Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
spirefox

Sack Barber -Bring Back Uncle Nev

By spirefox, in Leicester City Forum

Recommended Posts

Mark

Mark

Posted
Posted

Neville was past it like Jon Motson, and needed replacing. Every commentator we've had since has been dreadful though. I didn't realise we played that well (i felt the same after the Bolton match too) from listening to Barbers commentary until those who went came back, i don't like his pre and after match interviews either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Milky

Milky

Posted
Posted

yes, yes, yes. Barber out!.

i'd rather have john sinclair doing the commentary.

Barber has an annoying voice and he doesn't know his stats and facts!!!!! the voice and the stats are supposed to be the two things that a commentator should have.

get barber out, he's just not good enough. :@

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anish

Anish

Posted
Posted

Yep, agreed about John Sinclair doing it instead. It's been a valiant effort from Barber but I'd prefer commentators to stick to commentating on the game at hand rather than trying to be funny, witty, or socialising with their co-commentator. :ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jonbluefox9

Jonbluefox9

Posted
Posted

Although I agree with some of what has been said, I feel commentating is a pretty hard job and just to be able to speak fluently on the radio must be quite difficult. My motto is, walk a mile in someone elses shoes before judging them. I'm not Jon Barber though before anyone thinks I am. :P Another thing is Sinclair isn't much better. I remember us scoring against Birmingham the first game after La Manga and his commentary for the goal was awful. No signs of excitement at all. You would've hardly realised we'd scored. I know I could have done a better job because my instinct as a City fan would've made me go mad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Milky

Milky

Posted
Posted

Although I agree with some of what has been said, I feel commentating is a pretty hard job and just to be able to speak fluently on the radio must be quite difficult. My motto is, walk a mile in someone elses shoes before judging them.

i agree it is a hard job, and i will hold my hands up and say that i probably wouldn't do a brilliant job. however, john barber is paid to do that job and so you have to expect that he can do it to the satisfaction of the listener, otherwise he isn't doing the job well enough.

i'm not saying that he's a fool for not being able to commentate well, because i'm sure i wouldn't do much better. i'm just simply saying he's not satisfying the needs of the listener so it's time for a change. i think that's fair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cisono

cisono

Posted
Posted

Yep, agreed about John Sinclair doing it instead. It's been a valiant effort from Barber but I'd prefer commentators to stick to commentating on the game at hand rather than trying to be funny, witty, or socialising with their co-commentator. :ph34r:

Seconded.

Additionally, Barber seems to pick out the same players over and over again in ways that don't seem to match what's happening on the pitch!

:rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thracian

Thracian

Posted
Posted

Although I agree with some of what has been said, I feel commentating is a pretty hard job and just to be able to speak fluently on the radio must be quite difficult. My motto is, walk a mile in someone elses shoes before judging them. I'm not Jon Barber though before anyone thinks I am. :P Another thing is Sinclair isn't much better. I remember us scoring against Birmingham the first game after La Manga and his commentary for the goal was awful. No signs of excitement at all. You would've hardly realised we'd scored. I know I could have done a better job because my instinct as a City fan would've made me go mad.

Excellent point. But you don't get the feeling the commentators are thrilled to be there and that's important because they are trying to take effectively "blind" Leicester City listeners to a match by describing everything of relevance that is going on.

To do that well you need to understand the game, to have background trivia for the dull spells, to have vivid descriptive powers, to be an instant analyst, have a sprinkling of wit and a voice that carries excitement and passion.

Foulger's "I have to say" and "To be Fair" forever got on my nerves cos he didn't "have to say" anything and as a City fanatic I hardly wanted reminding of his need to be fair.

Of all these things passion is the key. In "before" and "after" match interviews I want questions the fans are dying to ask, provocative questions which draw interesting answers.

If the manager kops out (not saying he would) fair enough but ask the qustions, bring the bloody programme to life.

It's all too much like Mrs Dales' Dairy to me.

Like you say though. I don't suppose it's easy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steven

Steven

Posted
Posted

yes, yes, yes. Barber out!.

i'd rather have john sinclair doing the commentary.

