Yvonne Sampson leaves Nine

[Renegade]

I partially agree with Huge, Fourex, CptHook, Horseheadsup - a female is there first and foremost to "appeal" , they are parachuted into roles like these so the code can be viewed as a socially progressive sport that recognizes the contribution of females in sport, bla bla bla.

it's great marketing, but I too think they don't really add much. The fact she is/isn't good looking is completely irrelevant to me because i'm not a puberty-ridden 17yo that can't look at someone without making a sexual thought.

I would LOVE to see a female that absolutely knows her shit on the panel, but the ones that probably do aren't eye candy, and therein the problem comes full circle :)

 

[Porthoz]

I partially agree with Huge, Fourex, CptHook, Horseheadsup - a female is there first and foremost to "appeal" , they are parachuted into roles like these so the code can be viewed as a socially progressive sport that recognizes the contribution of females in sport, bla bla bla.

it's great marketing, but I too think they don't really add much. The fact she is/isn't good looking is completely irrelevant to me because i'm not a puberty-ridden 17yo that can't look at someone without making a sexual thought.

I would LOVE to see a female that absolutely knows her shit on the panel, but the ones that probably do aren't eye candy, and therein the problem comes full circle :)

I'm sure the usual suspects will jump at the opportunity to react, but it's been a long time since I've been called that, and I definitely have plenty of sexual thoughts when I see Vonny!

 

[Sproj]

What exactly has she done to be considered lacking in knowledge incidentally?

 

[2ndPhase]

As a father of four, including three young wonderful girls, this thread is so disappointingly revealing.

I hate writing long posts on my phone. But if I used BHQ on my PC I would have written a journal length peer reviewed essay by now on what disheartens me so much about parts of this discussion. Alas, I'm on the shitter and I have a few minutes so here goes.

Luckily, for the most of us involved, the NRL isn't played and broadcast in a misogynistic vacuum. It's a national entertainment platform requiring a range of hosts and personalities to anchor the relevant network shows. As mentioned previously the anchors role is indeed to engage and appeal to a broad and growing market which so happens to include both male and females. And this idea shouldn't need to be a subversive emasculation of anyone's seemingly vulnerable sense of machismo. (I was going to say masculinity but what a bruiser of a word right)

I agree that an anchor definitely requires a certain aptitude and base knowledge of the content to maintain credibility in their role. However, their role is primarily to engage the experts and keep the resulting conversations presentable and palatable as a broadcast medium.

By my scorecard, and in my opinion the only valid points on which I can judge Yvonne's performance, I think she has done a super job. And I for one will be disappointed to loose her from my free to air coverage. Not because of her tits as a few so eloquently pointed out, but that I think she has a very warming and welcoming air. A pleasantry. Coupled with a strong enough football caliber to carry her own.

The ease and willingness to so bluntly and negatively deride gender inclusion in this thread baffles me. The fact that even having 'one' women in a cast of many poses a kind of assault on some peoples archaic convictions of rigid gender roles is telling. Irrespective, if you have honestly watched Yvonne's performance, tokenism is the last critique you should be making.

My point is that if this thread was about a guy jumping networks with a similar role i.e Shirvo. A critique of his performance would never had eluded to, or in this case so overtly brought to the spotlight, the idea that his gender was a factor. Or worse, some kind of impairment.

Anyways, that's about it. Peace out homies.

 

[CaptainHook]

Heh heh boy where do you start with that...I doubt you'd have too many people mourning Shirvo's departure.

On the other hand, I don't think we should be handing out free passes to people with a vagina.

There doesn't seem to be a middle ground.

Isn't equality exactly that? You can compliment or criticise someone solely on their performance?

If you like her - Great! If you don't, does it have anything to do with the fact she's a woman - I don't think so. I think some of us on here can call it as we see it.

In a weird way it reminds me of The Force Awakens. I think Rey is a stupid, boring character. I was labelled a sexist on some forums I haunt. Honestly the fact that she's female is not even in the top 50 problems I have with her character.

Anyway mate, keep labelling us if it makes you feel better.

 

[2ndPhase]

Heh heh boy where do you start with that...I doubt you'd have too many people mourning Shirvo's departure.

On the other hand, I don't think we should be handing out free passes to people with a vagina.

There doesn't seem to be a middle ground.

Isn't equality exactly that? You can compliment or criticise someone solely on their performance?

If you like her - Great! If you don't, does it have anything to do with the fact she's a woman - I don't think so. I think some of us on here can call it as we see it.

In a weird way it reminds me of The Force Awakens. I think Rey is a stupid, boring character. I was labelled a sexist on some forums I haunt. Honestly the fact that she's female is not even in the top 50 problems I have with her character.

Anyway mate, keep labelling us if it makes you feel better.

