Sky Coverage

Got something to discuss about RL in general? Then this is the place to post it.
nathan_rugby
Posts: 4182
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 9:12 pm

Re: Sky Coverage

Post by nathan_rugby »

I try not to think about it too much or I’ll end up focusing so much on it and not enjoying the game.

It does come across very amateur and Micky mouse.

It’s a stark difference to the Premier League Football or NRL where the commentators have clearly had training, add opinion but try to analyse and call what they see versus trying to come up with silly anecdotes and oversell the game.

The things that annoy me are:
- constant references to things like “he never takes a backwards step, that’s not the type of player it is”.
- constant references to things like “these are the toughest men on the planet, this is the hardest sport, what a spectacle”

One person I don’t mind on Sky is Jon Wells.
Bomhead - "Lockers to prop."
josie andrews
Posts: 35788
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2007 10:17 pm
Location: Wigan
Contact:

Re: Sky Coverage

Post by josie andrews »

Richymac wrote: Fri Apr 14, 2023 9:28 am
What if people want some commentary on their game? Have you tried watching sport on tv with no sound? It’s appalling.
Sky’s commentary is only slightly better than complete silence in my opinion.

Quite frankly sport has been broadcast for 85 years or so in this country. The fact the commentary on Sky is that bad is pretty astounding.
Channel 4 and Viaplay manage to produce some great stuff. The 6 nations commentary was brilliant as is most of the football that’s put out in Britain.
All my opinion, just think there must be a middle point between silence or shouting over each other.
I want to listen to commentary & even though it annoys me I still have it on low.
Anyone can support a team when it is winning, that takes no courage.
But to stand behind a team, to defend a team when it is down and really needs you,
that takes a lot of courage. #18thMan
User avatar
Wigan_forever1985
Posts: 6568
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:50 pm

Re: Sky Coverage

Post by Wigan_forever1985 »

The problem for me with sky is there are too many of the same person on the commentary team. If you look at say for example football and i get that football is a much wider game so the team will be more representative of that but the main protagonists of the football coverage Keane/Neville/Carragher/Richards or example. Each of them brings something different, each has an authentic view point they have different styles Keane's very emotionally driven, Neville for example more analytical, Richards more light hearted etc etc

Barrie/Terry/JJB all occupy 1 voice which is jovial thick northerner - and im not saying that to be harsh but thats how they come across cliche driven thick accents.

Phil/Wells and now to some extent wilko all occupy 1 voice the more eloquent player who can live outside the cliche but tend to get bogged down in stats.

They need to trim the fat harsh as it sounds the first group should be no-where near the mic during the game, there is a reason that Keane and Souness (the more rough views) in football arent in the commentary team, have 1 in the studio discussing the game but not in the game.

Phil/Wells/Wilko should be the "expert" in tjhe game + a commentator and again not to sound awful but Bill Auther is no good and i dont know what the other fella is called but he just sounds like hes commentating while his mouth is full of peanut butter sandwich.

Like them of loathe them this is why Eddie and Steve-o worked so well, Eddie for calling the game (ie describing what i happening) and Steve-o for quips and interjections. Just 2 thats all you need for commentary Sky seem to want 17 people all trying to make their voice heard at once.

Theres a lack of professionalism in the whole thing JJB for example - i feel bad saying this but he isnt cut out for working on a microphone his voice is incomprehensible at times.

i just think they need to move away from the northern chappy routine
Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure
Richymac
Posts: 225
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 1:00 am

Re: Sky Coverage

Post by Richymac »

josie andrews wrote: Fri Apr 14, 2023 11:19 am
Richymac wrote: Fri Apr 14, 2023 9:28 am
What if people want some commentary on their game? Have you tried watching sport on tv with no sound? It’s appalling.
Sky’s commentary is only slightly better than complete silence in my opinion.

Quite frankly sport has been broadcast for 85 years or so in this country. The fact the commentary on Sky is that bad is pretty astounding.
Channel 4 and Viaplay manage to produce some great stuff. The 6 nations commentary was brilliant as is most of the football that’s put out in Britain.
All my opinion, just think there must be a middle point between silence or shouting over each other.
I want to listen to commentary & even though it annoys me I still have it on low.
I have it on because I like the crowd noise, just last night it stood out to me… Possibly due to the lack of action in the match.

I am just going to try and zone out the commentary.

I do in general enjoy having commentary on games though (in any sport), it’s just annoying that it’s done in the way it is on Sky. That’s my only gripe really, just wanted to voice it! Said my piece now really.
Lazy J
Posts: 329
Joined: Wed Jan 29, 2003 4:08 pm

Re: Sky Coverage

Post by Lazy J »

Only Jon Wilkin could watch that match and draw the conclusion Warrington could claim the ref cost them, even if the try in the last minute had stood they wouldn’t have won
There are 10 types of people, those who get binary and those who dont!
endoman
Posts: 621
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 7:22 pm

Re: Sky Coverage

Post by endoman »

Lazy J wrote: Fri Apr 14, 2023 10:19 pm Only Jon Wilkin could watch that match and draw the conclusion Warrington could claim the ref cost them, even if the try in the last minute had stood they wouldn’t have won
I thought it was a try, but they still wouldn't have won. No one mentioned that. They also failed to mention us playing with 16 for 75 minutes,
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 5551
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 10:07 pm

Re: Sky Coverage

Post by Firestarter »

endoman wrote: Fri Apr 14, 2023 10:34 pm
Lazy J wrote: Fri Apr 14, 2023 10:19 pm Only Jon Wilkin could watch that match and draw the conclusion Warrington could claim the ref cost them, even if the try in the last minute had stood they wouldn’t have won
I thought it was a try, but they still wouldn't have won. No one mentioned that. They also failed to mention us playing with 16 for 75 minutes,
They scored one try off a mistake
IF YOU STRIKE ME DOWN I WILL BECOME MORE POWERFUL THAN YOU CAN POSSIBLY IMAGINE
User avatar
Firestarter
Posts: 5551
Joined: Fri Mar 20, 2015 10:07 pm

Re: Sky Coverage

Post by Firestarter »

Wilkin needs to realise that none playing of the ball is the reason it gets slowed down…… this game isnt tiddly winks….. its exactly the same as saints purposely standing offside on the first tackle to give a pen so there defence can set….. all teams push the rules and none are better than his beloved saints….. once we go back to foot on ball it will all be put to bed
IF YOU STRIKE ME DOWN I WILL BECOME MORE POWERFUL THAN YOU CAN POSSIBLY IMAGINE
widdenoldboy
Posts: 1824
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2010 10:25 pm

Re: Sky Coverage

Post by widdenoldboy »

TBF, Sky have brought some new ideas tonight, so fair play to them for that. Still need some more tweaks.
Lumbernator
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2019 7:42 pm

Re: Sky Coverage

Post by Lumbernator »

Letts be honest here if the fellas on TV don't sell it where's it gonna go, people speak of TV coverage and building the game up but when they do it gets slated. It's a northern sport which I have no problem with, might be struggling or is struggling but let's do all we can to give these lads a good wage. They surely deserve it for sticking there bodies on the line. I would love to see these lads get a decent wage and not have to leave for a plumbers apprentice job but that the nick it's in as a sport.
Post Reply