World Cup 2014- The Official Thread!!

17071737576115

Comments

  • deivu74deivu74 Posts: 3,001
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    So we're half way through the three-games-a-day stage. It's going too fast! I'm enjoying watching footie from 4pm-1am. :D
  • irishfeenirishfeen Posts: 10,025
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    AZZURRI 06 wrote: »
    I am disappointed at not getting RTE`s coverage on Sky, thought it would be on as they showed the Confederations Cup last year. RTE have always had a good football ethos, showing more games than the British channels. Dunphy is good craic.
    Yeah RTÉ's coverage has been very good as usual, they do these kinds of things very well - with the exception of John Giles who usually is out if his depth with the letter matches the panel has been very good. Didi Hamann and Ossie Ardiles are both back and making a great contribution to the team.

    Can you not get Saorview where your living in the north?
  • BFGArmyBFGArmy Posts: 28,860
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Mark_spy wrote: »

    Peter Crouch and Mikael Sylvestre?! Well that's certainly a different World Cup line-up.
    ITV and BBC must have been gutted to not get those two. :D
  • samburrowssamburrows Posts: 1,671
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    deivu74 wrote: »
    So we're half way through the three-games-a-day stage. It's going too fast! I'm enjoying watching footie from 4pm-1am. :D

    Was thinking the same thing this morning. I wish it would slow down!
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 35
    Forum Member
    BFGArmy wrote: »
    Peter Crouch and Mikael Sylvestre?! Well that's certainly a different World Cup line-up.
    ITV and BBC must have been gutted to not get those two. :D

    : -)
    Robbie Fowler will replace Peter. Is he any better?
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 35
    Forum Member
    Bhaveshgor wrote: »
    To be fair it is better than having no pundit or host and just showing the games.
    From reading the comments it sounds like Sony six have catered for most indian preference and tried to mix Indian and English type coverage by having John Abraham and indian host and at the same time had Crouch, Silvestre and other pundits.

    Creating pundit show is quite difficult in India anyway with half the population wanting English Punditry and the other half wanting Hindi Punditry. In Cricket Star sports does both with one channel having English coverage of the India game and the other having Hindi commentary.

    They could've easily recruited someone who has knowledge in football rather than going with Bollywood celebs/anchors.
  • DragonQDragonQ Posts: 4,807
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Does anyone know why ITV for some reason persist in using "Holland" and "HOL" instead of "Netherlands" and "NED" in their international coverage? Strictly speaking it's incorrect to refer to the country as Holland and it makes them look amateurish. It's always bugged me but at least the BBC sorted this mistake out years ago.

    It's surely a conscious decision to be wrong because it's ubiquitous across their pundits, commentators, graphics, etc.
  • radcliffe95radcliffe95 Posts: 4,086
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Clarke Carlisle is an absolute arrogant tool
  • SamuelWSamuelW Posts: 8,447
    Forum Member
    World Cup ratings average share after day six:

    BBC- 39pct [35pct exc England]
    Itv- 30pct

    People are saying the quality of coverage doesnt impact the ratings, that it is the teams involved. Well, it was the Beeb and Itv who alternatively chose the games they wanted. So it looks like thus far, the BBC have chosen the better games. Even if you estimate the next two England Itv games get about 60pct share, Itv ratings average will still be trailing behind BBC One's 39pct.
  • BFGArmyBFGArmy Posts: 28,860
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    SamuelW wrote: »
    World Cup ratings average share after day six:

    BBC- 39pct [35pct exc England]
    Itv- 30pct

    People are saying the quality of coverage doesnt impact the ratings, that it is the teams involved. Well, it was the Beeb and Itv who alternatively chose the games they wanted. So it looks like thus far, the BBC have chosen the better games. Even if you estimate the next two England Itv games get about 60pct share, Itv ratings average will still be trailing behind BBC One's 39pct.

    I don't think it matters at all though and shouldn't be used a stick to beat ITV with.

    Have to say I thought ITV were brilliant again on the Holland game ( though were helped by an excellent game). The studio panel were very good - Andros Towmsend has been surprisingly good (and much better than I expected) and Martin O'Neill was as brilliant as he has been in previous World Cup/Euros punditry appearances and I really enjoyed when he contributed and hearing what he had to say. Great to finally see him and I only wish he'd first appeared earlier and will appear much more in the tournament.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    Forum Member
    BFGArmy wrote: »
    Have to say I thought ITV were brilliant again on the Holland game ( though were helped by an excellent game). The studio panel were very good - Andros Towmsend has been surprisingly good (and much better than I expected) and Martin O'Neill was as brilliant as he has been in previous World Cup/Euros punditry appearances and I really enjoyed when he contributed and hearing what he had to say. Great to finally see him and I only wish he'd first appeared earlier and will appear much more in the tournament.

    Have to agree with all you say there
    The Holland game made it great, but everything about that broadcast for me was excellent.
    I too have always enjoyed Martins views, do also hope we see/hear more of him.
  • tiger2000tiger2000 Posts: 8,535
    Forum Member
    LOL at the Chilean fans knocking down the wall at the Media Centre to gain access to the stadium!
  • Paul_CrawfordPaul_Crawford Posts: 5,860
    Forum Member
    Like Murphy, very insightful
  • bwfcolbwfcol Posts: 13,670
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    tiger2000 wrote: »
    LOL at the Chilean fans knocking down the wall at the Media Centre to gain access to the stadium!

