A View From The Terrace.

[Dons_1988]

Not sure if this is the thread to comment on the podcast but have to admit to being disappointed with the Rangers podcast guy being on this week's show.

Don't want to be a c**t about it as I'm still a big fan but the strength of the pod is in the breadth of knowledge of teams across the league, no matter who the club allegiance but he was on for over an hour with almost nothing of substance to say about Aberdeen, but in particular Livingston.

I look forward to the Monday pod every week as it's normally a welcome reprieve from BBC/Sky Sports weekend coverage that is predominantly framed through the prism of two clubs, so it was quite disappointing.

[capt_oats]

15 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

Not sure if this is the thread to comment on the podcast but have to admit to being disappointed with the Rangers podcast guy being on this week's show.

Don't want to be a c**t about it as I'm still a big fan but the strength of the pod is in the breadth of knowledge of teams across the league, no matter who the club allegiance but he was on for over an hour with almost nothing of substance to say about Aberdeen, but in particular Livingston.

I look forward to the Monday pod every week as it's normally a welcome reprieve from BBC/Sky Sports weekend coverage that is predominantly framed through the prism of two clubs, so it was quite disappointing.

NGL I had pretty much the same reaction - except I just skipped the entire section and went to Thom's chat about the Motherwell game and Craig's closing part. Having a Rangers fan on to talk about Celtic seemed a bit of a misstep to begin with but finding out he and Tony (who doesn't fall in my 'most listenable' category at the best of times anyway) ended up talking for over an hour was just massive amounts of "f**k.that".

Obviously that's a lot less of a disappointment for me because it wasn't my club that was getting the Hand on Heart treatment (or whatever his thing's called) but still, as you say given the usual balanced coverage the pod usually brings it was pretty tough.

Edited October 28, 2020 by capt_oats

[Dons_1988]

3 minutes ago, capt_oats said:

NGL I had pretty much the same reaction - except I just skipped the entire section and went to Thom's chat about the Motherwell game and Craig's closing part. Having a Rangers fan on to talk about Celtic seemed a bit of a misstep to begin with but finding out he and Tony (who doesn't fall in my 'most listenable' category anyway) ended up talking for over an hour was just massive amounts of "f**k.that".

Obviously that's a lot less of a disappointment for me because it wasn't my club that was getting the Hand on Heart treatment (or whatever his thing's called).

I have no issue with a Rangers fan doing a Dons game (OK, maybe a little...) but it's clear he is used to hosting a fairly partisan podcast that is...let's say a little one-eyed.

I like Tony and he tried to bring Livi and Aberdeen into the conversation but it was always diverted away again. He was asked about the strength of Livi's midfield and ended up on Gary Mcallister's post match interview.

Ach it's a fairly minor complaint but would hope it's a one off.

[Busta Nut]

I have to admit any time there is an OF fan on I lose heart. Often they know nothing about anyone but Celtic or Rangers and feel they have to deny they've watch much of the other team. I have listened to about 25 mins of this pod and the boy has mentioned how little he sees of Celtic a couple of times. 

You often hear the regular guys say "I watched this game last night" or something similar every week so the lever of knowledge you get about the most obscure (livi, for example) players is up there. These guys don't seem to watch much more than themselves. 

 

Edited cos of sausage fingered rage

Edited October 28, 2020 by Busta Nut

[Scotty Tunbridge]

Yeah the hearts for **** podcast guy was brutal this week, so many times he referred to Celtic as ‘them/they’ instead of Celtic as well (definitely intentional).

 

I seen that one was 2 hours long!! (Even with 1 game called off btw) so was going to give it a miss but gave it a try looked and seen it was over 40 minutes in and they were still talking about the Aberdeen Celtic game with the Rangers game to come. Obviously the most exciting game was the Celtic one but the chat was all one sided I ended up switching it off.

 

I know they need to talk about the Old Firm but at least get some people on that are clued up a bit more about the rest of the league.

 

[accies1874]

47 minutes ago, capt_oats said:

NGL I had pretty much the same reaction - except I just skipped the entire section and went to Thom's chat about the Motherwell game and Craig's closing part. Having a Rangers fan on to talk about Celtic seemed a bit of a misstep to begin with but finding out he and Tony (who doesn't fall in my 'most listenable' category at the best of times anyway) ended up talking for over an hour was just massive amounts of "f**k.that".

