JOHN RAWLING- AS BAD AS JIM NEILLY, OR WORSE?

overhand_right · Post by **overhand_right** » 01 May 2006, 07:31

Ever since john debuted on the bbc a few years ago, because he was not jim neilly it was basically accepted that he was better & this seems to have been taken for granted ever since.

This guy gets on my tits theres no way he is any better than Neilly most of the stuff he says is bullshit to shill whatever fights ITV are showing, every opponent no matter how shit is always a 'dangerous puncher' or 'hes got 5 knockouts in 20 fights so he can definitely BANG!!" etc or completely over reacting to any minor indiscretion against his favourites by yelling out in disgust i.e Skelton rubbing his forearm on Danny Williams chin etc 'OH NO!! the referee should not tolerate this!!!". Oh yeah and it doesnt help that every fight that goes 12 messy rds of two limited brits cuffing each other with no regards to skill or defence is 'what a fight people will talk about this one for many years' etc.

What do you guys make of him? Lets not get started on Duke McKenzie, too easy.

Twinkle Toes · Post by **Twinkle Toes** » 01 May 2006, 08:20

He's a pretty cool guy, but for sure his commentary has changed since he went to ITV.

He's no worse than McGuigan though, who jumps from one pocket to another, and generally talks total bollocks. :)

tonyevs · Post by **tonyevs** » 01 May 2006, 08:33

The thing that I don`t like about Rawlings style is that whilst he describes the ongoing action he makes it obvious who he prefers, and over emphasises what that fighter is doing..even if they aren`t doing alot.

Then he will try to be impartial, during the Munroe v Morris bout he would give a running commentry on how Morris was hurting Munroe..how Morris was landing more than Munroe in that rnd(even though it was a very close rnd)...then say to Duke he had given the rnd to Munroe??

overhand_right · Post by **overhand_right** » 02 May 2006, 07:35

Yeah my point exactly, listening to this pudendum shows just how little talent there is for UK announcers.

Since Ian Darkes not available i say bring in Steve Holdsworth & hook him up with Gary Mason. The ITV shills can fornicate off and we'll have some cold hard truthful commentary no messing about!

THEBUTCH · Post by **THEBUTCH** » 02 May 2006, 08:15

Agree. Rawlings always seems to favour the house(Sportsnetwork) boxer. Him and Duke are awful, which is a shame because clearly Rawlings knows his boxing and Duke has been there and done it.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 02 May 2006, 08:29

Well, I guess this just reflects the fact that all broadcasters generally opt for commentators who gloss over the shittier aspects of what they are broadcasting.

However, I was in agreement with Rawling that Skelton was being allowed away with murder.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 02 May 2006, 09:08

overhand_right wrote:
Since Ian Darkes not available i say bring in Steve Holdsworth & hook him up with Gary Mason. The ITV shills can smeg off and we'll have some cold hard truthful commentary no messing about!

I used to like Steve's commentary, but really gone off him now. He just waffles about things - gets his facts frequently muddled and when he is alongside a co-commentator just arse licks.

David Bremmer is an excellent commentator - him and Jimmy Mac made an excellent team on Screensport, he could work with any of the co-commentators available.

I also don't mind the guy who does the KOTV commentary.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 02 May 2006, 09:10

Steve Holdsworth is just too jaded and negative. He treats the boxing like the Eurovision song contest, however, with Eurosport you can't blame him half the time, some of those contests are just dire.

tonyevs · Post by **tonyevs** » 02 May 2006, 16:18

Gary Mason was one of the best at that time.

He would have only got better the longer he did the job also, such a shame we do not see him on the box anymore, whatever happened to him? I think I heard he swore or something live on air?? surely this alone cannot have been the reason behind him being banished??

Johnny Nelson, Nicky Piper and Glen McCrory are also excellent, Spencer Oliver I also think has real potential...if only he`d stop looking at the camera as if it was a mirror....cracks me up every time

...like a sketch out of Little Britain

But why not bring on Buncey as a colour guy, the guy is made for big time boxing, who else conveys the enthusiasm that Steve does??
Imagine him and McGuigan competing for the camera

KO Artist · Post by **KO Artist** » 02 May 2006, 17:04

tonyevs wrote:Gary Mason was one of the best at that time.

He would have only got better the longer he did the job also, such a shame we do not see him on the box anymore, whatever happened to him? I think I heard he swore or something live on air?? surely this alone cannot have been the reason behind him being banished??

