nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Second Captains

ballsymchugh

Thought I'd update the OP with links and stuff for anyone who stumbles across this.

The former Off the Ball hosts have partnered with The Irish Times to do a series of weekly podcasts. They go online each Tuesday and cover a variety of sports, with a number of contributors including Sid Lowe, Richie Sadlier, Gerry Thornley and Shane Horgan.

They can be found:
On The Irish Times' site: http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/second-captains
On Soundcloud: https://soundcloud.com/secondcaptains-it-com
On iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/ie/podcast/second-captains-irish-times/id647893016?mt=2

Or if you prefer not to use iTunes for your podcasts, use this link in whatever app you use (Thanks to youcancallmeal): http://feeds.feedburner.com/secondcaptainsitcom

And here are their Twitter and Facebook accounts.

Cheers,
wnolan1992

so they're almost finished their gardening leave...

where will they end up?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Dots1982

Brock Turnpike wrote: »

The average user on that piece of trash website wouldn't be much of a barometer for judging these kind of things.

Don't know, they are average folks posting i would say. I find it impossible to say if this will work out or not but the sentiments on 42.ie aren't encouraging.

[Deleted User]

I will subscribe as I have followed them and been a huge fan for years across tge formats, but if they don't provide honest and fair political stuff then I will be voting with my hard won euros and unsubscribing.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

Brock Turnpike

dulpit wrote: »

Lot of anti-rugby comments there for some reason...

The average user on that piece of trash website wouldn't be much of a barometer for judging these kind of things.

Dots1982

dulpit wrote: »

Lot of anti-rugby comments there for some reason...

Polarising sport in some ways. A lot of people, especially soccer people, see it as elitist and over hyped.

I'm not a rugby person really but I give them their due, they've brought back more trophies to this country then any other Irish team and deserve respect for that.

I do find the chat on Rugby on SC and OTB boring but that's just me.

dulpit

Dots1982 wrote: »

The comments on 42.ie to the story would not be encouraging for the hope of this flourishing.

http://www.the42.ie/second-captains-world-service-daily-shows-subscription-3225477-Feb2017/

Lot of anti-rugby comments there for some reason...

mrk75

I enjoy them to a point. I think they're starting to believe in their own hype a wee bit and the fact they're in their own sorta bubble has led to them treading water slightly, laughing at their own jokes, developing a bit of smugness and perhaps this is slightly over-reaching on their part (particularly going down the politics route).

But the market will obviously decide. Bold move on their part and it'll be interesting to see where it leads.

Dots1982

The comments on 42.ie to the story would not be encouraging for the hope of this flourishing.

http://www.the42.ie/second-captains-world-service-daily-shows-subscription-3225477-Feb2017/

bren2001

yosser hughes wrote: »

It's not the point. I don't want to fund Ken's juvenile echo chamber witterings on politics. I accept that many do want their opinions reinforced and what they gain from that is beyond me; but I think it's not very healthy debate.
Now, if he was prepared to get someone on to argue the toss and offer an alternative view, then maybe....

I understand that you don't want to fund certain Podcast but the a la carte approach is a non-runner at €5 a month. Even if you only listen to one of the paid podcasts a week. It works out at €1.25 per podcast. If you ran the pay as you play approach, I'd be expecting €1 an episode anyway.

I'll certainly run with it until the summer. If I'm listening to them and enjoying the podcasts, I've no qualms to pay for their content.

Trent Houseboat

Dots1982 wrote: »

What on earth are you talking about?

They need contributors close to the action (closer than Ken would be) who are respected journalists or writers. I would say they are intelligent enough to know this.

Yeah, that's pretty much what it said.

Trent Houseboat wrote: »

In fairness they speak with UK and Spanish based journalists with whom they often disagree.
I don't think they pick people based on whether or not they're in agreement but more based on their knowledge and expertise.

[Deleted User]

Ol' Donie wrote: »

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Oh, I like Ken but don't agree with his politics or at least do not like the lack of balance when he does discuss these things.

The listenership can only decline when they segment their audience.

Unless, of course, people agree with him.

Edit: y'know people who don't care about football, but do care about the world being dragged backwards by the remarkable self interest of a small group of ....

Sorry, getting off topic there

Small group of Islamic jihadists? I look forward to Ken obfuscating and fudging that issue rather than face reality. But with Trump it will be the same black and white "he is literally Hitler" type stuff.