Barber has an annoying voice and he doesn't know his stats and facts!!!!! the voice and the stats are supposed to be the two things that a commentator should have.

get barber out, he's just not good enough. :@

Got to agree. :huh::unsure::whistle:;):thumbup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jonbluefox9

Jonbluefox9

Posted
Posted

Excellent point. But you don't get the feeling the commentators are thrilled to be there and that's important because they are trying to take effectively "blind" Leicester City listeners to a match by describing everything of relevance that is going on.

To do that well you need to understand the game, to have background trivia for the dull spells, to have vivid descriptive powers, to be an instant analyst, have a sprinkling of wit and a voice that carries excitement and passion.

Foulger's "I have to say" and "To be Fair" forever got on my nerves cos he didn't "have to say" anything and as a City fanatic I hardly wanted reminding of his need to be fair.

Of all these things passion is the key. In "before" and "after" match interviews I want questions the fans are dying to ask, provocative questions which draw interesting answers.

If the manager kops out (not saying he would) fair enough but ask the qustions, bring the bloody programme to life.

It's all too much like Mrs Dales' Dairy to me.

Like you say though. I don't suppose it's easy.

I'm not saying I like Barber's style. Put him together with Eggerton, like at Hull, and it sounds like two school boys who've played a prank on the teacher but I won't criticise his interviewing style. You only have to look at Levein's past with the media. I think (and any Hearts fans may be able to clarify) Levein refused to talk to a newspaper in Scotland due to something they'd said about him or about his team. I think Barber feels it's important to keep a good relationship with CL, even if that has meant asking soft questions for the first year, because if he falls out with Barber he will have fallen out with Radio Leicester too and he may refuse to do anymore phone-ins etc. I think you have to be careful with Levein as a journalist. I feel he is the kind of person that would hold a grudge if you upset him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thracian

Thracian

Posted
Posted

I'm not saying I like Barber's style. Put him together with Eggerton, like at Hull, and it sounds like two school boys who've played a prank on the teacher but I won't criticise his interviewing style. You only have to look at Levein's past with the media. I think (and any Hearts fans may be able to clarify) Levein refused to talk to a newspaper in Scotland due to something they'd said about him or about his team. I think Barber feels it's important to keep a good relationship with CL, even if that has meant asking soft questions for the first year, because if he falls out with Barber he will have fallen out with Radio Leicester too and he may refuse to do anymore phone-ins etc. I think you have to be careful with Levein as a journalist. I feel he is the kind of person that would hold a grudge if you upset him.

Bring back the Late Laurie Simpkin - he'd ask the questions.

Managers have always implied that sort of threat but it is a two-edged sword. Upset the journalists by making their job impossible and you can soon be fighting for your future.

If journalists ask honest questions, listen to the answers, report and analyse fairly and constructively, what can a manager reasonably complain about?

Tame journalism is no good for anyone. Managers have responsibility to the media as part of their work and the media have a responsibility to be fair, honest, constructive and accurate. There will always be disagreements.

If Levein can't live with that (and I'm not saying that's the case at all) then he shouldn't be a manager. He criticises players, he'll doubtless criticise journalists and members of his own staff too. Does he expect them to take umbrage every time, refuse to co-operate, refuse to speak to him, refuse to train properly?.

If not, then by threatening the same, HE would be acting unreasonably and trying to be dictatorial. He would be simply seeking to intimidate and control the journalists and if they are weak enough to let that happen (or more important, if their bosses are weak) then THEY shouldn't be involved in journalism at all.

Does Levein consider himself too big and important to be criticised? I actually doubt it but, if so, it's time for him to think again.

I've said it before. Free speech (within the law) is important. People should fight to defend it. If Levein is unhappy with anything the media says he ALWAYS had the right of reply.

If I were Chief Executive of Leicester City and my manager refused to communicate with sections of the media I would insist on the status quo being restored and quickly.

Football clubs, like it or not, are in the publicity business. To a huge extent the way they are portrayed is in their own hands and the directors should recognise this. Newspapers serve the public. They are not PR companies although the distinction too often gets blurred.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...