Re: IT'S OUR YEAR, PROBABLY : Tue Jan 28, 2020 1:12 pm  

sally cinnamon wrote:

RD's critique is totally correct. Given the time and effort the hosts are putting in, they may as well produce a good product as churn out something cringey.

As someone who has to navigate the commute to work in London and runs a lot, I consume a lot of podcasts, and you see a huge variety in quality. A good podcast can beat other forms of media - for politics and NFL I much prefer listening to the podcasts I subscribe to than the mainstream news which is soundbite-dominated. In a 40 to 60 min podcast you can get a level of interesting discussion that you just don't get from other media sources. But a lot of podcasts just fall flat. Other than issues around set up (poor sound quality is an immediate killer) the single biggest turn off to me is when the presenters spend time trying to be funny (especially with cringey humour), chatting about their personal lives, side jokes and whatever. The listener has downloaded the podcast to listen to someone discussing the topic of interest, not to hear about the hosts.

There are some really good football podcasts: my current two favourites are Nessun Dorma (90s football) and These Football Times. They are nostalgia podcasts talking about previous seasons, teams and players which is right up my street but they cut out the side talk and have some really interesting discussion with different viewpoints added. Another good fan-led podcast from another sport is Mile High Report (Denver Broncos), the hosts cut out any attempts to make themselves the focus of the show, they aren't trying to be controversial or have hot takes but offer interesting viewpoints that are worth listening to.

Can an opinion be "totally correct"?

RD and yourself obviously have your own views on what constitutes a good sports podcast, but that just means that this pod isn't for either of you. I'm sure there are satarical takes on football and NFL that you avoid for the same reason but that doesn't mean they dont have their place.

I assume that the name and style of the pod came from the unofficial match day programme which i remember being sold outside Wilderspool back in the day which also took a satarical view on The Wire. In that sense the pod is true to its roots.

I don't get the impression that for a podcast focusing on a single team, they stuggle for subscribers, hence I can't see the format changing and RD shouldn't get upset about his feedback not being taken onboard.

It does raise an interesting point about whether there is a gap in the market for weekly fan pod on The Wire without a focus on satire.

[Uncle Rico]

Re: IT'S OUR YEAR, PROBABLY : Tue Jan 28, 2020 1:14 pm  

lefty goldblatt wrote:

FFS, The amount of humbugery on this thread is ridiculous.

I've never listened to one of these podcasts in my life. I see one, I DONT CLICK ON IT, as I have no interest. Yet, people say they are 5h1t, BUT STILL CLICK. A word to the unwise. If you don't like something, don't use it. Just give it a wide berth. In 1986, I bought Bon Jovi's Slippery When Wet (yes, I know). I hated it. Consequently, not a penny of my hard earned goes to the poodle haired plonkers. When they're on the radio, I change stations.

It seems people are queueing up to be appalled/offended.

There's obviously a market for these lads' output. Let them listen to it.
All the rest, untangle your smalls.

SPOT ON

Re: IT'S OUR YEAR, PROBABLY : Tue Jan 28, 2020 1:52 pm  

lefty goldblatt wrote:

FFS, The amount of humbugery on this thread is ridiculous.

I've never listened to one of these podcasts in my life. I see one, I DONT CLICK ON IT, as I have no interest. Yet, people say they are 5h1t, BUT STILL CLICK. A word to the unwise. If you don't like something, don't use it. Just give it a wide berth. In 1986, I bought Bon Jovi's Slippery When Wet (yes, I know). I hated it. Consequently, not a penny of my hard earned goes to the poodle haired plonkers. When they're on the radio, I change stations.

It seems people are queueing up to be appalled/offended.

There's obviously a market for these lads' output. Let them listen to it.
All the rest, untangle your smalls.

I totally agree. It's not like the old days where you'd get collared at the bar by some opinionated sole mouthing off whilst your mates laughed at you from a safe distance as you attempted to make your excuses and leave.

If you don't want to read / listen / see something then just go and click on something else instead.

And remember, there's a complete and utter plonker on every forum that the rest of us laugh at. If you don't know who it is - then it's you.

Re: IT'S OUR YEAR, PROBABLY : Wed Jan 29, 2020 12:52 pm  

The thing is that I and others WANT THEM to succeed with this podcast. Irony, sarcasm, sattire, all to the good, but mimicking the smuttier aspects of Benny Hill, not from time to time but in almost every other sentence, is killing what in other respects is a good idea very well produced. We're in the 21st Century. In the 60s and 70s sport fanzines, like University rag-mags, would include pin-ups of scantilly clad women, it was acceptable at the time but would be (rightly) decried nowadays. If podcasts are the 'new fanzines' then its clearly not appropriate now. Of course I can stop listening, but I'd rather give them what I hope is constructive criticism. If, after all this from genuine Wire fans, they decide to keep the smutty tone, I'll leave them to it and the ( I suspect ) very niche audience that they will be left with.