Quality of rugby media - TV Shows etc
-
@gt12 said in Quality of rugby media - TV Shows etc:
Now that the establishment has their man in Razor, there is very little discussion (if any) about those in control.
oh bro, can you imagine the vitriol if this was still Foster in charge? the response has been incredibly tame compared to what Fozzie copped, for a better record in worse circumstances.
-
Our rugby shows in NZ aren't good at all imo. Reunion was the best rugby show and that finished in 2012.
I'd rather watch Sydney NRL Journos talk about the DCE situation or Lachlan Galvin even if they ignore their fellow former colleagues fighting outside Rozelle pubs or crash into 3 cars.
Too much fan-boying on the Breakdown
-
@mariner4life said in Quality of rugby media - TV Shows etc:
@gt12 said in Quality of rugby media - TV Shows etc:
Now that the establishment has their man in Razor, there is very little discussion (if any) about those in control.
oh bro, can you imagine the vitriol if this was still Foster in charge? the response has been incredibly tame compared to what Fozzie copped, for a better record in worse circumstances.
Surely at least some of that is how much Foster lowered expectations though, and for Robertson we are at the start of season 2. Foster didn't really start copping it until we lost to Ireland in 2022 (I think?) and he was appointed in 2019/20?
Don't get me wrong, I think Robertson has a lot of fucking questions to answer for the slop we are being dished up, but I don't think the comparison is quite right.
-
@gt12 said in Quality of rugby media - TV Shows etc:
Thought I would post in here to keep the media discussion out of the game thread.
I listened to the ARP and it was very much what people have been saying - the two ex players focusing on the positive and not looking to blame any specific players. Ross was asking the right questions but Gyp and Bryn weren’t taking it.
Two key points for me - the first is related to my work so it really jumped out. The language they use to describe the game are all ‘intransitive’ in the way they describe play (e.g., the play got away from him) rather than for example, ‘he let the play get away from him’. I think I heard Gyp say multiple times that ‘circumstances’ led to the YCs etc etc, rather than saying ‘he made the choice’. It seems to be the logical extension of the movement in rugby to focus on systems and constant improvement by removing the ‘I’ from the discussion so that teams can focus on improvement. It's paradoxical though - everyone talks about giving players responsibility to react to the ‘pictures’ they seeing, but losses can be explained away due to circumstances (indicating that players can’t control the situation around them). The only time you’ll hear them use personal language (he can, he has this skill, is strong at) is on positive examples.
It was an incredibly frustrating listen and I think that’s a key ingredient.
The second big issue - and if anyone from NZRU is listening , please do something about it - is that these guys talk about stats that the average engaged fan cannot easily reach and certainly can’t reach through the sort of channels that Silver lake money and +NZR were meant to unlock. So Gypper can explain away a poor performance by focusing on an upward trend in key stats that regular punters can’t get a hold of (easily, at least).
Taken together, the biggest issue is that these guys are helping to devalue the AB jersey. At some point, losses - and personal responsibility for those losses - has leaked out of the AB culture. The media has a responsibility to represent the anger of the Nz public, any loss is unacceptable. This idea of ‘improvement’ is a reframing of the ABs into four year cycles and is a cancer in the media.
Now that the establishment has their man in Razor, there is very little discussion (if any) about those in control.
Rant over.
Israel Daggs critique of Reiko Ioane was a good start. Coming from someone who has been there and done that it spoke volumes.
-
@reprobate said in Quality of rugby media - TV Shows etc:
@mariner4life said in Quality of rugby media - TV Shows etc:
@gt12 said in Quality of rugby media - TV Shows etc:
Now that the establishment has their man in Razor, there is very little discussion (if any) about those in control.
oh bro, can you imagine the vitriol if this was still Foster in charge? the response has been incredibly tame compared to what Fozzie copped, for a better record in worse circumstances.
Surely at least some of that is how much Foster lowered expectations though, and for Robertson we are at the start of season 2. Foster didn't really start copping it until we lost to Ireland in 2022 (I think?) and he was appointed in 2019/20?
Don't get me wrong, I think Robertson has a lot of fucking questions to answer for the slop we are being dished up, but I don't think the comparison is quite right.
