Cringeworthy Kearns/Martin moments.....minutes......hours......

[wamberal]

These two are definitely worth a thread of their very own. Greg Clarke is pretty hopeless, repetitive and cliche-laden, but it is truly amazing that two great Wallabies are so inept as commentators.

Two examples amongst many from this past weekend. For the first half hour of the Reds/Chiefs match, Greg Martin was gushing like a schoolgirl about SBW. He praised everything except his beautiful biceps - and I might have missed that with the volume right down, as it has to be when these two are in full cry. Fortunately SBW and the Chiefs forwards ran out of steam in the first half and Marto turned his limited brainpower to other aspects of the match.

About 15 minutes from the end of the Rebels/Crusaders match, the Crusaders had an attacking scrum about 20 metres out, just to their right of the posts. Greg Martin pointed out that this is a perfect situation for an attacking scrum - an obvious point, but one worth making. Phil Kearns just had to predict which way the Crusaders would attack (what is it with these two, why do they have to put so much effort into predicting the next few seconds of the game? --- they are inevitably wrong, and even when they are right, what is added to our knowledge/enjoyment of the contest?). Kearns breathlessly told us that the backs to the left, more open side, of the scrum were whispering something to each other so "obviously the ball is going to go left".

Almost inevitably the ball went right. You just have to wonder how dim-witted an expert commentator can be. How did we win so many games under this chap?

 

[Scotty]

Firstly, why is Marto commentating on scrums and Kearns on the backline?

I suspect we would have won zero matches if each of them were involved in those respective areas.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

How did we win so many games under this chap?

Kearns?
6/10 as captain - whereas his predecessor (Lynagh) was victorious 73.33% of the time and Eales was 76.36%.
So there's something of a trough in results during his watch!
His commenting suggests why!

 

[Ignoto]

Sums up Kearns in 4 seconds -

 

[Samo]

It defies belief how low the proportion of good rugby commentators around the traps in most countries is - how do the broadcasters pick them and especially keep them - surely not many people are flicking through the channels and come across kearns/marto or tony johnson et al. here in nz and say - great I love these guys, and watch the whole game?

 

[Braveheart81]

I like Phil Kearns.

I think he is a genuinely entertaining guy and does a good job of providing the 'colour' to a commentary team.

I think Marto is an idiot and isn't funny in the slightest.

 

[tigerland12]

Kearns is horrible, so bias it is not even funny, just like his attempts at humour, which he tries every 5 seconds. The fact that he will consistantly refer to the Tahs as "We need to get more points" or "We are in a bit of trouble here", is completely un-professional

 

[Braveheart81]

I have no problem with bias in sports commentary.

I'd prefer commentators blatantly show their bias than try to hide it and still have it come through passively. Some people can't help but wear their heart on their sleeve and I don't begrudge that.

I have no problem watching commentary that is bias whether it is for my team or against my team. I think it is part of the spectacle of sport.

 

[Inside Shoulder]

I have no problem with bias in sports commentary.

I'd prefer commentators blatantly show their bias than try to hide it and still have it come through passively. Some people can't help but wear their heart on their sleeve and I don't begrudge that.

I have no problem watching commentary that is bias whether it is for my team or against my team. I think it is part of the spectacle of sport.

Have you tried the crap that regularly comes out of SA?
That is bi-arsed.
I don't think you can have 2 supposedly funny guys on at once, e.g. Marto and Kearns. kearns has surely done to death the "joke" when a scrum is being repacked "this is what the people have come here to see".
Martin adds nothing technically whereas Kearns has some idea whats going on in the scrums.
Marint and Kearns should not be rostered together.

 

[Brisbok]

I have no problem with bias in sports commentary.

I'd prefer commentators blatantly show their bias than try to hide it and still have it come through passively. Some people can't help but wear their heart on their sleeve and I don't begrudge that.

I have no problem watching commentary that is bias whether it is for my team or against my team. I think it is part of the spectacle of sport.

I have a feeling you might be in the minority here.

 

[Braveheart81]

Have you tried the crap that regularly comes out of SA?
That is bi-arsed.
I don't think you can have 2 supposedly funny guys on at once, e.g. Marto and Kearns. kearns has surely done to death the "joke" when a scrum is being repacked "this is what the people have come here to see".
Martin adds nothing technically whereas Kearns has some idea whats going on in the scrums.
Marint and Kearns should not be rostered together.

Yes. I watch plenty of SA based Super Rugby games.

I also agree that Kearns and Martin shouldn't both be on the commentary team. They are their to do the same job. Kearns just does it much better than Marto.

After Marto, I think Tim Horan is the next worst member of the commentary team. He is neither smart nor funny.

 

[Brisbok]

It defies belief how low the proportion of good rugby commentators around the traps in most countries is - how do the broadcasters pick them and especially keep them - surely not many people are flicking through the channels and come across kearns/marto or tony johnson et al. here in nz and say - great I love these guys, and watch the whole game?

As an outsider, I quite enjoy Tony Johnson's commentary. I find him to be very knowledgeable both tactically and of the players. Him and Justin Marshall are in fact two of my favourite commentators. Both very insightful with limited bias.

 

[Braveheart81]

The worst Kiwi commentator is Nisbo. By a mile.

 

[Cat_A]

I'd like to go back to the olden days where instead of trying to predict the future to SOUND like you know what you are talking about, you ACTUALLY KNEW what you were talking about and simply called what was going on.

I think it was Alan McGilvray who advised a young Richie Benaud "if you have nothing of value to add, let the silence speak volumes"

(or it was along those lines...)

 

[tigerland12]

Greg Clarke did a bit of what CatA is talking about on Sunday. Went to build up the Reds first try but thought it was Morahan scoring not Shipperely, made it sound like an absolute rabble of a sentence.

 

[tranquility]

Kearns is an absolute hero and is much needed.. You take rugby too seriously if you can't appreciate his banter.

 

[Brisbok]

The worst Kiwi commentator is Nisbo. By a mile.

Why is that Braveheart? He is generally quite knowledgeable, but extremely biased. But you mentioned earlier that you did not mind bias in commentary?

 

[Braveheart81]

I just find him annoying. I guess I don't have anything specific that I dislike about him. Just something about him grates on me.

I like TJ and Justin Marshall though.

 

[AlexH]

Surprisingly, I have always found South African commentators seem to call games pretty well. They are a country mile ahead of the Kiwi and Aussie commentators.

 

[Brisbok]

I just find him annoying. I guess I don't have anything specific that I dislike about him. Just something about him grates on me.

I like TJ and Justin Marshall though.

I just find it interesting that you have suggested that you do not mind biased commentary, in particular Phil Kearns, when you are a Waratahs fan is that right? But you think Greg Martin is an idiot and you have also picked out one of the most biased commentators in NZ that you also dislike.

I would suggest that Phil Kearns' commentary has a similar 'grating' affect on non-Waratah fans.