Obviously that's a lot less of a disappointment for me because it wasn't my club that was getting the Hand on Heart treatment (or whatever his thing's called) but still, as you say given the usual balanced coverage the pod usually brings it was pretty tough.

This was what annoyed me, although I didn't highlight your brackets as I really like Tony. I was intrigued when I saw the podcast was two hours but quickly realised what was going to happen when I heard the Rangers guy was on. To be honest, spending half an hour on Aberdeen-Celtic was understandable but spending the same amount of time on a run of the mill Rangers victory was boring...

43 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

He was asked about the strength of Livi's midfield and ended up on Gary Mcallister's post match interview.

... especially when the conversation got to this stage. 

On a positive note, I do actually like the new format for the Monday show as it allows for a deeper dive into games that wouldn't normally get it due to a lack of television coverage. 

[Dons_1988]

24 minutes ago, accies1874 said:

On a positive note, I do actually like the new format for the Monday show as it allows for a deeper dive into games that wouldn't normally get it due to a lack of television coverage. 

Absolutely.

[capt_oats]

28 minutes ago, accies1874 said:

This was what annoyed me, although I didn't highlight your brackets as I really like Tony. I was intrigued when I saw the podcast was two hours but quickly realised what was going to happen when I heard the Rangers guy was on. To be honest, spending half an hour on Aberdeen-Celtic was understandable but spending the same amount of time on a run of the mill Rangers victory was boring...

On a positive note, I do actually like the new format for the Monday show as it allows for a deeper dive into games that wouldn't normally get it due to a lack of television coverage. 

Aye, I mean I'm aware of Heart and Hand/ibroxrocks from their Twitter feed popping up when I search for 'Motherwell' (well aware enough to nearly get the name of the podcast right) so I was able to make the call that it clearly wasn't for me inside a couple of minutes and just skip it.

Admittedly I still raised an eyebrow when I saw that Thom's section didn't start until a full hour into the pod.

In fairness to Tony hosting with a guest whose normal output is as obviously partisan is going to be a tough shift.

Fwiw, I don't dislike Tony's stuff on The Terrace I just find him a bit more of a difficult listen than a lot of the others. We all have our favourites I guess.

Edited October 28, 2020 by capt_oats

[G51]

Isn't the point of the pod format to allow people to skip the stuff they don't like?

For example, I listened to Adams bit, skipped Thom's stuff then listened to Craig.

[AngusTheBull]

38 minutes ago, accies1874 said:

This was what annoyed me, although I didn't highlight your brackets as I really like Tony. I was intrigued when I saw the podcast was two hours but quickly realised what was going to happen when I heard the Rangers guy was on. To be honest, spending half an hour on Aberdeen-Celtic was understandable but spending the same amount of time on a run of the mill Rangers victory was boring...

Even half the Aberdeen-Celtic coverage seemed to revolve around ‘which Aberdeen players should Rangers be signing,’ or ‘where would Lewis Ferguson fit into Rangers midfield?’

Must admit I was silently seething five minutes in when the guest said ‘Aberdeen don’t try against Celtic like they do against Rangers.’ 

That’s the sort of lazy and moronic tripe you’d expect listening to Clyde radio or these pathetic, partisan OF* fans podcast (which I guess makes sense given where he’s normally on). The Terrace is normally far better, however. Even when you don’t agree with one of the regular guys views, you can normally see where they’re coming from and there is some sense of objectivity and knowledge across the league(s). The OF* guests who are occasionally on tend to have none of that.

Edited October 28, 2020 by AngusTheBull

[Busta Nut]

8 minutes ago, G51 said:

Isn't the point of the pod format to allow people to skip the stuff they don't like?

For example, I listened to Adams bit, skipped Thom's stuff then listened to Craig.

I think most people usually like to listen to the podcast as a whole. This does allow people to skip the difficult bits I suppose.

7 minutes ago, AngusTheBull said:

Must admit I was silently seething five minutes in when the guest said ‘Aberdeen don’t try against Celtic like they do against Rangers.’ 