Johnny Nelson, Nicky Piper and Glen McCrory are also excellent, Spencer Oliver I also think has real potential...if only he`d stop looking at the camera as if it was a mirror....cracks me up every time ...like a sketch out of Little Britain

But why not bring on Buncey as a colour guy, the guy is made for big time boxing, who else conveys the enthusiasm that Steve does??
Imagine him and McGuigan competing for the camera

Mason made the all time great comment live on SKY TV

When asked by Paul Dempsey if he thought a decision in a WBO title fight was fair, he responded

"Saddam Hussien is gonna give himself up for war crimes, but on one condition........ That the WBO appoint the judges".

Good joke, but it got him the tin tack.

steve689 · Post by **steve689** » 03 May 2006, 02:54

Mason got the boot for that? Compared with some of the lifeless, arse kissers parading around today they should have given him an extended contract for a gem like that

Better than Nicky Piper's "Benama Skin" pun.

THEBUTCH · Post by **THEBUTCH** » 03 May 2006, 07:45

That's a cracker from Mason.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 03 May 2006, 10:17

Rawlings is pretty dire I think... still thinks he's on the radio and talks far too much.
Why don't ITV get Simon Reed... brother of Oliver, he commentates on Tennis mainly but I have some fights which he has commentated on and he was very good... informative but not overbearing... from the Harry Carpenter school of don't talk unless theres something to say!...

steve689 · Post by **steve689** » 03 May 2006, 10:25

I suppose the producers must brief them to give as much "viewer informing" as possible because i was watching some older fights from the 70's and the old style commentators definately didn't talk as much. There were long periods when nothing was said and nothing was needed to be said. Every second of the 3 minutes is usually filled up with inane jabbering now.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 03 May 2006, 10:37

steve689 wrote:I suppose the producers must brief them to give as much "viewer informing" as possible because i was watching some older fights from the 70's and the old style commentators definately didn't talk as much. There were long periods when nothing was said and nothing was needed to be said. Every second of the 3 minutes is usually filled up with inane jabbering now.

Yeah... I actually found it hard to concentrate on the Morris fight on Sat as John and Duke were nattering away like one of those annoying couples you get in cinemas... I suppose next thing is they'll be eating popcorn too, while theyre talking!!.... :x :x :x

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 03 May 2006, 11:48

steve689 wrote:I suppose the producers must brief them to give as much "viewer informing" as possible because i was watching some older fights from the 70's and the old style commentators definately didn't talk as much. There were long periods when nothing was said and nothing was needed to be said. Every second of the 3 minutes is usually filled up with inane jabbering now.

It's something which has happened across the board in sports coverage, producers feel that the viewer needs to be idiot proofed by accompanying every single action.

This is part of why wimbledon coverage is still enjoyable, not so much prattling, though not as good as the days of Dan Maskell. Same with snooker, the drame is allowed to unfold without constant jabbering, although Dennis and Virgo do spout some bollocks sometimes, I like the old boy, whose name eludes me for the moment, Ted something.

RobD · Post by **RobD** » 03 May 2006, 12:17

Actually the best commentating to me is none at all. I have a copy of the Graham/Mccallum fight where there is no commentary at all. Just every few rounds an in studio person would make some comments.

Rawlings reminds me of Jim Lampley. He obviously wants one fighter to win, and goes on about everything they do.

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 03 May 2006, 12:44

Holdsworth? If Rawling supposedly talks shit why would Holdsworth be a better option? The guy talks absolute rubbish constantly. As for taking sides and having favourites Holdsworth is the worst commentator for doing so I think I have ever heard in any sport!

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 03 May 2006, 12:53

jamesmcdonnell wrote:
steve689 wrote:I suppose the producers must brief them to give as much "viewer informing" as possible because i was watching some older fights from the 70's and the old style commentators definately didn't talk as much. There were long periods when nothing was said and nothing was needed to be said. Every second of the 3 minutes is usually filled up with inane jabbering now.
It's something which has happened across the board in sports coverage, producers feel that the viewer needs to be idiot proofed by accompanying every single action.

This is part of why wimbledon coverage is still enjoyable, not so much prattling, though not as good as the days of Dan Maskell. Same with snooker, the drame is allowed to unfold without constant jabbering, although Dennis and Virgo do spout some bollocks sometimes, I like the old boy, whose name eludes me for the moment, Ted something.

Whipsering Ted Lowe, who started his commentating (with the BBC) in the actual audience with no sound proof studio hence his quiet voice. It was great to see him back on the mic (breifly) in last years final.

He did a gem of Murray Walker ism though.

"For those watching on Black and White, the pink is situated next to the brown".

Rawling is much better than Holdsworth, although David Bremmer is my current fave.

I remember Simon Reed doing commentary (no idea he was related to Oliver) he was quite good, but gave me the impression he wasn't that interested in it... Did quite a few of the UK legs of the Big PPV's - before Adam Smith got on the mic.

