Author Topic: Joe Brolly  (Read 912648 times)

MC

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 28
    • View Profile
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #6030 on: June 11, 2021, 02:21:44 PM »
I'm never sure what to make of him - its extremes of sincerity to absolute wind-up.
He can be very astute - I was always taken aback by his early comments in the Donegal v Dublin semi-final when Dublin seemed to be on top.
However, I'd agree with Mc Conville - it was always an issue when you could see him getting bored.
Says it all when Brolly was insulted by that bored comment and than made exactly the same accusation against O' Rourke.
I thought RTE should also clear out Spillane and O' Rourke but its a very broad audience they are catering to and viewer surveys may be supporting their retention.
I was always amazed no-one clobbered Joe live on air because his antics would be extremely irritating.

The argument is always presented as extremes - it's either a sole choice of the pub analysis and stories or it's all statistics.
However, the reality is we need both - the broad brush analysis and then select statistics to illuminate that.
Personally, I want the pundit to talk about what just happened but also go in depth into why it happened - what one team did to make it happen and what the other team did to stop it happening, etc. - why it works against Team A but it wont work against Team B, etc.

The other thing I have a real dislike for is the obvious bias from some of the pundits and often rank hypocrisy - you would think Meath had been a team of nuns when you hear O' Rourke talk about fouling!

Taylor

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2368
    • View Profile
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #6031 on: June 11, 2021, 02:43:12 PM »
I'm never sure what to make of him - its extremes of sincerity to absolute wind-up.
He can be very astute - I was always taken aback by his early comments in the Donegal v Dublin semi-final when Dublin seemed to be on top.
However, I'd agree with Mc Conville - it was always an issue when you could see him getting bored.
Says it all when Brolly was insulted by that bored comment and than made exactly the same accusation against O' Rourke.
I thought RTE should also clear out Spillane and O' Rourke but its a very broad audience they are catering to and viewer surveys may be supporting their retention.
I was always amazed no-one clobbered Joe live on air because his antics would be extremely irritating.

The argument is always presented as extremes - it's either a sole choice of the pub analysis and stories or it's all statistics.
However, the reality is we need both - the broad brush analysis and then select statistics to illuminate that.
Personally, I want the pundit to talk about what just happened but also go in depth into why it happened - what one team did to make it happen and what the other team did to stop it happening, etc. - why it works against Team A but it wont work against Team B, etc.

The other thing I have a real dislike for is the obvious bias from some of the pundits and often rank hypocrisy - you would think Meath had been a team of nuns when you hear O' Rourke talk about fouling!

Disagree.

Just because you or your team mates did something in the past in no way should stop you from calling it  out today if you are a pundit

MC

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 28
    • View Profile
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #6032 on: June 11, 2021, 03:15:46 PM »
I've no issue with anything being called out - it's the manner in which they do it.

From the Bunker

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10078
    • View Profile
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #6033 on: June 11, 2021, 05:51:03 PM »
What percentage of terrestrial TV viewership want in analysis? 15%?

Most don't care!

My wife the kids will watch sport. They will get emotionally involved. But they care little for analysis. Not unless there is a controversial decision or someone makes a mistake and it affect the result in a negative way to the result they wanted. And that's not analysis.

The rest is Punch and Judy.


BennyHarp

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5913
    • View Profile
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #6034 on: June 11, 2021, 08:04:38 PM »
What percentage of terrestrial TV viewership want in analysis? 15%?

Most don't care!

My wife the kids will watch sport. They will get emotionally involved. But they care little for analysis. Not unless there is a controversial decision or someone makes a mistake and it affect the result in a negative way to the result they wanted. And that's not analysis.

The rest is Punch and Judy.

So why even bother having any pundits giving analysis then?
That was never a square ball!!

Tony Baloney

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 15345
    • View Profile
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #6035 on: June 11, 2021, 11:33:51 PM »
What percentage of terrestrial TV viewership want in analysis? 15%?

Most don't care!

My wife the kids will watch sport. They will get emotionally involved. But they care little for analysis. Not unless there is a controversial decision or someone makes a mistake and it affect the result in a negative way to the result they wanted. And that's not analysis.

The rest is Punch and Judy.
Same here. I like the analysis but the young buck has zero interest on tv analysis but will happily watch some tubes on YouTube talk shite about it.

tiempo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 924
    • View Profile
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #6036 on: June 12, 2021, 12:08:41 AM »
More football less shite talk

Look no further

https://youtu.be/vz3XVPGWMUI

Walter Cronc

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3582
  • UTW!
    • View Profile
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #6037 on: June 12, 2021, 12:10:05 AM »
WRT pundits, I never bother with the lads/ladies at half time, but the pundits co comparing during the game are more important.

McStay and his americanisms does my banger in.

Hurling wise I like Duignan and Donal O'Grady.