That’s the sort of lazy and moronic tripe you’d expect listening to Clyde radio or these pathetic, partisan OF* fans podcast (which I guess makes sense given where he’s normally on). The Terrace is normally far better, however. Even when you don’t agree with one of the regular guys views, you can normally see where they’re coming from and there is some sense of objectivity and knowledge across the league(s). The OF* guests who are occasionally on tend to have none of that.

Although I don't think he actually said that, it was 1,000,000% what was being insinuated. As you said the type of shite diddy teams hear after getting a result against one but not the other. 

[G51]

6 minutes ago, Busta Nut said:

I think most people usually like to listen to the podcast as a whole. This does allow people to skip the difficult bits I suppose.

When it was the old format with two/three/four lads in a room I would normally listen to the whole thing too, but with the new format I just pick and choose the matches I want to hear about / the guys I want to listen to.

 

[ropy]

2 hours ago, Dons_1988 said:

Not sure if this is the thread to comment on the podcast but have to admit to being disappointed with the Rangers podcast guy being on this week's show.

Don't want to be a c**t about it as I'm still a big fan but the strength of the pod is in the breadth of knowledge of teams across the league, no matter who the club allegiance but he was on for over an hour with almost nothing of substance to say about Aberdeen, but in particular Livingston.

I look forward to the Monday pod every week as it's normally a welcome reprieve from BBC/Sky Sports weekend coverage that is predominantly framed through the prism of two clubs, so it was quite disappointing.

I listened this morning, skipped 40 minutes, found it was still Rangers/Celtic guff and skipped on to about 65.  There was a bit of chat about RC frailties then the host said I want to give 5 minutes to Motherwell. I just thought the balance was wrong.

[thisGRAEME]

Just to kind of echo what I think I said at this time last year, it remains a struggle putting shows together, and even more so this year. With 5 of the guys putting in the hours and research to turn out a TV show on Wednesdays, it's left to the rest of us to try and pick up the slack with regular shows.

Three of us now have kids, lockdown more or less remains in place and life gets in the way, essentially, so we've from time to time got to turn to other voices. Some you'll like, some you'll maybe not, but as folk have said, that's basically how we are with our regular collection of miscreants anyway.

The last few months have been great for getting us all involved in all sorts of nonsense (I often wonder if folk enjoyed the Culture pods as much as we enjoyed making them but I doubt it because I had SO MUCH FUN), but the reality of losing half our number for weeks at a time makes everything more difficult scheduling-wise. I'd never say it's a bad thing to have different folk on, as I always feel we get something from it in one way or another, but I appreciate it is a bit jarring when regular listeners are anticipating a certain type of tone and coverage which maybe doesn't arrive.

[Big Fifer]

13 minutes ago, thisGRAEME said:

Just to kind of echo what I think I said at this time last year, it remains a struggle putting shows together, and even more so this year. With 5 of the guys putting in the hours and research to turn out a TV show on Wednesdays, it's left to the rest of us to try and pick up the slack with regular shows.

Three of us now have kids, lockdown more or less remains in place and life gets in the way, essentially, so we've from time to time got to turn to other voices. Some you'll like, some you'll maybe not, but as folk have said, that's basically how we are with our regular collection of miscreants anyway.

The last few months have been great for getting us all involved in all sorts of nonsense (I often wonder if folk enjoyed the Culture pods as much as we enjoyed making them but I doubt it because I had SO MUCH FUN), but the reality of losing half our number for weeks at a time makes everything more difficult scheduling-wise. I'd never say it's a bad thing to have different folk on, as I always feel we get something from it in one way or another, but I appreciate it is a bit jarring when regular listeners are anticipating a certain type of tone and coverage which maybe doesn't arrive.

The culture pods were absolutely class. I remembered them being done a few years ago, sure there were a few done entirely on music which was class (I'd imagine more suited to the Patreon than the main show, of course).

[thisGRAEME]

5 minutes ago, Big Fifer said:

The culture pods were absolutely class. I remembered them being done a few years ago, sure there were a few done entirely on music which was class (I'd imagine more suited to the Patreon than the main show, of course).

Thanks man. Getting up on a Saturday morning to see Craig G Telfer in his dressing gown never felt so good. The music ones were an absolute carry-on, right enough. Mainly Telfer and Shaughan, from memory? Although I think that may have been when an unnamed member announced "Which Bitch" to be one of the greatest Scottish albums ever (possible exaggeration here), so maybe it's best they remain in the vault.

