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

gordongekko · 01-03-2017 10:20PM

IUA14 wrote: »

They discussed Rory's interview...one of Irleland's biggest, if not the biggest, sports stars...and discussed what he said and their opinions on what he said, I really don't see the problem on it. They have often discussed the issues surrounding drink and gambling in sport....in fact both in the last week...last night they discussed the George Best documentary and referenced how alcohol cut short his phenomenal talent...gambling came up last week discussing the Sutton United keeper.

Do you not see how they cant be taking this high moral ground when they gladly accept payment from the like of the Heineken roadshow, have their Betdaq slot at the weekend and take ads for Doonbeg golf course. To go on his high moral horse when his wages are being paid this way is just annoyingly hypocritical

foxtrot101 · 01-03-2017 10:24PM

IUA14 wrote: »

They discussed Rory's interview...one of Irleland's biggest, if not the biggest, sports stars...

But he's made it quite clear that he doesn't want to be "Ireland's" anything. So I don't get OTB's sense of ownership over him. He's not one of "ours" and doesn't want to be. How much time would they have given to a "Justin Rose plays a round with Trump" story.

PeterTheNinth · 01-03-2017 10:35PM

gordongekko wrote: »

To go on his high moral horse when his wages are being paid this way is just annoyingly hypocritical

And does anybody remember when Joe had Michael Ring on last year holding him to account almost, for the death of that young fighter, and questioning the safety of the sport. Heard them promoting an MMA event on the show this evening.

But NT have never been consistent. They dragged Martin O'Neill (a football manager) across the coals for a silly remark he made at a press conference, but said nothing was said about gay rights when darling of the left Michael D Higgins (a politician and president) went to Cuba. Same with vilifying Rory McIlroy for playing a round of golf with Trump. There is only one point of view welcome with the presenters of OTB, it's very black and white.

Newstalk are a lobby group. I just wish they would keep their lobbying OUT of the sports show, because it used to be enjoyable.

Tell me how · 01-03-2017 10:35PM

foxtrot101 wrote: »

But he's made it quite clear that he doesn't want to be "Ireland's" anything. So I don't get OTB's sense of ownership over him. He's not one of "ours" and doesn't want to be. How much time would they have given to a "Justin Rose plays a round with Trump" story.

They probably would have covered it if any golfer had played with Trump. After all, some people are of the view that Joe only want's to talk about Golf.

Tell me how · 01-03-2017 10:37PM

After Brian Kerr calling Joe on his perceived hypocrisy on Sunday, Gerry Thornley did it to Ger tonight when Ger was giving out about Wales not having a coach as Warren Gatland is gone to the Lions. Gerry played that one well I thought.

foxtrot101 · 01-03-2017 10:38PM

Tell me how wrote: »

They probably would have covered it if any golfer had played with Trump. After all, some people are of the view that Joe only want's to talk about Golf.

It it would have made the newsround, but I suspect that would of been it.

lawred2 · 01-03-2017 10:47PM

Anyone who thinks politics and sport are exclusive topics are simply living in cloud cuckoo land

PeterTheNinth · 01-03-2017 10:49PM

Can I just say as well it is very disappointing to have lost Paul Kimmage to The Last Word. I dont like his role on TodayFM as part of the chuckle brothers with that f**king Tony Cascarino. He's just not the same on that show. Completely different dynamic.

I would have loved if they had him on this Sunday for the newspaper review to discuss the latest stories about Mo Farah and Bradley Wigguns. That time they had him in last year to talk about David Walsh was probably the best radio show of last year.

foxtrot101 · 01-03-2017 10:58PM

PeterTheNinth wrote: »

Newstalk are a lobby group. I just wish they would keep their lobbying OUT of the sports show, because it used to be enjoyable.

It's not a lobbying group, it want's it's presenters to express their opinions to differentiate itself from RTE. The fact that majority of those presenters are socially liberal is mostly down to Ireland being a fairly socially liberal place these days. This is reflected in how we vote and the media we consume. The "silent majority" is silent essentially because it isn't the majority and hasn't been for a long time.

