[limblee]

Why oh why do the BBC insist on providing Brian Moore employment, he's useless.

To me, he's the John Barnes of Rugby commentary, just STOP employing him.

Oh and Jonathon Davies your slowing turning into Brian, please stop.

Can't we (as BBC licence fee payers) have a RED BUTTON vote on BBC sports commentators.

[limblee]

Must be just me then.

[KUBBY]

Don't know if its just you,but I don't agree!

I've just watched the England-Italy match and once again Brian Moore has said exactly what I was thinking (or shouting at the screen!)

Brian is a very experienced player with a very good knowledge of the Rules of the game.He sums up what goes wrong, and right, during set pieces and vents his frustration at needless penalty give aways and the current practice of the backs of Kicking the ball to their opposite numbers just to have it kicked back again (and again).

I think he gets frustrated with the way that the game is played today and gives voice to that frustration.As I say,I find that I agree with most of what he says.

K.

[clockworks]

I thought you were talking about the original Brian Moore (football commentator), but he died 9 years ago.

I don't watch rugby.

[ste v p]

Brian Moore is usually insightful on forward play and particularly scrummaging. His analysis of back play is often not as good. He was evidently frustrated at England's performance but most people were frustrated I think. He's definitely a marmite personality.

[Gossops]

Originally Posted by KUBBY

Don't know if its just you,but I don't agree!

I've just watched the England-Italy match and once again Brian Moore has said exactly what I was thinking (or shouting at the screen!)

Brian is a very experienced player with a very good knowledge of the Rules of the game.He sums up what goes wrong, and right, during set pieces and vents his frustration at needless penalty give aways and the current practice of the backs of Kicking the ball to their opposite numbers just to have it kicked back again (and again).

I think he gets frustrated with the way that the game is played today and gives voice to that frustration.As I say,I find that I agree with most of what he says.

K.

I like Brian Moore's commentary - spotting when he's trying not to swear or say something completely inappropriate is brilliant. I also agree that he says what I'm thinking...

(yes I am a girl and I understand offside in both rugby and football, so don't start...)

[deantown]

I used to think that Jonathon Davies was very good.But i'm beginning to think he is becoming a big bit biased towards Wales. I think Brian Moore is quite good most of the time.

[Ivor the Engine]

Moore and Butler together are pure comedy. I used to detest their commentary and their obvious bias. On Moore's part I used to think that he was a bumbling idiot.

After listening to the dreadful O2 commentary recently, sometimes it's better the devil you know, and I have a new found respect for both of them.

[JimmyHart]

I hate his commentary with a passion. He's so biased it's untrue. It's nothing to do with being Welsh, or losing to England last week, but even if he was Welsh, Scottish, Jamacian, whatever, it would be just as horrible.

If I wanna hear someone talk about a sports game based purely on their opinion and support, I'd go down the pub or listen to club commentary, I expect people on TV to be impartial. Bill Mclaren used to manage it, why cant Moore.

[Clunk]

I'm a Welshman, and I'm a big fan of Moore's commentary.

Good bloke.

[la gran siete]

Originally Posted by JimmyHart84

I hate his commentary with a passion. He's so biased it's untrue. It's nothing to do with being Welsh, or losing to England last week, but even if he was Welsh, Scottish, Jamacian, whatever, it would be just as horrible.

If I wanna hear someone talk about a sports game based purely on their opinion and support, I'd go down the pub or listen to club commentary, I expect people on TV to be impartial. Bill Mclaren used to manage it, why cant Moore.

tbf i think he has tempered his bias somewhat .I noticed he was quite scathing about England and did talk up a few of the opposition

[JimmyHart]

Originally Posted by la gran siete

tbf i think he has tempered his bias somewhat .I noticed he was quite scathing about England and did talk up a few of the opposition

I don't watch any of the other games apart from Wales to be honest (even that I don't have much interest in), but last week I wanted to put my fist through the tv screen. Some bias, but mostly how amateur he was, coming out with really stupid and sarcastic comments.