    Thanks for your insight into the broadcasting of the World Cup.

    I also find mindless violence "LOL" :)
  • Ian CleverlyIan Cleverly Posts: 10,683
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Post #1808 tell me about it (re: Netherlands wrongly named), it's bugged me for ages, which is why I 'found' an SBS (Australia) stream.
  • LanarkianLanarkian Posts: 7,533
    Forum Member
    DragonQ wrote: »
    Does anyone know why ITV for some reason persist in using "Holland" and "HOL" instead of "Netherlands" and "NED" in their international coverage? Strictly speaking it's incorrect to refer to the country as Holland and it makes them look amateurish. It's always bugged me but at least the BBC sorted this mistake out years ago.

    It's surely a conscious decision to be wrong because it's ubiquitous across their pundits, commentators, graphics, etc.
    I know from my frequent visits to the Netherlands that the international team is known as Holland.
  • sat-iresat-ire Posts: 4,753
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    IanFergus wrote: »
    I know from my frequent visits to the Netherlands that the international team is known as Holland.

    https://www.facebook.com/TheNetherlandsFootballTeam
    The official Facebook page of the Netherlands football team for all international fans. The Royal Netherlands Football Association (KNVB) owns and updates this page.
    Australia - The Netherlands (2-3) (23 photos)
    The Netherlands wins the second World Cup with 2-3 against Australia. Goals from Arjen Robben, Robin van Persie and Memphis Depay.
  • tiger2000tiger2000 Posts: 8,535
    Forum Member
    DragonQ wrote: »
    Does anyone know why ITV for some reason persist in using "Holland" and "HOL" instead of "Netherlands" and "NED" in their international coverage? Strictly speaking it's incorrect to refer to the country as Holland and it makes them look amateurish. It's always bugged me but at least the BBC sorted this mistake out years ago.

    It's surely a conscious decision to be wrong because it's ubiquitous across their pundits, commentators, graphics, etc.

    It is very confusing for us non Dutch!

    I checked on the Dutch Tourist Information Site...
    The official name for the entire domain under the rule of Queen Beatrix is the Kingdom of the Netherlands, though this title also includes the island countries of the Netherlands Antilles and Aruba. The country located on the European continent is officially known as the Netherlands in English.

    The name Holland is common but technically incorrect, as North and South Holland are actually provinces located in the central-western part of the country.

    However, the national football team, with the iconic orange and blue jerseys, go by Holland.

    And just to make things more complicated, the people and the language are known as Dutch.

    My understanding from the above is that the country is called The Netherlands but their National Football Team is called Holland, Holland is also how the Dutch refer to their country in their Tourism Brochures. So both the BBC and ITV are right, since the natives also use both terms.
  • LanarkianLanarkian Posts: 7,533
    Forum Member
    tiger2000 wrote: »
    It is very confusing for us non Dutch!

    I checked on the Dutch Tourist Information Site...



    My understanding from the above is that the country is called The Netherlands but their National Football Team is called Holland, Holland is also how the Dutch refer to their country in their Tourism Brochures. So both the BBC and ITV are right, since the natives also use both terms.
    Absolutely correct.
  • BelligerenceBelligerence Posts: 40,613
    Forum Member
    Like Murphy, very insightful
    Warmly recieved on Twitter.
  • carnoch04carnoch04 Posts: 10,275
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Having seen all the games so far, I see very little difference between the ITV and BBC coverage.
    The only exception was the Japan v Ivory Coast game which seemed to be a bit like "we are only doing this because we have to"

    Overall, very enjoyable coverage all round.
  • Paul_CrawfordPaul_Crawford Posts: 5,860
    Forum Member
    Warmly recieved on Twitter.

    Is murphy on twitter?
  • sat-iresat-ire Posts: 4,753
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    tiger2000 wrote: »
    It is very confusing for us non Dutch!

    I checked on the Dutch Tourist Information Site...



    My understanding from the above is that the country is called The Netherlands but their National Football Team is called Holland, Holland is also how the Dutch refer to their country in their Tourism Brochures. So both the BBC and ITV are right, since the natives also use both terms.

    They actually say on their tourist sites that they use Holland precisely because so many outside the country do. The football team is actually more commonly called Oranje. We shouldn't use that either.

    As evidenced by the link I provided from the Dutch FA the official name for the football team is the Netherlands.

    If we're going to start using colloquialisms then where do we stop?
  • BelligerenceBelligerence Posts: 40,613
    Forum Member
    Is murphy on twitter?
    Not sure.

    Meant he was warmly recieved by Twitter users! :p
  • DragonQDragonQ Posts: 4,807
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    tiger2000 wrote: »
    My understanding from the above is that the country is called The Netherlands but their National Football Team is called Holland, Holland is also how the Dutch refer to their country in their Tourism Brochures. So both the BBC and ITV are right, since the natives also use both terms.

    Fair enough. In that case, it would at least be nice to get some consistency.
Sign In or Register to comment.