Blanco100 · 02-03-2017 12:01AM

foxtrot101 wrote: »

It's not a lobbying group, it want's it's presenters to express their opinions to differentiate itself from RTE. The fact that majority of those presenters are socially liberal is mostly down to Ireland being a fairly socially liberal place these days. This is reflected in how we vote and the media we consume. The "silent majority" is silent essentially because it isn't the majority and hasn't been for a long time.

Why anyone would want to hear the view of the presenter i'd never know.

Joe is gone very Ray Darcy in the last year. He knows hes somewhat popular and has taken this as a licence to air his views/grievances on every single issue.

When you have Brian Kerr on to talk about football or Paul Kimmage on to talk about cycling then shut up and let the expert speak. The exchange with Brian Kerr again painted Joe in a negative light. I actually agree with him on the sacking on Ranieri by the way, however he gets caught up trying to explain his view and why he is right.

The following night he launched into it again and played audio of the exchange to Kilbane and Pat Nevin almost in an attempt to get the 2 lads to see his point and maybe vindicate him. Its very petty.

When you hear too much of a presenter give their opinion on something he has already stepped outside of his station. Remain impartial and explore every side of the argument that the actual subject matter experts may put forward. And if these "experts" are waffling then don't feel the need to jump in and shove your own views down peoples necks, get better experts next time.

Theres something very immature about Joe Molloy, he is very sensitive to criticism. But I suppose its something that will develop with time, he is decent enough, but I hope he lays off on the preaching. Hes just presenting the show at the end of the day

elefant · 02-03-2017 07:38AM

Blanco100 wrote: »

Why anyone would want to hear the view of the presenter i'd never know.

Joe is gone very Ray Darcy in the last year. He knows hes somewhat popular and has taken this as a licence to air his views/grievances on every single issue.

When you have Brian Kerr on to talk about football or Paul Kimmage on to talk about cycling then shut up and let the expert speak. The exchange with Brian Kerr again painted Joe in a negative light. I actually agree with him on the sacking on Ranieri by the way, however he gets caught up trying to explain his view and why he is right.

The following night he launched into it again and played audio of the exchange to Kilbane and Pat Nevin almost in an attempt to get the 2 lads to see his point and maybe vindicate him. Its very petty.

When you hear too much of a presenter give their opinion on something he has already stepped outside of his station. Remain impartial and explore every side of the argument that the actual subject matter experts may put forward. And if these "experts" are waffling then don't feel the need to jump in and shove your own views down peoples necks, get better experts next time.

Theres something very immature about Joe Molloy, he is very sensitive to criticism. But I suppose its something that will develop with time, he is decent enough, but I hope he lays off on the preaching. Hes just presenting the show at the end of the day

I think it makes any interview and discussion more interesting to have the interviewer actually engage with the expert rather than 'shutting up and letting the expert speak'. For me, one of the most enjoyable aspects to Off the Ball is that by having opinions and not being afraid to put their point across, the presenters can get more of an insight into the people they're interviewing.

I don't think we would have gleaned as much of an insight into Brian Kerr's position on Ranieri's sacking if Joe had just asked him a simple question, and then kept quiet and let him just speak.

Tell me how · 02-03-2017 07:56AM

elefant wrote:

I don't think we would have gleaned as much of an insight into Brian Kerr's position on Ranieri's sacking if Joe had just asked him a simple question, and then kept quiet and let him just speak.

Agreed. Absolutely.

I understand what others are saying about presenters losing sight of their role to encourage the conversation and trying to dominate it. I still feel Joe is much closer to facilitating conversation.

PeterTheNinth · 02-03-2017 08:03AM

gordongekko wrote: »

Do you not see how they cant be taking this high moral ground when they gladly accept payment from the like of the Heineken roadshow, have their Betdaq slot at the weekend and take ads for Doonbeg golf course. To go on his high moral horse when his wages are being paid this way is just annoyingly hypocritical

I think you could go further and say, how can they criticize Trump not publicizing his taxes and questioning his business morals, when they are prepared to accept their wages from Denis. Still huge questions over exactly how he won the license to print money from the State. And for a station of such supposed high morals, they were still the only broadcaster that would give Sarah Carey a job after she lied to the tribunals.... I think that is more indicative of the moral standards in NT, rather than the liberal views that all of their presenters seem mandated to express.

