|
|
Post by goldengus on Nov 23, 2008 8:03:13 GMT
Starting to annoy me now MOTD is. Firstly - the analysis is shocking, today against WBA the jock and geordie had no analysis of the game - absolute joke. Secondly they absolutely bum the big 4 and Dull. Thirdly a smug bird commentator - enough said. Rant over.
|
|
|
|
Post by arniepieinthesky on Nov 23, 2008 8:15:59 GMT
To be fair, we were the last on, they don't normally go into great depth for the last few games shown. I thought there comments were fair. Stoke do what they have to do and get the points. West Brom try to play football, but aint good enough.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jamo on the wing on Nov 23, 2008 8:26:54 GMT
Comments were fair enough, it would have been nice to see a bit of analysis about the goal though. It's not as if much happened in the games featuring the "big four" (Arsenal apart  ) so I don't know why we couldn't have been afforded a few extra seconds?? I guess the goal we scored doesn't fit in with them playing a montage of Rory's throws again though  |
|
|
|
Post by arniepieinthesky on Nov 23, 2008 8:36:17 GMT
'I guess the goal we scored doesn't fit in with them playing a montage of Rory's throws again though'
Yep, I think it must of threw them of course a bit. They had there notes all made up before the game 'Lets look at this Delap throw bla bla bla'...didn't have time make new ones.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bick on Nov 23, 2008 10:51:27 GMT
I have never had a problem with the woman commentator before, but having her comment on our match?!....
I have no problem with it being a woman, just that she is awful. Monotone throughout and dropping players names in to get a pat on the back, rather than commentating.
|
|
|
|
Post by One-Two on Nov 23, 2008 11:05:46 GMT
how did the Middlesborough Bolton match come after the Liverpool, Man U and Chelsea 0-0 draws?? unbelievable! They could be a little less obvious in their bias
|
|
|
|
Post by DrGonzo on Nov 23, 2008 12:20:14 GMT
To be fair they showed what few incidents actually happened during the game. I don't think anyone would really be interested in watching slow motion replays of WBA passing it from left to right and then hoofing the ball up to no-one.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nick1984 on Nov 23, 2008 12:22:54 GMT
We all agreed yesterday's game was one of the most boring we've seen. I wouldn't blame them for putting it on last.
|
|
|
|
Post by tuum on Nov 23, 2008 12:32:28 GMT
I didn't think yesterday's game was boring. Watching the game live from 6,000miles away is possibly more nerve-wracking than actually being there. The palms of my hand were sweating watching the game such was my level of excitement. I definitely get more "emotional" watching games we can/must win as opposed to those where we are expected to lose.
p.s. I didn't think it was as bad yesterday as people made out. If our final ball was better we could have had a lot more incidents for the neutrals to get excited about.
|
|
|
|
Post by th05 on Nov 23, 2008 12:32:52 GMT
Although the game was rightly last, I do agree, it is becoming annoying. They are constantly painting a picture of us being only about set pieces, which, although it is a massive part of our gamne, its not totally correct.
|
|
|
|
Post by skip on Nov 23, 2008 12:39:10 GMT
They could have made a fairly interesting article out of which tactics are more likely to lead a side in retaining their place in the Premiership. With the agenda set, they could have looked at footage of the game in terms of the opposing sides and manager's tactics in context of the ends justifying the means, Mobray's principles versus Pulis' pragmatism. But it's easier to pay lip service to it for ten seconds and move on.
I also don't see the logic is having an editorial policy of good games first, poor games last. It would give the programme far more colour if they mixed up the order, finished with a cracker would mean the programme ends on a high but heaven forbid on of the big four is on last.
|
|
) so I don't know why we couldn't have been afforded a few extra seconds??
