TalkingCarlton
http://talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/

ABC Commentary team: Worst. Episode. Ever.
http://talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1070		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Jarusa [ Sat Apr 02, 2005 12:18 am ]
Post subject:  ABC Commentary team: Worst. Episode. Ever.
What a shocking call of the game tonight by Tim Lane and David Parkin.

Several mentions were made of the state that the club was left in when Parkin/Brittain were not longer involved in the club.

Lane actually said that he thought the Brittain sacking was the 'greatest bastardisation' he had seen in football.

I love Tim Lane, but he has seriously lost the plot.

If a coach cannot be sacked at the END OF THE SEASON after leading a team to their first wooden spoon in 106 years then what reason would you have to sack a coach.

There are dozens and dozens of examples of coaches who have been sacked MID SEASON for records far less severe than that.

I believe Lane has lost all perspective, he was actually saying we played a 'tough' brand of football in 2001. The Brittain game plan had some in close clearance aspects which were 'tough' but the key position players were treated with kid gloves with the round a round a rosy possession game after stopagges. There might have been toughness in the clinches, but when the game opened up the team was found wanting largely as a result of the game plan.

Flooding and possession footy is LAZY FOOTBALL, flooding and long kicks to contests and running players is a much harder working brand of footy and completely different. I would argue it is tougher.

Parkin is a legend of the game, but the life of a man is not a linear path, there are ups and downs. I think we had Parkin at the times of his life where he was at his peak. At the moment he seems lost with his special comments and does not seem to be able to read a game any more.

For the first three quarters of tonights game we had a team that was slightly down on their form kicking OK (50-50) and a team playing out of their skins and kicking freakily (80-20) but the ABC commentary team would have you believe that the Scum dominated the first three quarters. It was as plain as day that the main difference between the teams was scoring accuracy. All it needed was for Carlton to keep up the intensity they had showed all night, kick a little more accurately, over run an oppossition that has faded out of games time and time again over the last 2 season and the game was there to be won. But no, before the last quarter we were being unfairly criticised and left for dead.

Lane and Parkin need a good talking to.
Author:  Heavs [ Sat Apr 02, 2005 12:23 am ]
Post subject: 
at least you got to listen to them. I had to put up with Triple M or whatever tripe they feed through AFL.com is. Although props to AFL site for having streaming audio up there. Love the ads chopping in for five minutes at a time at breaks though,.
Author:  Stefchook [ Sat Apr 02, 2005 12:53 am ]
Post subject: 
I hate MMM. It's like having to listen to the dregs of the channel 9 commentators (who can be frustrating enough as it is!).

Maybe if Nova comes on board next year (as it's rumoured they might), it'll give us another listening option. Anything to get away from Sam Newman and Brian Taylor.
Author:  Kaptain Kouta [ Sat Apr 02, 2005 1:41 am ]
Post subject:  Re: ABC Commentary team: Worst. Episode. Ever.
Jarusa wrote:

Lane actually said that he thought the Brittain sacking was the 'greatest bastardisation' he had seen in football.


Jar, I agree Brittain had to go, but the way that he was disposed of was a disgrace and very un-Carlton like.

Quote:
For the first three quarters of tonights game we had a team that was slightly down on their form kicking OK (50-50) and a team playing out of their skins and kicking freakily (80-20) but the ABC commentary team would have you believe that the Scum dominated the first three quarters. It was as plain as day that the main difference between the teams was scoring accuracy. All it needed was for Carlton to keep up the intensity they had showed all night, kick a little more accurately, over run an oppossition that has faded out of games time and time again over the last 2 season and the game was there to be won. But no, before the last quarter we were being unfairly criticised and left for dead.


We were being dominated to the extent that we were forced to play a game that we're not so good at anymore: playing short and indirect, and we were second-guessing our choices and making bad decisions.

But yes, Parko does show signs of Commentators Senility....he needs to be eased out of the chair. The damning indictment of him was the fact that Schwab made more sense than Parko....
Author:  Cyclonus [ Sat Apr 02, 2005 3:17 am ]
Post subject:  ...
Not convinced with Parkin of late. Last year's call that we should trade our pick for Brown was... tragic.
Author:  fjanyc [ Sat Apr 02, 2005 7:40 am ]
Post subject: 
Tim also roasted the Club over the Whitnall trade discussion which I think everyone (including Lance) would now concede was in both parties' interests because it was the impetus to Lance getting his body right. I like Tim a lot but there seems to be something more at play at the moment. Does he not get a long with Collo?

I, like Heavs, had to listen to Mr Self-Important Newman and co on Triple M. Out of interest Jarusa, did they jump on the bandwagon once we started coming back strongly in the last quarter?
Author:  bluechucky [ Sat Apr 02, 2005 7:47 am ]
Post subject: 
Tim and family are pissed off about the Princes Park move, thats for sure. I think he's got an axe to grind.
Author:  Blue Bird [ Sat Apr 02, 2005 10:51 am ]
Post subject:  Re: ...
Cyclonus wrote:
Not convinced with Parkin of late. Last year's call that we should trade our pick for Brown was... tragic.