[la gran siete]

Originally Posted by JimmyHart84

I don't watch any of the other games apart from Wales to be honest (even that I don't have much interest in), but last week I wanted to put my fist through the tv screen. Some bias, but mostly how amateur he was, coming out with really stupid and sarcastic comments.

well he is never going to be everyones favourite thats for sure, but at least he isnt dull

[JimmyHart]

Originally Posted by la gran siete

well he is never going to be everyones favourite thats for sure, but at least he isnt dull

I'd rather someone be dull and knowledgable than just spout a lot of nonsense and get paid for it. There's plenty of great commentators out there who are entertaining but also professional and know their stuff. 2 of the best being Murray Walker and Bill Mclaren. There's no excuse for Brian Moore.

[Wild Weasel]

Ack I couldn't stand that bumbling idiot, Murray Walker. I used to mute the sound and have the radio commentary on instead.

Brian Moore rules.

[limblee]

Yet another full game of awful commentary from my favourite person Brian Moore. It must be so annoying for Brian having that echo following him around, imagine not having dementia and hearing yourself say one thing, and then it being repeated over and over again. Would drive anyone mad.

Now who would I replace Brian Moore with?

From what I've heard this 6 nations I'd choose either Austin Healey or Colin Jarvis. These guys know their sports, know the rules and know how to commentate.

[JimmyHart]

Originally Posted by limblee

From what I've heard this 6 nations I'd choose either Austin Healey or Colin Jarvis. These guys know their sports, know the rules and know how to commentate.

Good call, Jarvis is excellent. Very well spoken, not biased and really knows his stuff. He knows he's there to do a job and he does it well.

[la gran siete]

Originally Posted by JimmyHart84

I'd rather someone be dull and knowledgable than just spout a lot of nonsense and get paid for it. There's plenty of great commentators out there who are entertaining but also professional and know their stuff. 2 of the best being Murray Walker and Bill Mclaren. There's no excuse for Brian Moore.

i dont see what your problem is with him .He has played the game at the highest level therefore knows it inside out.For me his commentary is good.Speaks his mind in a forthright manner, doesnt waffle, says as he sees things

[JimmyHart]

Originally Posted by la gran siete

i dont see what your problem is with him .He has played the game at the highest level therefore knows it inside out.For me his commentary is good.Speaks his mind in a forthright manner, doesnt waffle, says as he sees things

Oh come on. Because he's played the game means it automatically makes him an excellent commentator? There's plenty of football pundits who played at the top level and have absolutely no clue what they are talking about and instead of doing research and justifying their claims, they just rant and rave like they are in the pub.

Just because Moore speaks his mind, doesn't make him good or worthy of the position. I'm all for passionate commentary, but its gotta come with being professional and fair. You can see people like Charvis and Guscott are proud Welsh/English men, but never speak with bias and always give credit or criticism where its due.

Moore is just like a lager lout you see down the local pub watching rugby or football that thinks he knows it all, yet he's on a nice wage to do it.

[la gran siete]

Originally Posted by JimmyHart84

Oh come on. Because he's played the game means it automatically makes him an excellent commentator? There's plenty of football pundits who played at the top level and have absolutely no clue what they are talking about and instead of doing research and justifying their claims, they just rant and rave like they are in the pub.

Just because Moore speaks his mind, doesn't make him good or worthy of the position. I'm all for passionate commentary, but its gotta come with being professional and fair. You can see people like Charvis and Guscott are proud Welsh/English men, but never speak with bias and always give credit or criticism where its due.

Moore is just like a lager lout you see down the local pub watching rugby or football that thinks he knows it all, yet he's on a nice wage to do it.

my perception is different.To me he adds something different and is never dull.To say he doesnt know what he is talking about is obviously incorrect being as he is an ex international.He is there just to add his tuppence worth and does it well IMO.The likes of Guscott and Davies are there to dissect the game afterwards but Mooro reacts as the game goes along.Sure he makes mistakes but to my mind he adds something

[JimmyHart]

How is it obviously incorrect? Just because he played for England, doesn't mean he makes a good commentator. Playing rugby and commentating on it are 2 totally different things. Look at football , you got people like Jamie Redknapp and Steve Mac who played at the highest level for Liverpool yet go on and on and on about zonal marking and Rafa is rubbish. They never justify their points with facts, its just opinion that's come from jumping on the bandwagon of thinking of anything to criticise the team. 2 shocking pundits. Yet on the other hand you have Alan Hansen who most of the time is very good.

This is similar in rugby, Moore on numerous occasions during games he says things which just sound like an Englishman moaning at the ref for anything, just because he wants them to get the ball or score. I remember during the Wales game when England were right on the line and he said something (I cant remember what) which basically meant we had given a penalty away and stopped them scoring, but it was complete nonsense, we were defending well within the rules.

