Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Second Captains Part II

1289290292294295326

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,434 ✭✭✭Beersmith


    Didn't seem like your man was overly happy they didn't focus a little more on the book. Seemed like they were both a little off each others wave lengths most of the interview.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,150 ✭✭✭✭Arghus


    I thought so too.

    It felt like Ken was trying to steer the conversation into areas that Richard Evans wasn't too bothered about talking about. He flat out disagreed with Ken's assertions a few times - not in a confrontational way, just in a way that made it clear he didn't agree with everything Ken was saying.

    And he did say at one point -"as I mention in my book, which I thought I was brought here to talk about" - which was put very politely, but it was clear he didn't get the conversation he expected.

    The two of them got on and he did thank Ken at the end, but they seemed at odds in their approach at least at times. Ken was more about making statements that maybe feel true and was always trying to link to contemporary events, whereas R Evans was about rigour and, I felt, surprisingly uninterested in the current political & historical moment.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 700 ✭✭✭dog_pig


    Didn’t sound like he was on board with some of Ken’s hotter takes



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 832 ✭✭✭cheese sandwich


    That was what I thought too. I was more interested in Evans’s insights on the Nazis than his opinions about Tucker Carlson, who Ken seems quite obsessed about



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 143 ✭✭halfpastneverr


    Enjoyed gormless Branno tripping himself up on the football show today. Can't stand the fella.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 551 ✭✭✭Tucker.Tim


    Branno should probably pick a wider target than Sligo-based 1916 super-fans for the Ken wind-up tribute act if he wants it to hit.

    Marky Park right in the town is named after the most republican woman to have ever lived and Murph went for Paric Sean in Carrick as the defence, do you even know your revolutionary leaders, bro?

    And as an aside, Countess Markievicz is at least three times as cool as you remember from secondary school. Give her the Michael Collins biopic treatment.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,150 ✭✭✭✭Arghus


    I don't mind Branno that much - he's right more often than he's wrong on things IMO, but he can come across as a bit smug.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,777 ✭✭✭✭Ol' Donie


    I don't think I've ever heard the words "North star" this many times in any week of my life before.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,804 ✭✭✭✭siblers


    I like Branno talking about LOI or sports in general. He comes across a bit up his own arse at times when talking about politics, films etc.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 551 ✭✭✭Tucker.Tim


    I mean sure, but at least he’s right 95% of the time. Imagine if he was some centrist eejit or right wingnut, it would be many magnitudes worse.

    Also Ken’s absurd dismissal of City being awarded the winning goal is undone by the fact Wolves were stripped of a very similar winning goal last season when it went to VAR. Either the Stokely Park lads robbed them of points last season or this season. Gary O’Neill chose his words very carefully in that context because it would have been obvious to him how inconsistently the rules have been applied on something fairly simple to officiate on replay.

    Post edited by Tucker.Tim on


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,839 ✭✭✭Did you smash it


    Ken had a stupid take on the weekends refereeing but it wasn’t the obvious correctness of the legitimacy of the city goal but it was seeing the Tosin and Saliba incidents as the same. Jonathan Wilson called this take “willful blindness” on the guardian pod.

    The wolves goal vs west ham that got ruled out last season was also not very similar. The offside player was point blank in front of the keeper’s line of sight for the entire goal making it totally different and offside according to the rules of the game. Footage here https://youtu.be/UcgbjCw_MpA?si=ZthfPEuX9fCmiKM6

    Keep in mind that you can see these things clearly when not viewing through a bias lens but through a club bias it is difficult to distinguish this stuff.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,028 ✭✭✭Smell the glove




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,892 ✭✭✭Brock Turnpike


    Don't agree with the Branno hate. I actually wasn't a fan of his when he used to just be a guest for LOI spots with David Sneyd. But since he's joined the show as a producer, he's actually brought a lot to the party in terms of stories and he bounces off the lads well



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,733 ✭✭✭sheroman01


    Always love the football pods but could not get into it yesterday. Those guests were terrible. Particularly the Liverpool guy. I'm sure he'll be lauding Liverpool's amazing atmosphere and songs on a different week.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 133 ✭✭MercuryBoy


    Yeah sounded like an episode of "The Anfield Wrap" at times



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,892 ✭✭✭Brock Turnpike


    Honestly, I don't understand why they bring on fans for the football slots. Always the worst slots on the football show imo.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    A football pundit who doesn't like football chants is certainly a new one..



