Hughesy Posted November 10, 2010 Posted November 10, 2010 On before Arsenal & Liverpool to be fair....nice 10 seconds summary of the actual game though!
This thread is brought to you by theterracestore.com Enter code `BRFCS` at checkout for an exclusive discount!
Mattyblue Posted November 10, 2010 Posted November 10, 2010 TCO, I said that earlier in the thread. I got shot down by people saying 'i'd rather watch Man United play than the likes of West Brom' I want to see the MATCH OF THE DAY take top billing each week. Sad really isn't it? The BBC are just pandering to that type of tabloid mindset.
Hughesy Posted November 10, 2010 Posted November 10, 2010 Mick McCarthy's comments after the game on MOTD about tackling.... Good man!!
bluebruce Posted November 11, 2010 Posted November 11, 2010 Typical MOTD tonight, there was a 3-2 in the league yet the first game is a awful 0-0 which they feel the need to analyse. I thought it was about the entertainment value of the games not the competitors. Unfortunately, in the time I've been a football fan at least, it has never been about that.
Backroom DE. Posted November 11, 2010 Backroom Posted November 11, 2010 To be fair, even the pundits mocked the Utd/City game afterwards - "shortest game highlights we've ever had for an opening match" or something along those lines. Obviously, the follow up question from anybody neutral would then be "why did you pick it first then?" ... at which point they'd have to acknowledge that it isn't about the value of the game but rather simply the fact that it's a 'big' rivalry and thus will have first spot regardless of how turgid the actual game was. Right or wrong? Don't really care, as the less analysis I hear from Hansen and Dixon the better in regards to ours or any other game. Just show me the goals and if I want decent analysis or extended highlights I'll catch something like Goals on Sunday.
Mattyblue Posted November 11, 2010 Posted November 11, 2010 To be fair, even the pundits mocked the Utd/City game afterwards - "shortest game highlights we've ever had for an opening match" or something along those lines. Obviously, the follow up question from anybody neutral would then be "why did you pick it first then?" ... at which point they'd have to acknowledge that it isn't about the value of the game but rather simply the fact that it's a 'big' rivalry and thus will have first spot regardless of how turgid the actual game was. Right or wrong? Don't really care, as the less analysis I hear from Hansen and Dixon the better in regards to ours or any other game. Just show me the goals and if I want decent analysis or extended highlights I'll catch something like Goals on Sunday. To be fair, Dixon is ok. 'big rivalry', yeah pre match it was hyped, however a 0-0 draw with no incidents in November should not be the main match- especially when a good chunk of those watchnig will have just watched the yawn-fest on Sky.
Amo Posted November 11, 2010 Posted November 11, 2010 I'm surprised they didn't show Hoilett's dive, tbh.
Nate Posted November 11, 2010 Posted November 11, 2010 And how Hansen didn't think Essien's tackle was a red
Backroom DE. Posted November 11, 2010 Backroom Posted November 11, 2010 To be fair, Dixon is ok. 'big rivalry', yeah pre match it was hyped, however a 0-0 draw with no incidents in November should not be the main match- especially when a good chunk of those watchnig will have just watched the yawn-fest on Sky. I prefer Dixon as a pundit to most of the others they have on there, but there's not exactly huge competition for top pundit on there. I agree with you that it shouldn't be the main match, but I'm sure the BBC would argue it was placed there because it was 'the match that would interest the most people watching', regardless of the game itself. Think they've stated as much in the past, unfortunately.
Amo Posted November 11, 2010 Posted November 11, 2010 I agree with you that it shouldn't be the main match, but I'm sure the BBC would argue it was placed there because it was 'the match that would interest the most people watching', regardless of the game itself. Think they've stated as much in the past, unfortunately. Chelsea were second with a routine 1-0 win over Fulham. It's all just big-team bias (unless a real upset takes place), and has been for years.
Moderation Lead K-Hod Posted November 11, 2010 Moderation Lead Posted November 11, 2010 Dixon and Savage are both decent, Hansen is just a biased tool as is Lawro- it's gone so bad has MOTD it's untrue. How the BBC can make a show purely showing football highlights bad is beyond me, but they've achieved it! I'd rather watch the Premiership when it was on ITV!
Hughesy Posted November 11, 2010 Posted November 11, 2010 And how Hansen didn't think Essien's tackle was a red I dont think it was either. I think he jumped infront of the ball...he didnt jump into the player, he simply tried getting both legs/ feet infront of the ball to block it.