Nail on the head. The commentator and Co commentator far more important for me. Those are the ones who need to tell the viewer what's happening. Martin Carney, Martin McHugh. Jesus wept.

tiempo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 924
    • View Profile
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #6038 on: June 12, 2021, 12:54:40 AM »
WRT pundits, I never bother with the lads/ladies at half time, but the pundits co comparing during the game are more important.

McStay and his americanisms does my banger in.

Hurling wise I like Duignan and Donal O'Grady.

Nail on the head. The commentator and Co commentator far more important for me. Those are the ones who need to tell the viewer what's happening. Martin Carney, Martin McHugh. Jesus wept.

Martin McHugh, wise after the fact 🥱

McStay treats it like an interview for the Mayo job, next parish New Yark

Hard to look past Jimmy Smyth

Tubberman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3990
    • View Profile
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #6039 on: June 12, 2021, 07:32:40 AM »
Yeah it's the personal attacks. Let's not forget that's why he is out of RTE and he was warned. He wasn't a victim from one incident here.

The political stuff should have been separate and they didn't seem to seperate it mind you but I dunno what he wants to achieve here.

https://m.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sport/gaa/no-regrets-from-rte-chief-mcbennett-over-axing-of-controversial-pundit-brolly-39487035.html

It was primarily down to a change in the head of RTE sport and his change away from personality based pundits to more game based analysis. Has the standard of pundit on RTE improved since the new head came in, I donít think so. I watched the Ireland match last night and didnít tune into the analysis yet this used to often be the best entertainment of the night. Wondering what Dunphy and Giles would say and how Bill knew how to press their buttons.

I do get the fact that some people want stats based analysis and information on KPIs but if I want that type of information Iíll sign up for a coaching seminar. It just doesnít interest me.

This looks like the real reason he was sacked

https://m.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sport/gaa/no-regrets-from-rte-chief-mcbennett-over-axing-of-controversial-pundit-brolly-39487035.html

"I don't think you can just cover it the same way you've always done. People want to learn more. It's simply not good enough to come out with the same scenarioÖ the old days were good, this is awful. "

Dublin's  hegemony is a huge problem for anyone selling ads linked to.sports coverage. TV sport is about drama and the all Ireland endgame doesn't have any..

Using that metric, Pat Spillane and Colm O'Rourke should be gone too then!

Exactly what I was thinking.  Spillane in particular should be gone on that basis.  The interesting thing about Brolly that McConville seemed to uncover was that he is capable of giving far more incisive analysis, but he chose not to do so. He worked on the basis that people tuned into to hear a yarn at half time and for a good portion of the population he was probably right. 

My view of Brolly is that once you accept him for what he is, he is quite enjoyable to listen to.  His rant on Cavanagh was really good TV and for the most part he was dead right about the cynicism.  He articulated it very well; the notion that they were celebrating but that they had achieved something rotten.  There was hyperbole, but it was worth it as the point needed to be made.  Can you imagine any other pundit saying it. 

I could live without Spillane as there was no-one else who pedaled the myth as much as him that it was better in the 70s like him.  Pure crap analysis. 

It's grand to have the detailed analysis of tactics and formulations.  However, its great to have someone to spark a debate. There's no harm in the devil's advocate.

Paddy Heaney once had a very accurate article in the Irish News about GAA attendances depending heavily on the average drinking man.  They aren't there to examine tactics and they aren't that committed.  They are there to enjoy themselves, have a day out, a few pints and roar on their team.  He talked about them being priced out the gate by rising ticket costs.  The average drinking man is probably sitting at home or in the pub, and isn't a bit worried about which team made the most unforced errors.  It's the likes of Brolly, Spillane etc that keeps these guys engaged.

Oisin made that point, but Brolly refuted it in the interview and I have to say I agree with Brolly on that.
Once you cut through the bluster and the "entertainment", Brolly gave some very good insights into the games. I think a lot of people couldn't see past Brolly the entertainer far enough to actually listen to the analyst.
Of course that's a problem for a pundit too, but to be fair to brolly IMO he was rarely too far off the mark in terms of analysis.
I actually find McConnville (and Canavan for that matter) really difficult to listen to due to their tone of voice. The bore the arse of me to be honest.

So, if you ignore the 90% of waffle, insults,  made-up stories, and demeaning of amateur players, you'll find he can make a point?
Well, couldn't we just listen to someone who doesn't spout 90% shite?
"Our greatest glory is not in never falling, but in rising every time we fall."

yellowcard

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4109
    • View Profile
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #6040 on: June 12, 2021, 12:40:55 PM »
What percentage of terrestrial TV viewership want in analysis? 15%?

Most don't care!

My wife the kids will watch sport. They will get emotionally involved. But they care little for analysis. Not unless there is a controversial decision or someone makes a mistake and it affect the result in a negative way to the result they wanted. And that's not analysis.

The rest is Punch and Judy.