Foster was copping it from the day he was appointed and part of the reason was because Razor wasn't chosen.
-
@mariner4life said in Quality of rugby media - TV Shows etc:
@gt12 said in Quality of rugby media - TV Shows etc:
Now that the establishment has their man in Razor, there is very little discussion (if any) about those in control.
oh bro, can you imagine the vitriol if this was still Foster in charge? the response has been incredibly tame compared to what Fozzie copped, for a better record in worse circumstances.
I was going to start on that too, but had to get off the train.
I'll admit that Gregor Paul has raised the question, at least, and Devlin has gone about ti too. But, yeah, Foster would have been hung, drawn, and quartered by the media. -
as you said, vested interest. all these idiots have finally got the guy they wanted in 2020, and celebrated in 2023, and none of them want to look like the clueless clowns they are.
-
I listen to a lot of podcasts and it genuinely gobsmacks me at the continued ineptitude of the rugby analysis we get in NZ. You’d think we would have the best technical analysis of games in the world given the prominence rugby has in NZ culture.
Contrast to that Ireland – smaller playing population and rugby competes with Gaelic Football and Soccer. Despite that, there’s 3 Irish podcasts I regularly listen to. (There’s a bunch of other lesser options too.) Yes, they are horribly biased but know way more about the any opposition Ireland plays than any NZ rugby analyst. They tear into the team when they lose and actually spend time to analyse the game and tactics - we get told someone had a good game because they scored a try. It puts almost anything we get to shame.
Do the media think the general public are too thick too absorb content like this?
Surely there’s space for a grassroots type podcast/Youtube channel to fill this obvious void? There’s a bunch of South African ones but mileage varies greatly with these. -
@JA said in Quality of rugby media - TV Shows etc:
we get told someone had a good game because they scored a try. It puts almost anything we get to shame.
Jesus, this.
@JA said in Quality of rugby media - TV Shows etc:
Do the media think the general public are too thick too absorb content like this?
'yes', and the statistics would say they are probably correct'
-
@JA said in Quality of rugby media - TV Shows etc:
Do the media think the general public are too thick too absorb content like this?
Surely there’s space for a grassroots type podcast/Youtube channel to fill this obvious void? There’s a bunch of South African ones but mileage varies greatly with these.Podcasts are generally started by individuals, and want enough watching them to get a few $s don't they?
So if there is genuinely a hole for certain type of podcast, here is your chance to make some $s. mate! -
@gt12 said in Quality of rugby media - TV Shows etc:
The second big issue - and if anyone from NZRU is listening , please do something about it - is that these guys talk about stats that the average engaged fan cannot easily reach and certainly can’t reach through the sort of channels that Silver lake money and +NZR were meant to unlock. So Gypper can explain away a poor performance by focusing on an upward trend in key stats that regular punters can’t get a hold of (easily, at least).
Same as politics on MSM
It’s their only USP
It’s certainly not the quality of analysis
-
UK based and focussed but very knowledgeable about the global game
All on YouTube
Squidge
Rugby Analyst
Eggchasers
Welsh Rugby PodcastI dip into Rugby Pod and The Good, The Bad, The Rugby but too often it’s about them and in jokes
-
@MiketheSnow said in Quality of rugby media - TV Shows etc:
UK based and focussed but very knowledgeable about the global game
All on YouTube
Squidge
-
@antipodean said in Quality of rugby media - TV Shows etc:
@MiketheSnow said in Quality of rugby media - TV Shows etc:
UK based and focussed but very knowledgeable about the global game
All on YouTube
Squidge
You may not like the medium - I find it irritating as fuck - but the message is always on point
-
@MiketheSnow the same bloke that said England would win the RWC under Eddie Jones?
-
@antipodean said in Quality of rugby media - TV Shows etc:
@MiketheSnow the same bloke that said England would win the RWC under Eddie Jones?
That's predictions
His analysis is very good
-
@Windows97 said in Quality of rugby media - TV Shows etc:
And apologies for yet another tangent especially after poor Duluth split this tread already
But one of the issues I have with rugby in regards to how it promotes "the game" is that it's promoted as fun and entertaining and about mate ship/team work and passion (all of which are great things) but there's very little effort is put into promoting the intellectual aspect of the game.