Exiled_Rover Posted November 11, 2010 Posted November 11, 2010 C'mon it was a blatant red. He jumped in two footed. It doesn't matter if you get the ball or not.
Backroom DE. Posted November 11, 2010 Backroom Posted November 11, 2010 Chelsea were second with a routine 1-0 win over Fulham. It's all just big-team bias (unless a real upset takes place), and has been for years. Ahh but that was the "West London derby"
Mattyblue Posted November 11, 2010 Posted November 11, 2010 Dixon and Savage are both decent, Hansen is just a biased tool as is Lawro- it's gone so bad has MOTD it's untrue. How the BBC can make a show purely showing football highlights bad is beyond me, but they've achieved it! I'd rather watch the Premiership when it was on ITV! Bring back Andy Townsend's tactics truck, all is forgiven!
Stuart Posted November 11, 2010 Posted November 11, 2010 I prefer Dixon as a pundit to most of the others they have on there, but there's not exactly huge competition for top pundit on there. I agree with you that it shouldn't be the main match, but I'm sure the BBC would argue it was placed there because it was 'the match that would interest the most people watching', regardless of the game itself. Think they've stated as much in the past, unfortunately. I think you're right but... Now that we have SSN, Soccer Saturday and a million Internet sites showing instant results, it's hardly likely that the vast majority watching MOTD would still want to see the 0-0, incident-free, entertainment-free match first. Game of the day was without doubt Villa-Blackpool and was the one I wanted to watch. After Rovers had finished. In the days of red buttons and interactive TV though I shouldn't have to sit through (or even fast forward through) the BBC-acceptable line up. But if MOTD can't even afford to have HD cameras at each PL game then we are a long way off that!
American Posted November 13, 2010 Posted November 13, 2010 From the above: There's no prize – not even premium bonds – and the jaunty The Life of Riley that used to be its soundtrack has long gone, replaced this season by some execrable piece of music that manages simultaneously to channel late-1990s dancehall and a young woman being tickled to death.
adopted scouser Posted December 18, 2010 Posted December 18, 2010 For once there is a realistic chance we will have a lengthy slot on tonight's show. Ewood Park = Forrest Gump's shrimpin' boat
Tim Southampton Rover Posted December 18, 2010 Posted December 18, 2010 They'll probably cancel the show Also we're likely to be the game which is shown entirely on Football First considering they've already showed the other game in full.
cn174 Posted December 18, 2010 Posted December 18, 2010 They're just talking to shearer on 5live. I don't think he's overly looking forward to watching both games again on motd:d
chaddyrovers Posted December 18, 2010 Posted December 18, 2010 They're just talking to shearer on 5live. I don't think he's overly looking forward to watching both games again on motd:d Did they ask about Shearer maybe coming to rovers as manager???
cn174 Posted December 18, 2010 Posted December 18, 2010 Did they ask about Shearer maybe coming to rovers as manager??? They did. Well, they were talking about us getting another manager and Shearer said 'and I know what you're going to ask now'. He said that the new owners have said that they want someone with experience, and he does not have experience, so it is not for him.
cletus Posted December 18, 2010 Posted December 18, 2010 They asked Shearer about it on MOTD tonight. He said "Save your money" to the fans putting bets on him. Personally, i cannot believe any fan would want him as boss. He is totally unproven & his time as the toon boss showed no signs of him being a good boss. Rovers simply NEED a 'proven' boss with plenty of experience. On a side note, even though only two prem games today......Rovers were still the last game!
shadsworth cloud Posted December 19, 2010 Posted December 19, 2010 with an opportunity to sell ourselves, last nights MOTD was a hatchet job. Gabby Logan: i can't help thinking the ground staff shouldn't have bothered Shearer: for 60 mins it was the worst game i ever saw Hansen: Nelsen showed poor technique when scoring, while upson showed great technique when hitting the post (??, get the ball over the line. thats what is needed. and nelsen was 2 yards out, while upson was 8-10 yards out) then 10 minutes of wetting themselves over scott parker Hansen: Parker tried so hard he was knackered by the end of the match (note to hansen: that could be because he is unfit!!) and 5 minutes on the great shearer-will-he-won't-he debate (yawn) No mention of the fact that 3 rovers players had to leave the pitch injured which left our defence short handed. lazy lazy lazy journalism
Exiled_Rover Posted December 19, 2010 Posted December 19, 2010 Not sure what you were expecting, Shads. Logan is a silly tart. Shearer hates us and Hansen lost it years ago.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.