Is Phil Gould a poor winner or a sore loser?
Roar Pro
By Mushi, 17 Jul 2009 The Crowd is a Roar Pro
- Tagged:
- NSW Blues, Phil Gould, Queensland Maroons, rugby leauge, State Of Origin
Sydney, July 7, 2004. NSW Blues Coach Phil Gould celebrates. The NSW Blues beat the Queensland Maroons 36-14 in the third State of Origin match to win the series at Telstra Stadium.
I would like the thank Phil Gould for ruining what was, despite the outcome, an exciting match for this Queensland fan.
For a man who clearly considers himself the brightest mind in the game, it is amazing that when analysing “what was the difference” between the first two games and the third, that this bright mind would only believe that NSW did anything that mattered, the selections were a long over due, a masterstroke that led to total 80 minute domination, the style of play and the passion.
Apparently things like Queensland being forced to change its entire forward pack structure because it was missing three of its top four prop choices (with the other dehydrated having only just recovered from a virus) played no part?
Now NSW did deserve to win that game. Sure some decisions went against Queensland, but they were opportunities which we got through luck and didn’t deserve.
But this was always going to be New South Wales’ best opportunity.
QLD were missing the league’s best cross field kicking target, missing the core of their forward pack, their game plan wasn’t suited to the strangely slippery Suncorp surface, and they didn’t adapt like New South Wales did on the field.
New South Wales took full advantage of the opportunity.
But to suggest the same opportunities were there in Games One and Two, well, that is drawing a long bow there, Phil.
He went further to suggest that the game made him “certain” that the Blues should not have lost four in a row.
I used to find Fatty’s commentary embarrassingly one sided and rejoiced when he was seemingly cut from the play-by-play commentary, but at least with the Fatman, it wasn’t bias with a heavy dose of condescension.
So Channel 9, I implore you give me a State Of Origin option with just Rabs and Sterlo.
I’ll use pay per view to listen to an intelligent analyst that, despite having actually pulled on a sky blue jumper and bled for his team, is by some miracle able to do his job and provide impartial analysis rather than an 80 minute Blues sermon.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Rugby League articles
- Rugby league commission ushers in new era
- Ennis confident about his NRL fitness
- Why sporting seasons should never cross paths (6)
- Independent Commission four years in the making, but worth the wait
- Kearney still to choose Eels kicker
- Federal Court has it wrong on sports broadcast copyright (40)
- An open letter to Channel Nine (83)
- Federal Court has it wrong on sports broadcast copyright (40)
- An open letter to Channel Nine (83)
- The NRL’s scariest players (56)
- Is the All Stars match increasing the divide? (25)
- Channel Nine needs NRL-cricket ODI compromise (36)
- The NRL needs a vision (52)
- New breed of NRL players continue to develop (24)
- Explore:
- NSW Blues, Phil Gould, Queensland Maroons, rugby leauge, State Of Origin
Darcy said | July 17th 2009 @ 4:28am | Report comment
As an outsider who sides with Queensland I must say I don’t understand the animosity towards Gould. Fine he is the most successful NSW coach and is passionate about the side, but he is hands down the best pundit in the game. I’ve always found his articles informative and fair minded. I know you’ll probably never warm to the guy but in my mind you’re lucky to have him.. You’ll miss him when he’s gone.
Shane Sullivan said | July 17th 2009 @ 5:45am | Report comment
I can’t wait! To miss him I mean
Mushi said | July 17th 2009 @ 8:06am | Report comment
Darcy when he is covering a side he doesn’t have an interest in he’s fine. He shouldn’t be allowed to commentate for the roosters or the blues, and I’m a roosters fan saying that.
I will not miss having a guy try to tell me that everything that went well for QLD was because of NSW and everything that went well for NSW was because of NSW. Why does QLD show up if this is the case? Maybe we could just have a NSW skills drill and if it meets gus’ standards he can award them the win? then QLD and NSW can play a game of football whilst gus is down the pub celebrating.
Two states are trying to watch the game and it is little insulting to sit at home and have him drown out any discussion about your team.