It's great pity because there's lots of smart people in rugby, the thought that goes into developing attacking and defensive systems is really impressive. As a rugby community I think we kinda miss a bit of a trick here.
I hate this about all sports to be honest. At least other sports also try to throw in something for the intellectual (for lack of a better word) in their coverage.
Also, actually having more technical programming that allows the fans to get more of an insider's knowledge about tactics etc. helps fans develop their understanding of the game and therefore deepen their connection to the game. Passionate and knowledgeable fans are far more likely to spend time and money watching, playing, purchasing subscriptions, buying tickets to matches etc.
What use are millions of casual fans who only watch highlights on Youtube?
-
@JA said in Quality of rugby media - TV Shows etc:
I listen to a lot of podcasts and it genuinely gobsmacks me at the continued ineptitude of the rugby analysis we get in NZ. You’d think we would have the best technical analysis of games in the world given the prominence rugby has in NZ culture.
Contrast to that Ireland – smaller playing population and rugby competes with Gaelic Football and Soccer. Despite that, there’s 3 Irish podcasts I regularly listen to. (There’s a bunch of other lesser options too.) Yes, they are horribly biased but know way more about the any opposition Ireland plays than any NZ rugby analyst. They tear into the team when they lose and actually spend time to analyse the game and tactics - we get told someone had a good game because they scored a try. It puts almost anything we get to shame.
Do the media think the general public are too thick too absorb content like this?
Surely there’s space for a grassroots type podcast/Youtube channel to fill this obvious void? There’s a bunch of South African ones but mileage varies greatly with these.The rugby-industrial-complex in NZ is too small and no one wants to piss of their mates or anyone in power. While Rattue was a massive prick, the way he was frozen out completely by The Cartel has proved to be a salutary lesson for his colleagues and is probably part of the reason why we have the media we do.
-
@junior said in Quality of rugby media - TV Shows etc:
@JA said in Quality of rugby media - TV Shows etc:
I listen to a lot of podcasts and it genuinely gobsmacks me at the continued ineptitude of the rugby analysis we get in NZ. You’d think we would have the best technical analysis of games in the world given the prominence rugby has in NZ culture.
Contrast to that Ireland – smaller playing population and rugby competes with Gaelic Football and Soccer. Despite that, there’s 3 Irish podcasts I regularly listen to. (There’s a bunch of other lesser options too.) Yes, they are horribly biased but know way more about the any opposition Ireland plays than any NZ rugby analyst. They tear into the team when they lose and actually spend time to analyse the game and tactics - we get told someone had a good game because they scored a try. It puts almost anything we get to shame.
Do the media think the general public are too thick too absorb content like this?
Surely there’s space for a grassroots type podcast/Youtube channel to fill this obvious void? There’s a bunch of South African ones but mileage varies greatly with these.The rugby-industrial-complex in NZ is too small and no one wants to piss of their mates or anyone in power. While Rattue was a massive prick, the way he was frozen out completely by The Cartel has proved to be a salutary lesson for his colleagues and is probably part of the reason why we have the media we do.
That's a great point.
In general humans have a tendency toward groupthink because there is much more safety in staying with the herd than being outspoken.
People who stand up and rebel against systems oftentimes don't last all that long. And systems will always try to perpetuate and eradicate any threat to them by outsiders asking too many inconvenient questions or upsetting the apple cart.
So in essence NZ rugby does not exist in a climate where speaking truth to power is easily accomplished and can therefore not be accurately audited.
-
@junior Fully agreed about the local media not wanting to upset their mates or contacts. But that’s why I bought up Ireland – similar population and rugby competes with other sports, just like we do.
So why are their options for detailed analysis so much better than ours? I don’t know the answer.
More examples – the 42ie. It will have multiple articles from Kinsella or whoever breaking down one facet of the game in minute detail. A dozen stills and a video to show how one strike play evolved and was executed. Can you imagine Stuff or the Herald doing similar?
Tim from Eggchasers can go deep into the AB’s depth chart and discuss random players off the top of his head. Could you imagine the Breakdown guys discussing the merits of England’s fourth choice tighthead or Prendergast’s tackling technique? Ha!
