BoxRec

Useless, absolutely useless. Can't even go one line without messing his words up.

Get rid Sky, please!

Terrrrry wrote:Useless, absolutely useless. Can't even go one line without messing his words up.

Get rid Sky, please!

I would be really glad never to see it hear his voice again. Sadly Adam Smith is his soul mate and he will never get rid of him. I sky plus for 15 mins so I can wind past him.

Nothing wrong with him in my opinon. Not enough to get wound up over anyway.

get off his back, johnny is ok, the system works.

Sorry, but he's just not cut out for hosting/co-hosting a show.

I've met him away from the TV cameras, seems a decent enough fella. Put him infront of a TV camera and he turns into a bumbling fool.

I don't understand why they can't reshoot/edit when he gets his lines wrong on Ringside. Not like it goes out live surely..

Terrrrry wrote:Sorry, but he's just not cut out for hosting/co-hosting a show.

I've met him away from the TV cameras, seems a decent enough fella. Put him infront of a TV camera and he turns into a bumbling fool.

He's certainly not as bad as John Barnes when he was presenting the football. He'd be great when he was talking directly to the pundits but he'd look at the camera and speak as if he had a badger nursing its way slowly up his arse aka not comfortable viewing.
I don't mind Johnny Nelson, he may not be a 'natural' broadcaster but he's alright

I completely disagree - i think he's knowledgable, likeable, articulate with good presence.

danfoster wrote:I completely disagree - i think he's knowledgable, likeable, articulate with good presence.

Brokeback is all of those things but, as with almost all presenters - not just on Sky - he appears to be a 'yes man' who goes with the flow.

This is why when you get Harty on or Froch, to a lesser extent, they stand out so much (in a good way, usually).

I must admit I find him irritating too, he seems very awkward to watch. And each time he fluffs his lines he goes into overdrive to correct himeself/get his confidence back.

Nice guy but just don't want to watch him.

dondada wrote:

danfoster wrote:I completely disagree - i think he's knowledgable, likeable, articulate with good presence.

Brokeback is all of those things but, as with almost all presenters - not just on Sky - he appears to be a 'yes man' who goes with the flow.

This is why when you get Harty on or Froch, to a lesser extent, they stand out so much (in a good way, usually).

Its still a program i enjoy watching nothing wrong with it. The presenter usually is a yes man who keeps the show rolling along.....thats their job in my opinion, its generally the guests that can be a bit more controversial or have the deeper opinions.

people like Jonothan Ross break the mould a bit but although he is funny i think his show is more about him than the guests sometimes, so i prefer what i see on ringside for sure.

Good to see the young lad Frampton last night too...came across well

I think he's alright...at the end of the day he's an ex-boxer, so we should cut him some slack. He hasn't been to drama school and he probably wasn't always cast as the lead role in the school play so I don't expect him to be the next Jonathan Ross!

He's well spoken and seems a decent bloke and he certainly breaks the mould of the stereotypical image of the punch drunk, down on life ex-boxer. Maybe thats why Sky use him?

Nothing wrong with him. He supports his presenter and the guests. His roll is to engage with the casuals. It must be pretty difficult to break down what the guests are saying into something that everyone can understand.

What do people want ?
Well I guess some ranting controverial figure.
Guess what ? It ain't gonna happen.
Presenters present - specifically on the basis of the script they're handed, and the odd anecdotal (based on casual observations) comment - that comes as an instruction down the ear piece from the Director.
As far as I'm aware it's a live show to add to the difficulty of presenting.
Anyone who thinks it's easy - have a go, talking fom a sript whilst at the same time getting instructions in your right ear.
Johnny does a good job.

danfoster wrote:I completely disagree - i think he's knowledgable, likeable, articulate with good presence.

I agree and he seems to get the best out of the guests as they like him.

big lennox wrote:

danfoster wrote:I completely disagree - i think he's knowledgable, likeable, articulate with good presence.

I agree and he seems to get the best out of the guests as they like him.

This is key. If people are impressed with the guests, but not the presenter(s), then the presenter(s) are obviously making something tick.

BTW this thread is a disgrace

twenty six wrote:What do people want ?
Well I guess some ranting controverial figure.
Guess what ? It ain't gonna happen.
Presenters present - specifically on the basis of the script they're handed, and the odd anecdotal (based on casual observations) comment - that comes as an instruction down the ear piece from the Director.
As far as I'm aware it's a live show to add to the difficulty of presenting.
Anyone who thinks it's easy - have a go, talking fom a sript whilst at the same time getting instructions in your right ear.
Johnny does a good job.

It's not live. Maybe filmed "as live".....only way to explain them leaving in the endless JN bumbles.

As long as remains Smith in situ then Johnny remains on screen.

Its crying out to promote Ed Robinson to a regular presenting role IMHO

Not a big fan of Johnny on SS to be honest, for many of the same reasons as have already been posted. Wouldn't say its a major issue for me, he's not Bunce-annoying or anything, just wouldn't be one I'd pick if I were employing the presenters (just Moore and Froch huddled around a mic sounds fine to me - simple, understated, effective).

Not met Johnny in person, as seems to be the case with most of those on here who are in the pro-Johnny camp, I certainly have great respect for him as a fighter though.

Barry McGuigan is another one who also splits opinion, I like him, but I can easily understand that some people won't. Its not about ranting, its simply personal preference. Disgrace? Its called a debate.

Johnny has worked hard on his media career.
He's presented some great documentaries for the BBC Inside Out programmes.
Sure there are some on youtube.
Did a great programme with the Paras, also one working on stage at Funny Girls (hilarious)
There was also one with a Cricketer - forget his name now - who suffered from a sleep disorder and Johnny followed him through his rehab.
You cannot fault the guy for the effort he puts in - whatever he turns his hand to.
Also delivers some good motivational speeches and knows his stuff on Sports Psychology.
I think he can be forgiven for the odd tongue trip !

twenty six wrote:Johnny has worked hard on his media career.
He's presented some great documentaries for the BBC Inside Out programmes.
Sure there are some on youtube.
Did a great programme with the Paras, also one working on stage at Funny Girls (hilarious)
There was also one with a Cricketer - forget his name now - who suffered from a sleep disorder and Johnny followed him through his rehab.
You cannot fault the guy for the effort he puts in - whatever he turns his hand to.
Also delivers some good motivational speeches and knows his stuff on Sports Psychology.
I think he can be forgiven for the odd tongue trip !

Fair point, Johnny has indeed worked hard at his media career. I would say that such roles are judged more on performance than effort, but I do take your point.

JamesH wrote:Disgrace? Its called a debate.

Ok, if you say so. Please explain on what grounds Nelson should be sacked...

JDC wrote:

JamesH wrote:Disgrace? Its called a debate.

Ok, if you say so. Please explain on what grounds Nelson should be sacked...

I didn't say he should be sacked, so I won't press that argument in the slightest. I think someone said Sky should get rid, which they are entitled to do at the end of anyones contract without explaining the grounds to you or anyone else. That we can debate such matters is the very essence of this forum. Bite your lip and move on.

Terrrrry wrote:Useless, absolutely useless. Can't even go one line without messing his words up.

Get rid Sky, please!

This is the OP of the thread you are supporting. It's a witch hunt, not a debate.

DaveBoyMorrison wrote:

Terrrrry wrote:Useless, absolutely useless. Can't even go one line without messing his words up.

Get rid Sky, please!

I would be really glad never to see it hear his voice again. Sadly Adam Smith is his soul mate and he will never get rid of him. I sky plus for 15 mins so I can wind past him.

Hahah I had a chuckle at that mate!