I read the above with much interest. I'm not a sexist and I probally couldn't do a football commentary myself. BUT - look they were trying to do comedy during the tensest moments of the game today - which wasn't helping. I want proper Charlton commentary, not Two Ronnies lite. At one point they were going on about DIY and it turned out to be something about burying a hamster which involved Jonaton Fortune. Eh?
I listen to radio a lot and 5 Live and the CAFC player. Greeny moans on about empty seats at......(insert ground here), prawn sandwich brigade, Mike Ingham getting an OBE. Graham Taylor keeps saying 'There's No Doubt About It' a lot.
Cafc player is FAB - except when the girl is on it. It's better when it's the bloke one.
Earlier this season (was it at Carlisle) Terry Smith and a bloke commentator were supposed to be relaying the match, and hardly any description happened, there was tantalizing crowd noises and such like, but you had no idea what was happening. The commentators have a first and fundamental duty to describe what is happening, especially the instant a goal is scored....but so many want to be 'characters' (and Alan Green is one of these, an obnoxious character, who thinks the football world should be constructed simply to please him) that they seem to think you can see the play yourself,and their job is to add 'colour'. Emma is consistently poor at telling us what is happening,when it is happening.I don't carewhat she looks like, i care what she sounds like, and how she relays to me the action....on that basis she is poor, along with some (male) others.
I'm sorry but some of you on here should feel ashamed of yourselves, jimmymelrose especially and I say that as his brother. Fine, slag her off as a commentator but why bring her looks into it? If you are that bothered about her commentary then fine do something about it but it isn't her looks making her a bad commentator. I wonder how Jimmy would feel if a patient said his wife was a useless doctor and an ugly cow to boot (which she isn't btw) but what would that have to do with her medical ability?
I'm glad I'm not the only one who cant stand Alan Green. I wont listen to any commentary when his moaning voice comes on and likewise when there is any TV commentary with Mark Lawrenson on it i turn off instantly.
[quote][cite]Posted By: Bedsaddick[/cite]I'm glad I'm not the only one who cant stand Alan Green. I wont listen to any commentary when his moaning voice comes on and likewise when there is any TV commentary with Mark Lawrenson on it i turn off instantly.[/quote]
I got on 606 once after a champions league game. I spoke to Greeny. Argued with him about Barca being 'Like Arsenal BUT with TEETH' He liked that; made him laugh. Lately he's become really moany, though. last couple of years. Don't know why. Used to really like his commentary but now I agree with you.
Radio 5 has got a bit Nobby lately - why don't they do the Europa League on thursdays anymore?
Sorry North London Addick, should be a new thread; I realise that.
Yes true nla. The looks stuff is completely wrong. And glad LA agrees with me. Constructive criticism is the way. I didnt know yeovil had scored until she had finished rabbiting and they were probably back at the centre circle!
I didn't have any choice today, I HAD to stay at home and listen to the match on CAFCplayer. How the hell you can commentate on a game and NOT mention the fact that a team has scored a goal is absolutely diabolical. Doing it once was bad enough but she did it again for the second goal and even for our own goal.
I'm sick to death of being called a sexist because this woman is shit at her job. She is a diabolical. I had only just made it home after a very difficult day I managed to listen to the game. This commentator, Emma Jones, does not seem to care, she seems to be more bothered about the sound of her own voice.
Get rid. Gender doesn't come into it. This person is just not good enough as far as I'm concerned.
[cite]Posted By: AFKABartram[/cite]Have had to edit far too many posts.
Have a bit of class, eh guys ?
Really. Although all the Emma and her looks comments are childish and pathetic i didn't realise the site was censored. Surely nothing said was libelous?
Not libelous no, but certainly not something that gives me any form of pride where i see associated with the site. Some of the comments were just nasty and completely unnecessary.
Some of the members on here work with Emma, some are friends with Emma and i'm 100% sure that she herself will be reading this. If you think she is no good at her job and not providing the service you want from a radio presenter, then rip into it till your hears content. Just the personal stuff is not necessary.
We were talking about her commentary until someone asked 'is she hot?' to which I flippantly replied in the negative simply because I think (as does everyone it seems) that her commentary is crap. Of course her looks have nothing to do with her commentary but I didn't even know what she looked like until someone posted her picture. It was the sort of joke that a bunch of guys would make all the time. The problem is of course that I was forgotting that this is a forum of mixed sex (+ my brother who takes offence at everything).
Now my post has been edited by AFKA which would make it appear that I did say something really bad, which I didn't. As Beds says above, is this site really that censored? I read AFKA's thread the other day about why threads are sunk: in short it was that it was a football forum and that some threads get too political, religious etc. This thread is about football however.
P.S: Please do not use my wife as an example because she has a sense of humour and has also slagged off this commentator. And if you don't believe me then send me a whisper.
Fair enough. I can see how some of the comments would upset her. completely unnecessary. having said that , when you delete or edit posts from people it can distort the original conversation .
It's funny how some of you get on your high horses about my post when 30 'would ya' threads have been allowed on this site. They are very insulting and sexist.
[cite]Posted By: Bedsaddick[/cite]Fair enough. I can see how some of the comments would upset her. completely unnecessary. having said that , when you delete or edit posts from people it can distort the original conversation .
I know, i realise that and don't get any pleasure from doing that i can assure you. But when i know that quite a few regular posters on here know her personally pretty well, its more a bit of respect. I certainly wouldn't want those things posted on here about someone i knew well.