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 551 ✭✭✭Tucker.Tim


    I mean he fairly effectively dismantled the points Ken was making in the pre-interview segment about the style of football without even hearing them.

    Just having Wilson, Fanning and Miguel the Prophet of Wrong crying about the soul of football for 40 minutes would get very old if that’s all they did with the football guests.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,892 ✭✭✭Brock Turnpike


    Agree re: Miguel. Every time Eoin gives a "Miguel Delaney is coming up" announcement I lose some enthusiasm for the show.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,706 ✭✭✭cmac2009


    Branno is fine in small doses but he has a tendency to get on his soapbox and preach a little too much. Smug, self-righteous, sanctimonious ...there's a common theme with people's opinion of him.

    Don't mind hearing from him now and again, and he can be entertaining. But hoping he isn't becoming a regular - although that appears to be happening already. Also, I think the dynamic of 3 is far better than 4, on a regular basis anyways.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 63 ✭✭Island Voter


    Paul Flynn's biggest objection to the new rules is that he cant get his head around even / odd numbers.

    I wonder was it ever considered by the brains trust committee that not changing the rules at all was an option? Or that changing the rules of a sport to instigate a change in tactics is a doomed idea from the outset?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,580 ✭✭✭The Davestator


    Not changing the rules wasn't an option. The attendance at matches for years proves that.

    Lots of sports go through changes to improve them, backpass, offside, black cards, sin bins etc



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 63 ✭✭Island Voter


    I think that not changing the rules needed to be very much considered as an option. Basing it on attendances is silly. The attendances last year arent a reliable barometer anyways - the championship structure is stupid with there needing to be 500 games to remove 8 teams. The complete lack of jeopardy affected attendances as much as style of play.

    Black cards, sin bins relate to punishment for breaking the rules and dont strictly relate to the flow of the gameplay. The backpass rule in soccer was a good introduction (restricting the movement of goalkeepers is the only new rule i like) and offside was introduced as a rule in 1863 so as good as there since organised football began.

    Changing the rules on how scores are counted and/or where certain scores can be scored from is a huge change to the rules and will completely change the game. Possibly not for the better. 4 points for a goal will simply lead to teams being even more protective of their goal - see the Armagh player's words on this over the weekend (was it Grimley - not sure). Add the two point zone to this and you create a no man's land on each side of the pitch inside the 21 yard line where the new job corner forward's have will be to get the ball to the outer scoring zone as soon as possible.

    Tactics evolve. I am not saying the current state of GAA is exciting in the main. But there is a way to beat the blanket and that is to kick over it and early. If your blanket is being bypassed before it can form, teams will soon adjust and press higher or more man to man. And there ends the slow build up for a new exciting thing with a new set of coaches following suit. Catenaccio came and dominated soccer for 10 years and then Rinus Michels and the total football Dutch came along. GAA would have changed the rules in that period to ban teams using sweepers. Its not the answer. My opinion of course.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,863 ✭✭✭pappyodaniel


    Oh no, is this a new saying like ceiling or risk tariff that's gonna drive me mad?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 700 ✭✭✭dog_pig


    The comments and response were a bit embarrassing for someone who enjoys invoking history and politics. It's puzzling that none of the rest of them seemed to aware of Markievicz either.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,028 ✭✭✭Smell the glove




  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,006 ✭✭✭✭Utopia Parkway


    I'd say Branno is the type of lad that would still have Che Guevara posters up on his bedroom wall.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 510 ✭✭✭ClashCityRocker


    The hot key they played at the very end of Branno talking about yoga or something at Dalymount was perfect. Pretty sure you could hear a few of the others laughing away in the background



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,028 ✭✭✭Smell the glove




  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 551 ✭✭✭Tucker.Tim


    Lol what

    As someone for whom gaelic football is number one with a bullet there is an absolute sickness in how the sport is played at the top level that needs to be solved by rules changes. This is not something that is new and has developed over such a long time that it’s very obvious this is the only way of jarring the sport out of the nuclear winter of massed 15 men behind the ball trench warfare. And by the way, attendances have been fading on a per match basis for long before the new format or even the Super 8s were a thing. The sport has been on a downwards spiral for decades at this point.

    Affecting changes in style through the rules is something that has been done many times successfully in other sports and even football itself so where you got the idea it’s a doomed prospect from the outset is unfathomable.



Advertisement