I don’t have a problem with him being their most successful coach but someone who is behaving as a passionate fan cannot be, by definition, fair minded. As I pointed out stelring actually pulled on the jumper and yet manages to behave with professional objectivity. And therein lies the problem, having Gould commentate a game that he clearly is not willing or capable of providing objective analysis of. I didn’t think it wa appropriate when Vautin did it for QLD but at the very least sterlo and rabs could reign him in.
Even sterlo tried distancing the rest of the commentary team from him at two points in the match.
I just looked up his wikipage and obviously a few Queenslanders have gotten to it…
LeftArmSpinner said | July 17th 2009 @ 8:07am | Report comment
Easy. Both!
Justin said | July 17th 2009 @ 8:31am | Report comment
I heard some of his comments towards the end which were of the poor winner variety. Essentially it was “Well done on 4 in a row QLD but”…. there should never be a but, NSW were absolute rubbish in games 1 and 2 besides Hayne and deserved to lose the series.
Ken said | July 17th 2009 @ 9:38am | Report comment
I’m a born & bred NSWelshman who married a QLDer (yeah I know, but she can read and write
). Consequently I spend a fair bit of time north of the border and know that up there this hatred of ‘biased’ commentators is common. But despite never in my life wanting QLD or Manly to win a game, it’s never bothered me when Fatty works himself into a lather over ‘QLD’s mythical passion’ or throws in a ‘Go Manly’ during a club game. His allegiance isn’t hidden and he’s showing he’s still a fan and not a robot.
Gould is much the same although admittedly he is usually attempting more detailed analysis. Also there is an element of truth in this particular story – NSW gave up early starts in both games 1 and 2 and then got back into the contest – they were never completely out-classed – the difference between winning and losing those games could easily have been 1 missed tackle, 1 dropped ball or 1 contentious decision.
Hoy said | July 17th 2009 @ 9:42am | Report comment
I agree that Gould has a massive problem with commentary. It should not need to be said, but I can’t understand the commentary team that is allowed to operate with attachments to teams playing. It is clearly a conflict of interest. A bad one at that.
Andrew Johns should not be allowed near the opening commentary when he is involved with the coaching of one team playing.
Gould’s commentary, with all his “we” and “us” etc is a disgrace. It always has been. I can appreciate his brain, and I like watching his analysis on the footy show, and the roast, but come Origin, he is absurdly biased and I find it very hard to stomach.
And for all those who are going to counter accuse Fatty or what not, I can’t stand them either, and I almost thank god every time I watch the broncos and QLD that Ikin is gone.
Benjamin Conkey said | July 17th 2009 @ 9:43am | Report comment
What about when he declared that Billy Slater’s try should be disallowed…and then a five seconds later it was given a Try.
Normally Gould would go off about the video ref..but he didn’t…he just kept quiet, which suggests to me, he knew it was a try, and was just saying No Try because Queensland scored.
I think he’s great on the Sunday Roast, and in his newspaper columns, but his commentary is very annoying.
Hammer said | July 17th 2009 @ 11:12am | Report comment
Yip he’s biased nothing new there .. but I wouldn’t mind if he actually had something new to say … every year Game 1 and through the series .. all we get is “that’s origin” .. and “they’re out origining them” … and so and so does origin better … FFS – yes it’s a great series but it’s no mythical beast … like their cricket commentary team the C9 league team are well past their best
Mushi said | July 17th 2009 @ 12:55pm | Report comment
Ken if you think that all NSW needed was a lucky bounce or decision lets go back to origin two
- QLD have I think four players laid up the day of the game with stomach viruses that had to play dehydrated, you don’t need to be a doctor to know that dehydration isn’t a good thing for a professional athlete
- Barrett knocks out Inglis, I don’t think it was intentional but it sure was “lucky” for NSW that the best attacking weapon in the game gets knocked out
- the abysmal performance by the referees in origin 2 (which even NSW based commentators admonished) with at least two try swing in what could generously be described as 50/50 decisions
NSW had enough luck to take home a Keno jackpot.
Also if QLD didn’t outclass them how was it that Petero contributed more than their entire front row? The NSW pack was road kill for the first two games and surprise surprise bounce back when we lose three players. but hey just like with gus that’s of little importance hey