Tell me how · 02-03-2017 08:11AM

PeterTheNinth wrote:

I think you could go further and say, how can they criticize Trump not publicizing his taxes and questioning his business morals, when they are prepared to accept their wages from Denis.

Still huge questions over exactly how he won the license to print money from the State. And for a station of such supposed high morals, they were still the only broadcaster that would give Sarah Carey a job after she lied to the tribunals.... I think that is more indicative of the moral standards in NT, rather than the liberal views that all of their presenters seem mandated to express.

The first part of your statement is like saying that someone who, say, is a member of the government in the US can't have an opinion on how the American administration is currently interacting with the rest of the world.

The second part, I don't think has anything to do with this conversation.

Lt Dan · 02-03-2017 10:08AM

lawred2 wrote: »

Anyone who thinks politics and sport are exclusive topics are simply living in cloud cuckoo land

As already repeated before. NO one has suggested that or suggests that. What has been said , and they are absolutely correct on this, the Rory story was a non story! His decision to agree to have a picture taken with Trump does not say that he endorses the man or opposes the man. The vast proportion of the rant with Joe and Fan Boy (who bless him was almost in tears) was to talk about how bad Trump is, which had NOTHING to do with sport

We are told, rightly, that someone's personal life such as sexuality, womanising etc should have no relevancy. But, clearly, if they have an inkling over their political views, that do not match the reporters, it is open season. Joe's comments on Tiger were pathetic! When they are talking about Cheltenham will they comment on JP McManus's and John Magnier's so called tax exile place of residency or will they just ignore that and talk about how great they are for racing. Rightly , they will shut up . For sports people, the sports star's political view , unless they publicly express it, should be irrelevant. It is as bad as when Denis Rodman went to North Korea. The yanks went mental. At least in that case, Rodman was bigging up Dear Leader

Lt Dan · 02-03-2017 10:17AM

PeterTheNinth wrote: »

Can I just say as well it is very disappointing to have lost Paul Kimmage to The Last Word. I dont like his role on TodayFM as part of the chuckle brothers with that f**king Tony Cascarino. He's just not the same on that show. Completely different dynamic.

I would have loved if they had him on this Sunday for the newspaper review to discuss the latest stories about Mo Farah and Bradley Wigguns. That time they had him in last year to talk about David Walsh was probably the best radio show of last year.

For me, last summer, when he was talking about cycling, and , it think drugs , could be wrong , he spent a whole 5-7 minutes, brilliantly explaining his theory in a way comparing cheap but very good wine that was grown in a vineyard just across from the yard where expensive wine is produced. That was gold

Lt Dan · 02-03-2017 10:20AM

foxtrot101 wrote: »

It's not a lobbying group, it want's it's presenters to express their opinions to differentiate itself from RTE. The fact that majority of those presenters are socially liberal is mostly down to Ireland being a fairly socially liberal place these days. mostly down to Ireland being a fairly socially liberal place these days. The "silent majority" is silent essentially because it isn't the majority and hasn't been for a long time.

mostly down to Ireland being a fairly socially liberal place these days.:D

mostly down to Ireland being a fairly socially liberal place these days.

Media? We are not really blessed with options. Suffice to say, the media got it all wrong on many fronts over the last 3-4 years on certain important issues . No surprise that the Irish Times is down the toilet now.

How is Newstalk remotely different to RTE bar being a bit more Fine Gael that Stickies/Workers Party/Labour? Marc Coleman was one of the last of the dissenting voices on Newstalk, and he is gone. Remember that Russian Economist , works in Trinity, who use to be all over the media a few years ago? Where is he now ?

Cartman78 · 02-03-2017 12:22PM

Disclaimer: I am in no way whatsoever an apologist for Trump, UKIP etc...but

I am so bored listening to Irish sports journalists (especially OTB & Second Captains) whinging on about politics in other countries.

It's very easy to jump aboard the anti-Trump bandwagon and regurgitate a few amusing tweets but it would be much more interesting to ask and investigate about the growth and rise of right wing politics in America and Europe.