Yet you have others, as I've said, like Charvis, Guscott who are ex players and are very very good at their pundit/commentary jobs.

I appreciate that yes he does add something, that's his passion, and I've got nothing wrong with that. But when passion starts to go into bias and talking nonsense, them I'm sorry, it's not adding anything. As for reacting at the time, yes it's difficult, but surely thats what they are paid for? To make split second, fair and informative remarks about the match and to basically tell us what is going on and explain why things happen, and I'm sorry, but Moore does none of this, he's just like a fan with a microphone.

We'll have to agree to disagree, but I think basing your whole opinion on him being an ex player is very misguided, as they are completely different.

[la gran siete]

he has written a very good piece here about the state of English rugby.I often read his articles for to me they make sense
Brian Moore: England fans must wake up to rugby's new world order - Telegraph

[la gran siete]

the fact is he says what he has to say in the heat of the moment and is an excellent counterfoil to the rather pedestrian Eddie Butler .If someone does something dull(Powell) he'll say so bluntly.He is not going to give you insightful commentary like Davies or Guscott, because he is all about commentary on the hoof

[la gran siete]

you may not like his commentary but he does write exceptionally well
Brian Moore: Wake me up from this England Six Nations nightmare - Telegraph

[IAN P]

He's a qualified referee(no s******ing) so his analysis, and commentary are very good. At least he tries to explain when it goes wrong.


Charvis is another who is very similar in his views.


Butler and Moore aren't too bad, as pundits go.

[la gran siete]

Originally Posted by IAN P

He's a qualified referee(no s******ing) so his analysis, and commentary are very good. At least he tries to explain when it goes wrong.


Charvis is another who is very similar in his views.


Butler and Moore aren't too bad, as pundits go.

yes, they compliment each other quite well.Moore is more passionate and irascible whilst Butler is usually quite calm in comparison

[Ivor the Engine]

Just a little refresher. For anyone who saw last night's game, I was absolutely astonished by Moore's 'commentary'. For large portions of the game he harrumphed about how poor the referre was, particularly at scrum time.

Whilst I recognise his skill in identifying the technical problems, his comments about the referee were hardly justifiable.

He got himself so worked up that, at times, he was talking gobbledygook only to apologise minutes later once he'd seen the incident in slo-mo.

Astonishing!!!

[la gran siete]

Originally Posted by Ivor the Engine

Just a little refresher. For anyone who saw last night's game, I was absolutely astonished by Moore's 'commentary'. For large portions of the game he harrumphed about how poor the referre was, particularly at scrum time.

Whilst I recognise his skill in identifying the technical problems, his comments about the referee were hardly justifiable.

He got himself so worked up that, at times, he was talking gobbledygook only to apologise minutes later once he'd seen the incident in slo-mo.

Astonishing!!!

all heat in the moment stuff and quite excusable

[JimmyHart]

Originally Posted by la gran siete

all heat in the moment stuff and quite excusable

Baffled as to how you can say that's excusable. He's getting paid! If any commentator starts ranting and then admits a minute later that he was talking crap, then he shouldn't be doing it. At the end of the day, it's his job to provide knowledgable, unbiased commentary. He's not doing his job, as he admits he rants, so he shouldn't be doing it.

I know plenty of people who could do what he does, but somehow, they aint getting paid to do it?

People on the BBC are meant to be impartial and show no signs of bias, it's against their rules, so why is he still there? If I was listening to something like Swansea Sound listening to an Ospreys game, I could understand as they are a commercial local station. Imagine you were watching the world cup final on BBC 1 and John Motson or whoever started ranting that the referree is useless, that's a pen, that's a free kick, a certain player is cheating, only to watch the replay and then say he is wrong.

I appreciate we have different views on Moore, but I just cant believe how you're defending him no matter what.

[its_all_Greek]

You must bear in mind that he is reacting to what he sees so mistakes will happen but if he is wrong he admits it and gets on with the commentary.

At heart he is an englishman and isn't scared to admit it/show it and can be as scathing about the english team as he is passionate.

To be honest and it is just my own point of view i would rather listen to someone as passionate about the english team that quite often is saying what i am thinking, than doing a "radio" style commentary and not offering an informed personal view of what he sees.