• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Channel 9 Commentators - Very Poor Form

Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
vic_orthdox said:
What is there to be gained out of it? The selectors are much better off taking the heat from not selecting him, than hanging out an employee to dry and making him look like the bad bloke. Being criticised isn't the worst thing in the world, and when you know that it's not justified, it's generally water off a duck's back. If you have knowledge that those criticising you don't, then who cares what they have to say!
Click to expand...
Well I don't know about everyone, but myself I always think the best route is to avoid criticism to the maximum extent by making decisions I'm responsible for as open and accountable as possible. If you've two options: get criticism that you know is bull**** because you've not been so open as you could be; or be open and thus not even get the criticism at all... then I really don't see the slightest of good reason why the former option is the preferable one of the two. None at all.

And if you feel the employee is the bad bloke - which, judging by what you've said about their reasons for not picking Noffke, they do - then I see no reason not to hang him out to dry and teach him a lesson. What is there to gain by not doing so? If you wanted to take the heat and avoid a player getting criticism, you'd generally want to do that because you were trying to avoid his confidence taking a knock because you wanted him to play at a later date. Well, for a multitude of reasons, that doesn't seem to be the case with Noffke. 1) He's not getting any younger. 2) Things like poor attitudes don't change too readily, especially in someone who's closer to the end of their career than the start. 3) If you want a player improve a poor attitude, generally the best chance of that happening is for him to be told to pull his head in, and a public dressing-down is one of the best ways to do that in my experience.
 
Uppercut

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Richard said:
Well I don't know about everyone, but myself I always think the best route is to avoid criticism to the maximum extent by making decisions I'm responsible for as open and accountable as possible. If you've two options: get criticism that you know is bull**** because you've not been so open as you could be; or be open and thus not even get the criticism at all... then I really don't see the slightest of good reason why the former option is the preferable one of the two. None at all.

And if you feel the employee is the bad bloke - which, judging by what you've said about their reasons for not picking Noffke, they do - then I see no reason not to hang him out to dry and teach him a lesson. What is there to gain by not doing so? If you wanted to take the heat and avoid a player getting criticism, you'd generally want to do that because you were trying to avoid his confidence taking a knock because you wanted him to play at a later date. Well, for a multitude of reasons, that doesn't seem to be the case with Noffke. 1) He's not getting any younger. 2) Things like poor attitudes don't change too readily, especially in someone who's closer to the end of their career than the start. 3) If you want a player improve a poor attitude, generally the best chance of that happening is for him to be told to pull his head in, and a public dressing-down is one of the best ways to do that in my experience.
Click to expand...
I agree with vic here. It's part of the selector's job to act in the best interests of the team, and if they feel that releasing information on a player who was formerly part of the squad would not be in the team's best interests, they shouldn't do so. It's a pretty reasonable opinion. Let business matters remain private.
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
If they feel it's in the best interests to act that way, they're right to do so, of course. What I question is not that, but that it is indeed in the team's best interests to act that way. I'd say it's actually in the team's best interests not to.

I've no problem with selectors "taking the heat" for the sake of a player they want to protect for whatever reason, but I can't actually think of any circumstance where that might happen. Generally, if you're treating a player in the way that's best for him and for the team, you'll be recognised as doing such.
 
Uppercut

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Richard said:
If they feel it's in the best interests to act that way, they're right to do so, of course. What I question is not that, but that it is indeed in the team's best interests to act that way. I'd say it's actually in the team's best interests not to.

I've no problem with selectors "taking the heat" for the sake of a player they want to protect for whatever reason, but I can't actually think of any circumstance where that might happen. Generally, if you're treating a player in the way that's best for him and for the team, you'll be recognised as doing such.
Click to expand...
It's not just that. Noffke has state team-mates and people he knows from when he was in the squad in the Australia side. They wouldn't be happy with CA hanging their friend and team-mate out to dry. It's poor PR for CA in general to be seen to have disputes with their players, and the general public tend to side with the player more often than not so it creates more problems than it solves. Keeping it quiet and taking the heat is a tough thing to do at the best of times, but it's part of their job.
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
I guess I see what you mean, but I'd certainly dispute that the public tends to side with players. If a player is perceived to be talented with poor attitude, generally these are those who are turned against most quickly.

Also, if Noffke's attitude is poor enough that he deserves non-selection, I'm frankly amazed if he's got all that many genuine friends at all.
 
susudear

susudear

Banned
Channnel 9 rocks

Superb commentaytors. Benod, Healy, Lawry all are good. Much better than those jokers from the subcontinet. :laugh: 8-)
 
Langeveldt

Langeveldt

Soutie
Voltman said:
Please find a hole to bury yourself in. Now.
Click to expand...
Giving the province of Otago a bad name..

Heard Richie going on about Betfair and the odds today, trying to cram it in before a ball was bowled.. It just didn't seem right, and C9 have consistently the lowest standard of commentary going IMO
 
Uppercut

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Richard said:
I guess I see what you mean, but I'd certainly dispute that the public tends to side with players. If a player is perceived to be talented with poor attitude, generally these are those who are turned against most quickly.
Click to expand...
Depends how good he is really. You only have to look at the reaction Symonds got when he came out to bat in Perth to see where their loyalties lie.
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Uppercut said:
Depends how good he is really. You only have to look at the reaction Symonds got when he came out to bat in Perth to see where their loyalties lie.
Click to expand...
Well it seems Symonds has long been overrated by the rabble in Australia (most of the higher-quality observers on this site don't think all that much of him but amongst the more casual types he seems to be a demi-god) but also it seems there's less than certainty about his attitude. Only recently, and from some very top journos (Greg Baum, Peter English), has there been anything seriously questioning his commitment to the BaggyGreen.

That I've read, anyway.
 
Burgey

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Richard said:
Well it seems Symonds has long been overrated by the rabble in Australia (most of the higher-quality observers on this site don't think all that much of him but amongst the more casual types he seems to be a demi-god) but also it seems there's less than certainty about his attitude. Only recently, and from some very top journos (Greg Baum, Peter English), has there been anything seriously questioning his commitment to the BaggyGreen.

That I've read, anyway.
Click to expand...
Perversely, his innings in the first dig was, I thought, his most assured in Tests. Then he played those two shots ....
 
susudear

susudear

Banned
Why oh why?

Richard said:
About as likely he's from Otago as it is that he was from Cairns, really. This is almost certainly a duplicate of some sort even if it's not grapedo.
Click to expand...
Why can't you just post **** of yours without taking a jab at anyone whom you persume is someone?? :laugh:
 
duffer

duffer

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I thought Ritchie trying to sell CSI Miami was bad enough but his forced selling of Betfair at every opportunity is even worse. Especially as on the morning of the 5th day he said on air that he "doesn't bet on anything that speaks." Brilliant little middle finger to the producers from the great man.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top