I have absolutely no problem with sports and politics being covered under the same roof...but a more nuanced and balanced approach is needed or it just becomes facile and repetitive

Conservative · 02-03-2017 12:53PM

foxtrot101 wrote: »

PeterTheNinth wrote: »

Newstalk are a lobby group. I just wish they would keep their lobbying OUT of the sports show, because it used to be enjoyable.

It's not a lobbying group, it want's it's presenters to express their opinions to differentiate itself from RTE. The fact that majority of those presenters are socially liberal is mostly down to Ireland being a fairly socially liberal place these days. This is reflected in how we vote and the media we consume. The "silent majority" is silent essentially because it isn't the majority and hasn't been for a long time.

Agree on this. I think the "liberal news" agenda represents the views of the majority.

Depressing.

lawred2 · 02-03-2017 01:31PM

Conservative wrote: »

Agree on this. I think the "liberal news" agenda represents the views of the majority.

Depressing.

what's depressing about it?

Loafing Oaf · 02-03-2017 01:35PM

lawred2 wrote: »

what's depressing about it?

The clue is in his username...

lawred2 · 02-03-2017 01:39PM

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

The clue is in his username...

I got that...

But that can cover a whole raft of things

I want to know what's so depressing to him about Ireland being socially liberal..

Conservative · 02-03-2017 02:04PM

Not the place to discuss it so I will keep it brief.

I disagree strongly but accept the will of the majority.

Socially liberal = agree or be condemned.

I didn't agree with it but Ger Gilroy's take on Trump/McIlroy was maybe the most interesting the thing I've ever hear him say.

lawred2 · 02-03-2017 03:11PM

Conservative wrote: »

Socially liberal = agree or be condemned.

well that's meaningless bullsh!t

rufuseric82 · 02-03-2017 04:53PM

Not sure how a radio station that features Paul Williams, Pat Kenny and George Hook (and with Ivan Yeats returning) could be described as being pushing a left wing agenda. Newstalk is all about listenership and advertising. I'm sure Gilroy and Molloy are just giving their honest opinions and I'm not sure what the problem with that is? Sometimes we get more of it than I would like but I think that's part of their 'banter' attempts which I find fall flat more often than not.

IUA14 · 02-03-2017 04:57PM

rufuseric82 wrote: »

Not sure how a radio station that features Paul Williams, Pat Kenny and George Hook (and with Ivan Yeats returning) could be described as being pushing a left wing agenda. Newstalk is all about listenership and advertising. I'm sure Gilroy and Molloy are just giving their honest opinions and I'm not sure what the problem with that is? Sometimes we get more of it than I would like but I think that's part of their 'banter' attempts which I find fall flat more often than not.

Would completely agree with the first part of this. Quite like the two lads and feel they are entitled to their opinion so don't mind it at all.

Conservative · 02-03-2017 06:07PM

lawred2 wrote: »

Conservative wrote: »

Socially liberal = agree or be condemned.

well that's meaningless bullsh!t

And this is?

lawred2 · 02-03-2017 06:33PM

Conservative wrote: »

And this is?

Descriptive

DEFTLEFTHAND · 02-03-2017 10:34PM

Conservative wrote: »

Not the place to discuss it so I will keep it brief.

I disagree strongly but accept the will of the majority.

Socially liberal = agree or be condemned.

I didn't agree with it but Ger Gilroy's take on Trump/McIlroy was maybe the most interesting the thing I've ever hear him say.

On the regressive leftist side of things for sure. (which unfortunately has encroached into mainstream liberalism over the past number of years)

Classical Liberalism is still something to admire though imo. It promotes open discussion and encourages all viewpoints to be heard. They would actually have more in common with a run of the mill conservative than a regressive leftist. See Dave Rubin for an eg.

*Anyway apologies for going off topic. Like you say, this isn't the place for such a discussion.

Tell me how · 02-03-2017 10:42PM

I think several of the posts here, from all sides show just how difficult it is to not let our sociological persuasions influence opinions and therefore conversations.
Why should the guys be any different?

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

Comments