseldog

Holy sh1t.

Datallus

Using foul language is the refuge of the inarticulate unthinking people who believe it is more important to be heard than it is to say something useful.

MonsterCookie

Datallus wrote: »

Using foul language is the refuge of the inarticulate unthinking people who believe it is more important to be heard than it is to say something useful.

Yes, I would usually agree with you but I still think that the odd expletive here and there are generally a good thing.

In this case, the term **** stirrer is quite well placed given the message the IT wants to convey.

Cecil should just **** off.

For Forks Sake

Datallus wrote: »

Using foul language is the refuge of the inarticulate unthinking people who believe it is more important to be heard than it is to say something useful.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cWJKUnKfVNo

gormdubhgorm

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

Sir/Madam,

I would like to register a protest against the shocking and offensive use of language in your article on the Rugby (Monday 28th of September). Who do you think you are, the Sunday Independent?

Cesil Brooke,:D

Dublin 6W

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/international/tv-view-tv3-s-lack-of-a-****-stirrer-not-helping-them-on-gainline-1.2368947?__vfz=c_pages%3D11000002670848

With a name like that I am not surprised!

Scipio_Hib

Scipio_Hib wrote: »

He's just there to play the curmudgeon - and he undoubtedly plays it very well, but he has no concept of rugby in the 21st Century.

I'd argue he knows a lot more than most. He has that thing in common with Johnny Giles in that he correctly predicts where teams will win/lose games.

He has been banging on about Ireland's p*ss poor record of producing quality front row players as well as the need for concussion protocols long before the bandwagon started into motion.

I like him warts and all and would much rather listen to him than someone like Ronan O'Gara (YAWN!).

Yeah_Right

Deleted User wrote: »

I'd argue he knows a lot more than most. He has that thing in common with Johnny Giles in that he correctly predicts where teams will win/lose games.

He has been banging on about Ireland's p*ss poor record of producing quality front row players as well as the need for concussion protocols long before the bandwagon started into motion.

I like him warts and all and would much rather listen to him than someone like Ronan O'Gara (YAWN!).

George Hook knows nothing about rugby since it went professional. He is irrelevant. Saying that Ireland can't produce quality front row players? Try the names Hayes, the Claw, Flannery, Best, McGrath, Healy, Ross. Try again.

Firefox11

It's like the half time show at the Superbowl....the pundits need to jazz things up a bit for the common folk who are not really that interested in the actual game.

Dave_The_Sheep

Nah. Most rugby fans just want a panel of three from Jackman, Horgan, O'Gara and O'Shea. **** the ****-stirrer.

My name is URL

Firefox11 wrote: »

It's like the half time show at the Superbowl....the pundits need to jazz things up a bit for the common folk who are not really that interested in the actual game.

The coverage is terrible though tbh

It'd be nice if you could see the ball from time to time. I've seen more balls in wedding videos

They're not even broadcasting in 'standard' definition let alone HD

Dave_The_Sheep

Firefox11 wrote: »

jazz things up a bit for the common folk who are not really that interested in the actual game.

Nah, **** ye.

Billy86

blinding wrote: »

The dunphy bulls**t on rte for all these years has led the Irish viewers to believe that some of these bulls**tters are talking sense(Why else would they be on telly ? ? ?).

These long winded time fillers make dirt cheap tv (panel shows or a few people yapping is actually cheap tv).

"We need to be dumbed down!" - it's a farce.

TheLastMohican

Rugby? A game of two halves!

Billy86

TheLastMohican wrote: »

Rugby? A game of two halves!

Out half and scrum half? :pac:

Yeah_Right

Yeah_Right wrote: »

George Hook knows nothing about rugby since it went professional. He is irrelevant. Saying that Ireland can't produce quality front row players? Try the names Hayes, the Claw, Flannery, Best, McGrath, Healy, Ross. Try again.

I'd argue only Healy is international standard. Would any of the others even get a game with Italy or England or France? Highly doubtful.

Best cannot even throw in to a lineout. You are being highly myopic if you think they are world class players.

Yeah_Right

Deleted User wrote: »

I'd argue only Healy is international standard. Would any of the others even get a game with Italy or England or France? Highly doubtful.

Best cannot even throw in to a lineout. You are being highly myopic if you think they are world class players.

I would love to discuss (in depth) the merits of various past and present front row players. Especially over beers. It's a subject very dear to me however this is AH so I can't.

In regards to this thread. I'm glad Hook has gone because he offered nothing to the panel. He knew nothing about the modern game and it's players. He once said Tommy Bowe would never be an international winger because he wasn't fast enough. Great call!! Hook just tries to be grumpy and controversial which some viewers may find entertaining but a lot find irritating.

It's unnecessary. Commentators and pundits can be controversial and entertaining while also being intelligent and informative. The Aussies tend to do it very well with rugby, rugby league and cricket. Check out the U.S. Sports as well. Former players and professional journalists with personality who know what they're on about as well as being entertaining and sometimes controversial.

It's great Hook has gone and the sooner Dunphy goes the better.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Just got my complaint letter posted off this evening. I will be expecting a personal reply from the Editor.

Kermit.de.frog

Is yer wan with the crooked eyes still the editor? Or is it a sir now?