Spot on Cyclo. I will always have a soft spot for Parkin but when he said that I just got down on my knees and thanked the almighty he was no longer in charge.
Author:  Big_T [ Sat Apr 02, 2005 11:31 am ]
Post subject: 
Triple M were great to listen to. I flicked it on in the 3rd quarter and they hated us so much... and then they hated that we started to come back, but too little too late... then they hated...

DADA DADA DADAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!
Author:  Noonamah Blue [ Sat Apr 02, 2005 11:51 am ]
Post subject:  Re: ABC Commentary team: Worst. Episode. Ever.
Jarusa wrote:
the ABC commentary team would have you believe that the Scum dominated the first three quarters.


Gotta agree with you there. Due to work I didn't hear the call til I was able to turn the radio on at 3/4 time. Their summation gave us no chance of winning after we had played poorly for three quarters ???

After watching the replay on Fox Footy , they obviously got it wrong.
Author:  GWS [ Sat Apr 02, 2005 1:28 pm ]
Post subject: 
I've been a Tim Lane fan for a long time and reckon he's the best commentator going round on his night but I have to agree that he's left me scratching my head more than once over the past couple of years.

He certainly has an axe to grind over decisions taken by the club in recent times but for me the major problem I have with him at the moment is the self-righteous nature of his "pronouncements".

I'm all for spirited debate in football issues (I'd hardly be here otherwise) but his moral high ground stance of late has me thinking that these days he's not much more than the thinking man's Mike Sheahan.

I reckon something happened around the time he knocked back commentating with Eddie over Eddie's conflict of interest in calling Collingwood games. I agreed with that decision. He took a stand and had it written into his contract with Channel 9. He didn't break the agreement - they did. Whether people agreed with his position or not it was a fair enough position to take and he acted accordingly.

As a result of taking such a public, political stance he no doubt received many pats on the back from the anti-Eddie movement (I admit to being an occasional member) and it seems to have helped him shift from being a very good caller of football matches to a commentator on all that is "bad" in the sport.

From memory it was after that incident that he started writing for The Age. For an example of the two extremes of broadsheet football writing you don't have to look any further than the back of the Saturday sports section in The Age. Every week next to Tim's rant on the "ugliness" of this, that or the other is a column penned by one of the great football writers of all time - Martin Flanagan. Today's edition is no exception.

Whilst Tim bangs on at supposed inconsistencies in Leigh Matthews opinions on on-field violence now and 20 years ago Martin Flanagan encounters the ghost of Danny Southern on a train to the MCG.

Obviously the editors have asked them to write different types of columns and the world would be somewhat one-dimensional if everyone wrote like Martin Flanagan but the difference in quality between the two columns is glaring. One is the work of a slightly bitter, nit-picking wowser and the other of a man who clearly loves the game and quite obviously appreciates the difference that is brought to it by a pluralist world. One preaches while the other observes and reflects.

As I said, I think Tim Lane is a great "caller" of a game. Few can match him for verbally painting a visual image as the action happens. Unfortunately that part of his media profile appears to be taking second place at the moment to his time spent at the pulpit.
Author:  Mickstar [ Sat Apr 02, 2005 1:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Criticism
Tim Lane critics go stick your heads up a dead dogs backside.The guy is a one eyed blue fanatic and his biased rantings of all things blue should be enthusiasticly encouraged.So,he gets a little muddled at times.So what.Hes a bluey,and as such,will never walk alone.
Author:  bluechucky [ Sat Apr 02, 2005 1:56 pm ]
Post subject: 
Great post GWS... well said.
Author:  The Tyrant [ Sat Apr 02, 2005 2:09 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Criticism
Mickstar wrote:
Tim Lane critics go stick your heads up a dead dogs backside.


does it have to be a dead dog?
Author:  Ryan8024 [ Sat Apr 02, 2005 2:34 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Criticism
The Tyrant wrote:
Mickstar wrote:
Tim Lane critics go stick your heads up a dead dogs backside.


does it have to be a dead dog?


...yeah. And do we have to be critics of Tim Lane?
Author:  Bluesboy70 [ Sat Apr 02, 2005 3:28 pm ]
Post subject: 
Some of you ABC and Tim Lane bashers should hear Gary Lyon. In the 3rd quarter last night a flash accross the screen noted that James Tird had 6 possessions (for the match). flower Eddie arse licker thought it was 6 possessions for the quarter and though he had had a great quarter, and when pulled up over it he said, Oh I thought James had a bit more of the ball than that i :shock: What, he thought he had 6 possessions in the qtr as opposed to SFA. This guy really has no idea, especially when you look at his votes for last nights game. Go back to coaching your pisspot disgrace of a 'Hybrid" side. (Cant call them Australian, even an Australian side wouldnt act as disgracefully as that) Thats where you belong :twisted:
Author:  Wild Blue Yonder [ Sat Apr 02, 2005 4:36 pm ]
Post subject: 
I think Tim's turning point as a great commentator who simply became a good commentator was when he was lured onto commercial tele and gave up calling for the ABC on weekends. Or something like that.

I like his commentary - really clear. But the pre-game stuff is psuedo intellectualisation of aspects of the game and AFL that often don't warrant such "heavy" discussion.

I do agree with their call at 3/4 time though. We were shit. We played one effective quarter, one ok quarter and two very very ordinary quarters.

Thank god for Eddie Betts and his passion to get the pill.
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC + 10 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/