Ric Posted July 3, 2004 Share Posted July 3, 2004 We all go on about how biased and completely sh*te the English commentators are, however this is normally based on a few key phrases which get highlighted. When the final is played we should conduct a proper test of whether they are at it or not. During the game someone should note down each unconnected, contrieved and downright stupid comment made about English previous results, England players or English managers. Not piecemeal in the forum, but during the game with a pad and paper and after the game post it here. Why am I saying "someone should" and not "I will"? Well as it's the final of a tournament I can't guarantee you I will not be in an alcoholically challenged mood. So I am hoping that if I don't manage to do this someone else will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerwickMad Posted July 3, 2004 Share Posted July 3, 2004 Why dont you put BBC1 on Sky digital, press the red button and turn the commentry off, instead of moaning. I usually just turn the sound off when i am watching a Scotland game because i cant stad how biased the Scottish commentators are in both games involving Scottish clubs and the national team Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Posted July 3, 2004 Author Share Posted July 3, 2004 You fool! You don't get it do you? I was mentioning it so we could either prove or disprove whether this happens or whether we all overeact and the problem is just us (the non-English) being overly sensitive on the matter. This is not about bashing your beloved Engerland. Go and read my oginal post and point out to me where I am moaning about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Macleod Posted July 3, 2004 Share Posted July 3, 2004 I'm with you ricster. I'll keep my ear to the ground if I'm sober and capable. You shouldn't have to switch the commentary off! Particularly when watching the eBC. They are supposed to be impartial. A scientific study of this nature will prove whether or not we're all just whingers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StewartyMac Posted July 3, 2004 Share Posted July 3, 2004 i am watching a Scotland game because i cant stad how biased the Scottish commentators are in both games involving Scottish clubs and the national team Nothing wrong with being biased. Looks like you've totally missed the whole point of the commentator thing haven't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David W Posted July 3, 2004 Share Posted July 3, 2004 I presume that quotes such as "Man United's Ronaldo", will not be counted, seeing as that is giving factual information to the listener, and not displaying bias? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Posted July 3, 2004 Author Share Posted July 3, 2004 Well I think they SHOULD be counted, if mentioned more than once, so yes, jot them all down and we can -1 away from the count. Remember this is a national broadcast so if they are to mention one players club, they should do so for each player. Any mention of "he wouldn't do that in the Premiership" would also count, as it's the Euro championship we are watching. Any reference to England playing Portugal would only be allowed if they then mentioned it in the same context as every other team Portugal played. The bottom line is, iff we are to do this properly then it should include every mention (valid or not) and only afterwards should we argue if it was in context. Remember, we won't have another big tournament final for another 2 years, so if we really are to find out if... 1) we are a bunch of whingers 2) the southern bias is in full swing ..then we can't miss this opportunity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest spr Posted July 3, 2004 Share Posted July 3, 2004 Since the commentators are largely broadcasting to what they perceive as a mainly English viewing public, references to England will sadly always be the case. Things have to involve England in some way, I suspect it's the only way they believe they can keep said "English" audience interested in games not involving their own lot, ie by throwing in comments like the ones ricster mentions. It is much the same way as Scottish media must involve the boring OF in everything. Games like, for example, Sweden and Holland were seen by our tabloids in terms of Sellik v Rangers (Advocaat v Larsson). Sellik fans wanted Sweden to win and Holland to get beat. Then even though Larsson has left Sellik we were still treated to thrilling pics of him in his medical for Barca. I don't think it's a case of whingeing Scots, the London-dominated media are not interested in Scots or what we think. It has always been and will be thus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Posted July 4, 2004 Author Share Posted July 4, 2004 I think you are probably right, stairparkrabbit. What we need though is a good test case and a major international football tournament is the perfect example. I actually tried to do this for the Czech/Greek game but lost count*. Although Clive did manage to mention "Zagorakis, the ex Leicester City player" at least 5 times in the first half. (* nothing to do with alcohol, offfiisssher.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerwickMad Posted July 4, 2004 Share Posted July 4, 2004 You fool! Im not the one sitting through one of the biggest matches in the last 2 years sad enough to count references to England or anything English. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SeD Posted July 4, 2004 Share Posted July 4, 2004 Of course, to compare like with like, we would need to see (hear?) what other commentators throughout the world are saying - do they mention their own countries and players as often? The major difference is the obvious one - we have 4 sporting nations and one broadcasting one. I'm not sure it's in the BBC's remit to produce sanitised coverage which would vet any reference to one of the home nations because it may offend the other three. Edited to include: The only comparable situation I can think of is when the OF games were being braodcast down south. They had their own commentary teams and pundits at the match. I don't know if BBC Scotland are able to do this at Euro and World cup games. My guess is that they can but choose not to. I could be wrong though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Posted July 4, 2004 Author Share Posted July 4, 2004 SeD, the OF situation is EXACTLY the sort of thing that gets me annoyed. When it's a Scottish game on, the commentary is split between North/South. Why is that? Do they think we would run out of shillings for the meeter up here so it's safer to have a studio in London do it? Perhaps they think the English wouldn't understand the accent of the Northern commentators, or maybe they just needed to mention "Chris Sutton ex of Chelsea and Blackburn Rovers." rather than just "Sutton" when he gets the ball? Perhaps BBC(Scotland) and ITV(STV/Grampian) don't