Anyone, its done now. Some other people like to make a big deal about the 'censoring' on this site. The bottom line is we get somewhere between 5,000 - 5,500 posts made per week. The instances where a moderator will edit someone elses post (other than to correct a link or take out swearing) works out to be once every 2 to 3 months. So that's editing a post every 50,000 - 75,000 posts. Not exactly the North Korea some make it out to be......
[cite]Posted By: jimmymelrose[/cite]It's funny how some of you get on your high horses about my post when 30 'would ya' threads have been allowed on this site. They are very insulting and sexist.
I'm generally uncomfortable with putting anything nasty down on the internet about someone of a personal nature, but that's just me. Surely though you can see the difference when slating someone personally who is likely to be reading this / connected to people on here ?
Back to the main point, you actually lose all the credibility in your argument (that she is not very good) when you incorporate annexed irrelevent stuff.
[cite]Posted By: jimmymelrose[/cite]It's funny how some of you get on your high horses about my post when 30 'would ya' threads have been allowed on this site. They are very insulting and sexist.
I'm generally uncomfortable with putting anything nasty down on the internet about someone of a personal nature, but that's just me. Surely though you can see the difference when slating someone personally who is likely to be reading this / connected to people on here ?
Back to the main point, you actually lose all the credibility in your argument (that she is not very good) when you incorporate annexed irrelevent stuff.
Anyway, last one from me on this.
1. How are we supposed to know who's reading this? And does it really make it OK if someone doesn't read it - hence my post about the 'would ya's'
2. I agree about the loss of credibility of argument. But in this case there is no argument to the contrary. No-one has ever (in my knowledge) argued that her commentaries are good.
Comments
Sadly Emma's commentary infuriates rather than illuminates.
I will admit to switching over to the Yeovil commentator after it went 1-1
But I thought she was fine against Barnet. It was her co-commentator that annoyed me.
Those are the only two games I've heard her for. I think she'd be better with someone less 'pally' alongside her or on her own.
Alan Green and Jonathon Pierce look like stuffed pigs but nobody mentions that.
You're right.
So you've never slagged someone off who's infuriated you then.
Get real.
I listen to radio a lot and 5 Live and the CAFC player. Greeny moans on about empty seats at......(insert ground here), prawn sandwich brigade, Mike Ingham getting an OBE. Graham Taylor keeps saying 'There's No Doubt About It' a lot.
Cafc player is FAB - except when the girl is on it. It's better when it's the bloke one.
I can feel it
I got on 606 once after a champions league game. I spoke to Greeny. Argued with him about Barca being 'Like Arsenal BUT with TEETH' He liked that; made him laugh. Lately he's become really moany, though. last couple of years. Don't know why. Used to really like his commentary but now I agree with you.
Radio 5 has got a bit Nobby lately - why don't they do the Europa League on thursdays anymore?
Sorry North London Addick, should be a new thread; I realise that.
Beds I ain't got a clue what you mean mate
For what its worth
to me the minute people brought looks into her inability to perform to any reasonable standard of football commentry. The point got lost
I'm sick to death of being called a sexist because this woman is shit at her job. She is a diabolical. I had only just made it home after a very difficult day I managed to listen to the game. This commentator, Emma Jones, does not seem to care, she seems to be more bothered about the sound of her own voice.
Get rid. Gender doesn't come into it. This person is just not good enough as far as I'm concerned.
Have a bit of class, eh guys ?
Really. Although all the Emma and her looks comments are childish and pathetic i didn't realise the site was censored. Surely nothing said was libelous?
Some of the members on here work with Emma, some are friends with Emma and i'm 100% sure that she herself will be reading this. If you think she is no good at her job and not providing the service you want from a radio presenter, then rip into it till your hears content. Just the personal stuff is not necessary.
We were talking about her commentary until someone asked 'is she hot?' to which I flippantly replied in the negative simply because I think (as does everyone it seems) that her commentary is crap. Of course her looks have nothing to do with her commentary but I didn't even know what she looked like until someone posted her picture. It was the sort of joke that a bunch of guys would make all the time. The problem is of course that I was forgotting that this is a forum of mixed sex (+ my brother who takes offence at everything).
Now my post has been edited by AFKA which would make it appear that I did say something really bad, which I didn't. As Beds says above, is this site really that censored? I read AFKA's thread the other day about why threads are sunk: in short it was that it was a football forum and that some threads get too political, religious etc. This thread is about football however.
P.S: Please do not use my wife as an example because she has a sense of humour and has also slagged off this commentator. And if you don't believe me then send me a whisper.
How about this one for example:
What if she came on this site too?
I know, i realise that and don't get any pleasure from doing that i can assure you. But when i know that quite a few regular posters on here know her personally pretty well, its more a bit of respect. I certainly wouldn't want those things posted on here about someone i knew well.
Anyone, its done now. Some other people like to make a big deal about the 'censoring' on this site. The bottom line is we get somewhere between 5,000 - 5,500 posts made per week. The instances where a moderator will edit someone elses post (other than to correct a link or take out swearing) works out to be once every 2 to 3 months. So that's editing a post every 50,000 - 75,000 posts. Not exactly the North Korea some make it out to be......
I'm generally uncomfortable with putting anything nasty down on the internet about someone of a personal nature, but that's just me. Surely though you can see the difference when slating someone personally who is likely to be reading this / connected to people on here ?
Back to the main point, you actually lose all the credibility in your argument (that she is not very good) when you incorporate annexed irrelevent stuff.
Anyway, last one from me on this.
1. How are we supposed to know who's reading this? And does it really make it OK if someone doesn't read it - hence my post about the 'would ya's'
2. I agree about the loss of credibility of argument. But in this case there is no argument to the contrary. No-one has ever (in my knowledge) argued that her commentaries are good.