My favourite Co-Commentator of all time was Gill Clancey (a great tactition) it was a shame to see him working on the last Margarito PPV, only briefly, but he has aged dramatically and it was very sad.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 03 May 2006, 13:03

Nothing too wrong with Rawling. Apart from when a shit show's on hedefinitely glosses over it. In particular some of the awful SN fights that have been on ITV, i.e. those two scrappy Danny Williams fights. But he did just fine on the Calzaghe-Lacy/Hobson-Maccarinelli

Holdsworth does tend to natter. & he has dropped a few clangers. said that Sven Ottke was given his hardest fight by "the Jamaican, Lloyd Bryan". Ottke won every round against Bryan, it was Glen Johnson he meant!

I thought Gary Mason was sacked from Sky for saying "where's my fornicating tie" on air?

never been keen on the way the recent Sky panel has been done. seems like Nelson, McCrory, Piper or whoever are competing to get their word in, you can see when one guy gets interrupted he seems a little peeved. i always felt it seemed slightly awkward

MightyWarrior · Post by **MightyWarrior** » 03 May 2006, 13:44

Yeah Holdsworth is not an option: too much of a loose canon, and not that good either. Bremmer is just like Alan Partridge and needs to be banished to radio Norwich.

I think Rawlings does a good job all things considered - better than Jim Beam Neilly defintely.

KO Artist · Post by **KO Artist** » 03 May 2006, 14:23

stujones wrote:
jamesmcdonnell wrote:
steve689 wrote:I suppose the producers must brief them to give as much "viewer informing" as possible because i was watching some older fights from the 70's and the old style commentators definately didn't talk as much. There were long periods when nothing was said and nothing was needed to be said. Every second of the 3 minutes is usually filled up with inane jabbering now.
It's something which has happened across the board in sports coverage, producers feel that the viewer needs to be idiot proofed by accompanying every single action.

This is part of why wimbledon coverage is still enjoyable, not so much prattling, though not as good as the days of Dan Maskell. Same with snooker, the drame is allowed to unfold without constant jabbering, although Dennis and Virgo do spout some bollocks sometimes, I like the old boy, whose name eludes me for the moment, Ted something.
Whipsering Ted Lowe, who started his commentating (with the BBC) in the actual audience with no sound proof studio hence his quiet voice. It was great to see him back on the mic (breifly) in last years final.

He did a gem of Murray Walker ism though.

"For those watching on Black and White, the pink is situated next to the brown".

Rawling is much better than Holdsworth, although David Bremmer is my current fave.

I remember Simon Reed doing commentary (no idea he was related to Oliver) he was quite good, but gave me the impression he wasn't that interested in it... Did quite a few of the UK legs of the Big PPV's - before Adam Smith got on the mic.

My favourite Co-Commentator of all time was Gill Clancey (a great tactition) it was a shame to see him working on the last Margarito PPV, only briefly, but he has aged dramatically and it was very sad.

Good call Stu

Clancy was my favourite, well joint favourite actually, with Marv Albert.

My UK fave is Reggie and Dave Brenner is very very good too.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 03 May 2006, 14:59

jamesmcdonnell wrote:
steve689 wrote:I suppose the producers must brief them to give as much "viewer informing" as possible because i was watching some older fights from the 70's and the old style commentators definately didn't talk as much. There were long periods when nothing was said and nothing was needed to be said. Every second of the 3 minutes is usually filled up with inane jabbering now.
It's something which has happened across the board in sports coverage, producers feel that the viewer needs to be idiot proofed by accompanying every single action.

This is part of why wimbledon coverage is still enjoyable, not so much prattling, though not as good as the days of Dan Maskell. Same with snooker, the drame is allowed to unfold without constant jabbering, although Dennis and Virgo do spout some bollocks sometimes, I like the old boy, whose name eludes me for the moment, Ted something.

Think Barry Davies is my favourite from this school - he can put his hand to anything and just lets the drama unfold, also does fantastic research - he really is great in the obscure Olympic Sports.... His commentry on stuff like Gymnastics and Ice Skating is fantastic, mainly cause he says very very little during the performance.

lirva33 · Post by **lirva33** » 03 May 2006, 15:01

rawlings really is pathetic, along with mckensie. I know a lot of people that hate his commentary. they can't reqally believe some of the shit they spout. Don't try to insult my intelligence wankers.

overhand_right · Post by **overhand_right** » 08 May 2006, 10:23

DAVID BREMMER??? Unfucking believable. Hes there with reg gutteridge & harry carpenter in out dated senile old men rambling on with no insight whatsoever.

Good call on simon reed. he used to do a great job back in the day. Check out Holyfield/dougla,s Hide/tucker etc.