have the budget for separate commentary when it comes to international games. Who knows? Both institutions know how frustrating it can be to listen to it. BerwickMad, you seem to have a chip on your shoulder, old bean. I am suggesting this just to see if it IS true. Maybe we are a bunch of whinging b*stards or perhaps your media are glorifying, self-centered and conceited? Once again you seem to have failed to grasp what this thread is about. Go read the topic again, go on... we'll wait for you... right, done? Good... Now for everyone else and BerwickMad this is the premise (and I will put it in capitals to help you read it BM) DO WE WHINGE TOO MUCH ABOUT ENGLISH BIAS IN COMMENTARY, OR IS THE COMPLAINT JUSTIFIED. I SUGGEST USING THE FINAL AS A TEST CASE TO MEASURE THE EFFECT. Ok? Good, now we have got the fact that I am not knocking either side, but trying to find out if it's a valid comment out of the way, bring the game on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Macleod Posted July 4, 2004 Share Posted July 4, 2004 BerwickMad, you seem to have a chip on your shoulder, old bean. I am suggesting this just to see if it IS true. Maybe we are a bunch of whinging b*stards or perhaps your media are glorifying, self-centered and conceited?Once again you seem to have failed to grasp what this thread is about. Go read the topic again. Alternatively, if this doesn't interest you, feck off! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SeD Posted July 4, 2004 Share Posted July 4, 2004 SeD, the OF situation is EXACTLY the sort of thing that gets me annoyed. When it's a Scottish game on, the commentary is split between North/South. Why is that? Do they think we would run out of shillings for the meeter up here so it's safer to have a studio in London do it? Perhaps they think the English wouldn't understand the accent of the Northern commentators, or maybe they just needed to mention "Chris Sutton ex of Chelsea and Blackburn Rovers." rather than just "Sutton" when he gets the ball? My take on it is that league football coverage has always been separate (at least in my lifetime) and so the English have their commentators and the Scots theirs. Which, for the most part, is fine and dandy. I don't think there is anything 'sinister' such as leccy meters and unpenetrable accents involved Perhaps BBC(Scotland) and ITV(STV/Grampian) don't have the budget for separate commentary when it comes to international games. Who knows? Both institutions know how frustrating it can be to listen to it. Can anyone find out though? This is my real point. There is obvious unhappiness at having an English bias being fed into Scotland's homes; but is there no choice or has the decision been made to opt-in to the broadcasts being shown for an English audience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Posted July 4, 2004 Author Share Posted July 4, 2004 It is a strange one I have to say SeD, and I would love someone with BBC/ITV contacts to find out if this is the case. *psst* I'll probably get shot for saying this, but I think we do over react to some of the comments. That said, I've got a lot of English mates (yes BM, I am not the ranting partizan natio-phile you think I am! ) who would happily do damage to Clive et al Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon EF Posted July 4, 2004 Share Posted July 4, 2004 If Scotland qualify for Germany 2006 and England don't, do you think that the English will have to listen to our commentators and watch our coverage, would they f**k! They would not even have to watch our coverage of Scotland games, I would imagine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SeD Posted July 4, 2004 Share Posted July 4, 2004 If Scotland qualify for Germany 2006 and England don't, do you think that the English will have to listen to our commentators and watch our coverage, would they f**k! Which is precisely my point. Given the English media organises their own coverage, can the Scottish media also organise their own? If so, are they opting-in to what is being shown down south for Euro 2004 rather than providing proper broadcasting for their citizens? They would not even have to watch our coverage of Scotland games, I would imagine. As far as I am aware, everybody gets the coverage that the host broadcasting company provides - maybe one or two extra cameras to check on 2-2 draws Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Posted July 4, 2004 Author Share Posted July 4, 2004 In the 1982 World Cup, no home nation qualified and neither the BBC/ITV took the feed. Admittedly it's changed days now, with all the commericalism. I dare say Sky would run a Bhutan v Vanuatu friendly if they could. [edited: I am doing this from memory and haven't checked the stats. I could be bombed out here, but it's how I remember it] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest spr Posted July 4, 2004 Share Posted July 4, 2004 I was channel-hopping between BBC and ITV pre match and while ITV showed the closing ceremony, BBC were showing a piece on Wayne bloody Rooney Plenty of references to England, natch. Motty took 19 mins 55 secs before mentioning that year. btw Ricster in 1982 Scotland and England were in the Spain World Cup, remember the Narey toe-poke against Brazil? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GalaKev Posted July 4, 2004 Share Posted July 4, 2004 Of course, to compare like with like, we would need to see (hear?) what other commentators throughout the world are saying - do they mention their own countries and players as often?The major difference is the obvious one - we have 4 sporting nations and one broadcasting one. I'm not sure it's in the BBC's remit to produce sanitised coverage which would vet any reference to one of the home nations because it may offend the other three. Edited to include: The only comparable situation I can think of is when the OF games were being braodcast down south. They had their own commentary teams and pundits at the match. I don't know if BBC Scotland are able to do this at Euro and World cup games. My guess is that they can but choose not to. I could be wrong though. Thats hit the nail on the head. Its ashame for you Scots, but thats life I'm afraid. You watch a french TV station and its just as biased as the British TV towards their national team. England makes up 90% of the population, so what can you expect. You need to send your own teams out to these tournaments to broadacst on BBC Scotland, etc. Its the only way out of this. But lets put it into the context of the world outside footie. If 90% of the population wants to hear it, they will broadcast it. A 10% share of the audience, would be a lunch time BBC 2 programe only. Unless Scotalnd have a huge population boom (be fun trying though), the comentary will always be biased and will be until the day we die. I thought ITV tonight was not too bad (so far) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.