I think this is increasingly true. Attention spans with the younger generation are much lower. The half time break is a chance to get a comfort break and attention moves to their IPhone or elsewhere not some ex player talking about turnovers and transitions. It has to be something entertaining to hold their attention. Some of these pundits take themselves and their roles far too seriously.

StPatsAbu

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 312
    • View Profile
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #6041 on: June 13, 2021, 02:33:07 PM »
Canavan on Sky gives a level of analysis that makes every one of RTE pundits look like rank amateurs

Silver hill

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 268
    • View Profile
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #6042 on: June 21, 2021, 07:34:36 AM »
Canavan on Sky gives a level of analysis that makes every one of RTE pundits look like rank amateurs

Aye, but his voice is like the boring priest in Father Ted.

tbrick18

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2154
    • View Profile
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #6043 on: June 21, 2021, 10:11:49 AM »
Yeah it's the personal attacks. Let's not forget that's why he is out of RTE and he was warned. He wasn't a victim from one incident here.

The political stuff should have been separate and they didn't seem to seperate it mind you but I dunno what he wants to achieve here.

https://m.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sport/gaa/no-regrets-from-rte-chief-mcbennett-over-axing-of-controversial-pundit-brolly-39487035.html

It was primarily down to a change in the head of RTE sport and his change away from personality based pundits to more game based analysis. Has the standard of pundit on RTE improved since the new head came in, I donít think so. I watched the Ireland match last night and didnít tune into the analysis yet this used to often be the best entertainment of the night. Wondering what Dunphy and Giles would say and how Bill knew how to press their buttons.

I do get the fact that some people want stats based analysis and information on KPIs but if I want that type of information Iíll sign up for a coaching seminar. It just doesnít interest me.

This looks like the real reason he was sacked

https://m.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sport/gaa/no-regrets-from-rte-chief-mcbennett-over-axing-of-controversial-pundit-brolly-39487035.html

"I don't think you can just cover it the same way you've always done. People want to learn more. It's simply not good enough to come out with the same scenarioÖ the old days were good, this is awful. "

Dublin's  hegemony is a huge problem for anyone selling ads linked to.sports coverage. TV sport is about drama and the all Ireland endgame doesn't have any..

Using that metric, Pat Spillane and Colm O'Rourke should be gone too then!

Exactly what I was thinking.  Spillane in particular should be gone on that basis.  The interesting thing about Brolly that McConville seemed to uncover was that he is capable of giving far more incisive analysis, but he chose not to do so. He worked on the basis that people tuned into to hear a yarn at half time and for a good portion of the population he was probably right. 

My view of Brolly is that once you accept him for what he is, he is quite enjoyable to listen to.  His rant on Cavanagh was really good TV and for the most part he was dead right about the cynicism.  He articulated it very well; the notion that they were celebrating but that they had achieved something rotten.  There was hyperbole, but it was worth it as the point needed to be made.  Can you imagine any other pundit saying it. 

I could live without Spillane as there was no-one else who pedaled the myth as much as him that it was better in the 70s like him.  Pure crap analysis. 

It's grand to have the detailed analysis of tactics and formulations.  However, its great to have someone to spark a debate. There's no harm in the devil's advocate.

Paddy Heaney once had a very accurate article in the Irish News about GAA attendances depending heavily on the average drinking man.  They aren't there to examine tactics and they aren't that committed.  They are there to enjoy themselves, have a day out, a few pints and roar on their team.  He talked about them being priced out the gate by rising ticket costs.  The average drinking man is probably sitting at home or in the pub, and isn't a bit worried about which team made the most unforced errors.  It's the likes of Brolly, Spillane etc that keeps these guys engaged.

Oisin made that point, but Brolly refuted it in the interview and I have to say I agree with Brolly on that.
Once you cut through the bluster and the "entertainment", Brolly gave some very good insights into the games. I think a lot of people couldn't see past Brolly the entertainer far enough to actually listen to the analyst.
Of course that's a problem for a pundit too, but to be fair to brolly IMO he was rarely too far off the mark in terms of analysis.
I actually find McConnville (and Canavan for that matter) really difficult to listen to due to their tone of voice. The bore the arse of me to be honest.

So, if you ignore the 90% of waffle, insults,  made-up stories, and demeaning of amateur players, you'll find he can make a point?
Well, couldn't we just listen to someone who doesn't spout 90% shite?

Don't ignore it, accept it for what it is and for what Brolly himself says it is.....barstool conversation, personal opinion and a bit of craic. That's the entertainment part and it generally sits on top of some decent analysis.

Canavan doesn't spout "shite" as you call it, but you couldn't listen to him. He'd put an insomniac to sleep as would the majority of other pundits.

I know what I'd rather watch on The Sunday Game.



Rossfan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18224
  • Ballaghaderreen CO ROSCOMMON
    • View Profile
    • Roscommon County Board official website
Re: Joe Brolly
« Reply #6044 on: June 21, 2021, 10:35:52 AM »
I'd prefer to watch more action and less blather
Remember we're a noble race from a land where Kings once trod.