Arghus

With this subscription based way of doing things they'll have to ensure shows that will please their listeners, otherwise it will all go tits up.

I agree with Ken a lot when he goes off on one about politics, though I think he tends to pick the low hanging fruit at lot of the time.

Dots1982

Trent Houseboat wrote: »

In fairness they speak with UK and Spanish based journalists with whom they often disagree.
I don't think they pick people based on whether or not they're in agreement but more based on their knowledge and expertise.

If knowledgeable experts agree with Ken on US politics or Trump is it a lack of balance, should they be eschewed? Should he not talk about it until he can find someone willing to oppose?
If Ken wants to talk about the destruction of our environment should they seek out a climate science denier? Flat earthers? Truthers? Birthers? Anti-vaxers? Holocaust deniers? Bigfoot chasers?

Your principles might force you to unsub because Ken and some imagined SoCoDu-er have opinions you've yet to hear? Maybe they can fill the balance quota you seek in the off chance you accidentally read mailonline headline.

What on earth are you talking about?

They need contributors close to the action (closer than Ken would be) who are respected journalists or writers. I would say they are intelligent enough to know this.

Trent Houseboat

Dots1982 wrote: »

When Second captains do an item on English football, they talk to an English based football journo, when they do an item on Spanish football they talk to aSpanish based football journo..etc etc.

I hope to God they realize they will need to do the same when it comes to politics. If they want to talk about US politics and Trump they will need informed US based political journos.

If its Ken and some other SoCoDo based talking head discussing about how to put the US to rights from leafy Dublin then I might unsubscribe on general principle.

The politics show might actually be good if they pay balanced informed contributors based in the UK/US or mainland Europe. Interesting debates where Ken is challenged could occur.

In other words I hope it will be entirely different to the politics segments they have done up to now.

In fairness they speak with UK and Spanish based journalists with whom they often disagree.
I don't think they pick people based on whether or not they're in agreement but more based on their knowledge and expertise.

If knowledgeable experts agree with Ken on US politics or Trump is it a lack of balance, should they be eschewed? Should he not talk about it until he can find someone willing to oppose?
If Ken wants to talk about the destruction of our environment should they seek out a climate science denier? Flat earthers? Truthers? Birthers? Anti-vaxers? Holocaust deniers? Bigfoot chasers?

Your principles might force you to unsub because Ken and some imagined SoCoDu-er have opinions you've yet to hear? Maybe they can fill the balance quota you seek in the off chance you accidentally read mailonline headline.

Dots1982

When Second captains do an item on English football, they talk to an English based football journo, when they do an item on Spanish football they talk to aSpanish based football journo..etc etc.

I hope to God they realize they will need to do the same when it comes to politics. If they want to talk about US politics and Trump they will need informed US based political journos.

If its Ken and some other SoCoDo based talking head discussing about how to put the US to rights from leafy Dublin then I might unsubscribe on general principle.

The politics show might actually be good if they pay balanced informed contributors based in the UK/US or mainland Europe. Interesting debates where Ken is challenged could occur.

In other words I hope it will be entirely different to the politics segments they have done up to now.

Seamy Fitz

I too am happy to support for €60 a year just to keep the lads in funds for the forseeable future. I owe them that for the last 4 years of laughter. I like others won't get time to listen to all 7 podcasts a week but nice to be able to pick and chose.

I don't like bashing the set up but I really question the introduction of Richie as a presenter. Why do the lads love him so much? His voice goes through me and he doesn't bring anything to the table in terms of opinions. Not a bad lad but they have enough talent in the 5 of them without him on air.

Ol' Donie

yosser hughes wrote: »

It's not the point. I don't want to fund Ken's juvenile echo chamber witterings on politics. I accept that many do want their opinions reinforced and what they gain from that is beyond me; but I think it's not very healthy debate.
Now, if he was prepared to get someone on to argue the toss and offer an alternative view, then maybe....

Not to go off topic...but you saying other people want their opinions reinforced sounds a lot like saying you don't want to hear your views being challenged.

That just how it reads, what do i know.

Rumpy Pumpy

Cienciano wrote: »

As long as its entertaining I couldn't give a rats ass if its fair and balanced

+1

This whole fair and balanced thing is overrated. I sometime watch Bill O'Reilly just for the laugh. I'll listen to Early as he's an interesting polemicist with strong opinions on politics.