[Dons_1988]

53 minutes ago, thisGRAEME said:

Just to kind of echo what I think I said at this time last year, it remains a struggle putting shows together, and even more so this year. With 5 of the guys putting in the hours and research to turn out a TV show on Wednesdays, it's left to the rest of us to try and pick up the slack with regular shows.

Three of us now have kids, lockdown more or less remains in place and life gets in the way, essentially, so we've from time to time got to turn to other voices. Some you'll like, some you'll maybe not, but as folk have said, that's basically how we are with our regular collection of miscreants anyway.

The last few months have been great for getting us all involved in all sorts of nonsense (I often wonder if folk enjoyed the Culture pods as much as we enjoyed making them but I doubt it because I had SO MUCH FUN), but the reality of losing half our number for weeks at a time makes everything more difficult scheduling-wise. I'd never say it's a bad thing to have different folk on, as I always feel we get something from it in one way or another, but I appreciate it is a bit jarring when regular listeners are anticipating a certain type of tone and coverage which maybe doesn't arrive.

That all makes sense, as I said I didn't want to be a c**t about it, will still be listening each week. Was just a bit disappointing and came away from what I normally tune in for from the pod.

[capt_oats]

2 hours ago, thisGRAEME said:

Just to kind of echo what I think I said at this time last year, it remains a struggle putting shows together, and even more so this year. With 5 of the guys putting in the hours and research to turn out a TV show on Wednesdays, it's left to the rest of us to try and pick up the slack with regular shows.

Three of us now have kids, lockdown more or less remains in place and life gets in the way, essentially, so we've from time to time got to turn to other voices. Some you'll like, some you'll maybe not, but as folk have said, that's basically how we are with our regular collection of miscreants anyway.

The last few months have been great for getting us all involved in all sorts of nonsense (I often wonder if folk enjoyed the Culture pods as much as we enjoyed making them but I doubt it because I had SO MUCH FUN), but the reality of losing half our number for weeks at a time makes everything more difficult scheduling-wise. I'd never say it's a bad thing to have different folk on, as I always feel we get something from it in one way or another, but I appreciate it is a bit jarring when regular listeners are anticipating a certain type of tone and coverage which maybe doesn't arrive.

another +1 on really enjoying the Culture pods.

I'm wary of coming across like a complete ingrate; it's a free podcast that people are giving up their time to produce and no one's forcing me to listen etc but the first section of Monday's pod is the first I've swerved like that - either way a single hour of a single podcast from hundreds published is a pretty good ratio all told.

The Patreon content this year has been great value even before you factor in everything having shut down so cheers for that as well.

Edited October 28, 2020 by capt_oats

[true_rover]

Possibly in the minority that I'm finding the new format of the Monday podcast a decrease in quality from before. I'm finding that rather than being first in the queue to listen to when it downloads that it's put further down in the pecking order.

My thoughts are that the length of it has become too much and since it's not 3 or 4 contributors for a game that most of half an hour or so can be one person talking about a game or two - it just doesn't hold the same interest.

[gav-ffc]

2 hours ago, thisGRAEME said:

Just to kind of echo what I think I said at this time last year, it remains a struggle putting shows together, and even more so this year. With 5 of the guys putting in the hours and research to turn out a TV show on Wednesdays, it's left to the rest of us to try and pick up the slack with regular shows.

Three of us now have kids, lockdown more or less remains in place and life gets in the way, essentially, so we've from time to time got to turn to other voices. Some you'll like, some you'll maybe not, but as folk have said, that's basically how we are with our regular collection of miscreants anyway.

The last few months have been great for getting us all involved in all sorts of nonsense (I often wonder if folk enjoyed the Culture pods as much as we enjoyed making them but I doubt it because I had SO MUCH FUN), but the reality of losing half our number for weeks at a time makes everything more difficult scheduling-wise. I'd never say it's a bad thing to have different folk on, as I always feel we get something from it in one way or another, but I appreciate it is a bit jarring when regular listeners are anticipating a certain type of tone and coverage which maybe doesn't arrive.

The patreon stuff with best/worst signings has been my favourite, great content as always.