Sonja drama

[crossref]

For me, I'd term it 'not very good' rather than 'awful' but otherwise agree with Rich.

It was the sort of thing you'd expect from ITV, rather than the BBC.

No attempt to gain any insight, then pressing the matter did seem more like trying to catch someone saying something they'd later regret.

IMO, a much better line of questioning would have been about how did England recover from these incidents, what effect it had on the team, or whether he felt England should have changed tactics - something that you wouldn't necessarily know from just watching the game. And to be fair, every man and his dog knew Farrell was pissed off at the ref!

That seems pretty reasonable summation. So not 'appalling' and not 'deserved to be sacked at all'

a better performance than, say, Eliot Daly or - indeed - Pascal Gauzere, but not as good as Anthony Watson

[Rich_NL]

I don't think "deserve to be sacked" (of her or Gauzere), but I'd expect both of them to reflect and review honestly on a poor performance.

Asking OF if England were robbed by the officials, EJ if he thought OF was right to be furious (which he hadn't said), AWJ if he should have asked the officials to overturn Welsh tries... it was a shambles. No insight, no added value, a waste of interviewing opportunity that many journalists would give their eye teeth for.

4/10 if I'm generous, she got their names correct and managed to hold the mic the right way round.

[crossref]

I don't think "deserve to be sacked" (of her or Gauzere), but I'd expect both of them to reflect and review honestly on a poor performance.

Asking OF if England were robbed by the officials, EJ if he thought OF was right to be furious (which he hadn't said), AWJ if he should have asked the officials to overturn Welsh tries... it was a shambles. No insight, no added value, a waste of interviewing opportunity that many journalists would give their eye teeth for.

4/10 if I'm generous, she got their names correct and managed to hold the mic the right way round.

which is fine, don't completely agree, but we are in the ball park now. There was nothing egregious or 'appalling' about it

For me
- these were the main talking points, she was perfectly correct to raise them
- Farrell is a blunt straightforward bloke, she asked him blunt and straightforward questions
- Eddie is a shyster, with the gift of the gab, her question style altered to suit him, Eddie deserves a bit of jousting (and I daresay enjoys it)
- she asked similar questions of AWJ and Pivac, again varying her style

I think she repeated the questions, she could have moved on more quickly.

The abuse was ridiculous

[Marc Wakeham]

She asked question that she new could not be answered. That is useless / appauling reporting. SAhe persisted wi =th the line when it was clear it was going nowhere. Poor. It was like listening to a 7 year old asking the questions.

[damo]

She asked question that she new could not be answered. That is useless / appalling reporting. She persisted with the line when it was clear it was going nowhere. Poor. It was like listening to a 7 year old asking the questions.

+1

I even tidied up your typos for you.

[crossref]

She asked question that she new could not be answered. That is useless / appauling reporting. .

she was asking a question that she know her interviewees have been forbidden to answer.
asking that sort of question can be pretty effective journalism... If journalists don't ask about referee mistakes then WR will have achieved their aim of silencing *everyone*

Next week we'll have more 6N and more unusual referee decisions, I'll be interested to see if interviewers ask about them. Bet they do. They should do

[SimonSmith]

But Farrell DID go to the referee to ask that the score be overturned!!!

So why's that such a poor question ?

Try reading skills.

It was the AWJ interview that was particularly stupid. The EJ and OF interviews were just hackers, trying to get a reaction.

Shes fair game. If Henley can get heaps for being an opinionated uninformed areshole, she can get it for being shit.
Gender has no part to play here.

[crossref]

You haven't specially mentioned the AWJ interview before ? What did you think was particularly stupid about it ?

[didds]

Or was it just a pointless moan ?

I think youve answered your own question ;-)

didds

[didds]

She asked question that she new could not be answered. That is useless / appauling reporting. SAhe persisted wi =th the line when it was clear it was going nowhere. Poor. It was like listening to a 7 year old asking the questions.

This.

and quality typing from the Didds carp tiepin course ;-)

10/10

didds