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

Cienciano

Richard Hillman wrote: »

€5 a month is decent value but I cannot be funding a politics show from Ken Early. It'll be about as Fair and Balanced as Fox News.

As long as its entertaining I couldn't give a rats ass if its fair and balanced

yosser hughes

bren2001 wrote: »

Its 32c a podcast. Why bother with pay as you go at those costs?

It's not the point. I don't want to fund Ken's juvenile echo chamber witterings on politics. I accept that many do want their opinions reinforced and what they gain from that is beyond me; but I think it's not very healthy debate.
Now, if he was prepared to get someone on to argue the toss and offer an alternative view, then maybe....

Rumpy Pumpy

Podcasts are my favourite thing about the internet. It's the diversity of being able to find good talk radio across such a wide range of subjects that make it so compelling. I'll be subscribing; as I already do to a few other podcasts through Patreon. Ideally I'd like to see Patreon offer a Netflix style model for premium podcasts.

bren2001

yosser hughes wrote: »

Yes, same here. I'm not paying for Ken's political show, or Ritchie for that matter, but I'm not averse to paying something. Why can't they charge as you go/consume?. More of an a la carte option.
I'd like to support the guys and it makes me sick to see what the RTE Sports department splurge on some of the mediocrity they have. Lots of people pay for that without a second thought.
Pay as you go is the way forward and it will have to be for RTE at some stage too; as more people move away from 'traditional' media sources.

Its 32c a podcast. Why bother with pay as you go at those costs?

foxtrot101

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Oh, I like Ken but don't agree with his politics or at least do not like the lack of balance when he does discuss these things.

The listenership can only decline when they segment their audience.

I would say a fair sized majority of second captains listeners would be more in sympathy with Ken's take on Trump/Brexit then would be in yours.

I was in two minds whether to pay or not, because there is only going to be one dedicated football show. The Ken Early Politics Show is the reason I'm going to subscribe.

Utopia Parkway

Is there really going to be a Ken Politics show or is that just rumour? I can just imagine he'd have Una Mullally on every second week. I would give it a wide berth if that's the case.

I don't mind Ritchie Sadlier as a guest but not sure I want to listen to him doing his own show every week but I guess you can always skip what you don't want.

Ol' Donie

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Oh, I like Ken but don't agree with his politics or at least do not like the lack of balance when he does discuss these things.

The listenership can only decline when they segment their audience.

Unless, of course, people agree with him.

Edit: y'know people who don't care about football, but do care about the world being dragged backwards by the remarkable self interest of a small group of ....

Sorry, getting off topic there

Richard Hillman

boobycharlton wrote: »

Ye anti-Earlyites seem to be in the minority here so I wouldn't be so sure about your prediction. Same for the niche market, majority of paid pods are aimed at niches. Anfieldwrap being prime example.

Oh, I like Ken but don't agree with his politics or at least do not like the lack of balance when he does discuss these things.

The listenership can only decline when they segment their audience.

boobycharlton

Richard Hillman wrote: »

€5 a month is decent value but I cannot be funding a politics show from Ken Early. It'll be about as Fair and Balanced as Fox News.

I said a few pages back that the show won't have much of a future if they continue to make their show for a continuously niche market. With subscriptions and them setting their political stall out, I'll give it until Christmas until it's done.

Ye anti-Earlyites seem to be in the minority here so I wouldn't be so sure about your prediction. Same for the niche market, majority of paid pods are aimed at niches. Anfieldwrap being prime example.

MEGA BRO WOLF 5000

How is the paid service gonna be downloaded??

yosser hughes

Richard Hillman wrote: »

€5 a month is decent value but I cannot be funding a politics show from Ken Early. It'll be about as Fair and Balanced as Fox News.

I said a few pages back that the show won't have much of a future if they continue to make their show for a continuously niche market. With subscriptions and them setting their political stall out, I'll give it until Christmas until it's done.

Yes, same here. I'm not paying for Ken's political show, or Ritchie for that matter, but I'm not averse to paying something. Why can't they charge as you go/consume?. More of an a la carte option.
I'd like to support the guys and it makes me sick to see what the RTE Sports department splurge on some of the mediocrity they have. Lots of people pay for that without a second thought.
Pay as you go is the way forward and it will have to be for RTE at some stage too; as more people move away from 'traditional' media sources.