That's why I think Shirvo is an apt comparison. He could as easily be perceived as tokenism. Maybe even more legitimately. The good looking guy who can carry himself in front of a camera with no real footy credentials. But I can assure you there would not have been a mention of any free passes for dudes with enormous tackle.

Lol. The size of that guys tackle has a greater negative influence on my agency as a man than any female footy presenter.

 

[Mr Fourex]

I agree with you.......go-ahead and **** Shirvo off as well!

There's no misogynistic vacuum here. Remove all tokenism or be real enough to accept it for what it is.

 

[Morkel]

As a father of four, including three young wonderful girls, this thread is so disappointingly revealing.

I hate writing long posts on my phone. But if I used BHQ on my PC I would have written a journal length peer reviewed essay by now on what disheartens me so much about parts of this discussion. Alas, I'm on the shitter and I have a few minutes so here goes.

Luckily, for the most of us involved, the NRL isn't played and broadcast in a misogynistic vacuum. It's a national entertainment platform requiring a range of hosts and personalities to anchor the relevant network shows. As mentioned previously the anchors role is indeed to engage and appeal to a broad and growing market which so happens to include both male and females. And this idea shouldn't need to be a subversive emasculation of anyone's seemingly vulnerable sense of machismo. (I was going to say masculinity but what a bruiser of a word right)

I agree that an anchor definitely requires a certain aptitude and base knowledge of the content to maintain credibility in their role. However, their role is primarily to engage the experts and keep the resulting conversations presentable and palatable as a broadcast medium.

By my scorecard, and in my opinion the only valid points on which I can judge Yvonne's performance, I think she has done a super job. And I for one will be disappointed to loose her from my free to air coverage. Not because of her tits as a few so eloquently pointed out, but that I think she has a very warming and welcoming air. A pleasantry. Coupled with a strong enough football caliber to carry her own.

The ease and willingness to so bluntly and negatively deride gender inclusion in this thread baffles me. The fact that even having 'one' women in a cast of many poses a kind of assault on some peoples archaic convictions of rigid gender roles is telling. Irrespective, if you have honestly watched Yvonne's performance, tokenism is the last critique you should be making.

My point is that if this thread was about a guy jumping networks with a similar role i.e Shirvo. A critique of his performance would never had eluded to, or in this case so overtly brought to the spotlight, the idea that his gender was a factor. Or worse, some kind of impairment.

Anyways, that's about it. Peace out homies.

Thank you.

 

[Dash]

Heh heh boy where do you start with that...I doubt you'd have too many people mourning Shirvo's departure.

On the other hand, I don't think we should be handing out free passes to people with a vagina.

There doesn't seem to be a middle ground.

Isn't equality exactly that? You can compliment or criticise someone solely on their performance?

If you like her - Great! If you don't, does it have anything to do with the fact she's a woman - I don't think so. I think some of us on here can call it as we see it.

In a weird way it reminds me of The Force Awakens. I think Rey is a stupid, boring character. I was labelled a sexist on some forums I haunt. Honestly the fact that she's female is not even in the top 50 problems I have with her character.

Anyway mate, keep labelling us if it makes you feel better.

But when the phrase 'blithering woman' is used, you have to forgive people for thinking it was about gender. And when you assume a 'free pass' was given because she has a vagina, then you have to forgive people for thinking it's about gender.

Is she the second coming of Richie Benaud in a hot body? No. But she's more than qualified enough to work on any of the footy shows, especially considering the calibre of idiots she'll be working with. Who incidentally do in fact get a free pass, because they have a penis.

 

[Sproj]

But when the phrase 'blithering woman' is used, you have to forgive people for thinking it was about gender. And when you assume a 'free pass' was given because she has a vagina, then you have to forgive people for thinking it's about gender.

Is she the second coming of Richie Benaud in a hot body? No. But she's more than qualified enough to work on any of the footy shows, especially considering the calibre of idiots she'll be working with. Who incidentally do in fact get a free pass, because they have a penis.

It is basically the same as when a guy says to a married woman after she says something about being unhappy in her marriage: 'What are you doing right now? Wanna get a coffee?'

And she says: 'Um, why?'

He says: 'Well you know, just so you can let off some steam, just want you to know I'm available if you want to come round and talk.'

She says: 'But I'm married. I would never do something like that.'

Then he backs out of it by saying she got the wrong idea and misinterpreted what he was saying, he was just trying to be a good friend, etc. Just because he says she misinterpreted it doesn't mean she did.

 

[Black Philip]

Vonny is a Queenslander :takdir:

 

[Cult]

Vonny is a Queenslander :takdir:

She's also a Broncos fan

 

[Super Freak]

She's also a Broncos fan

Is she? I thought she was a Cowboys fan.

She talks more highly of them than what she does with the Broncos.

Even when they play the Broncos, it's Cowboys this, Cowboys that...

 

[Nashy]

Is she? I thought she was a Cowboys fan.

She talks more highly of them than what she does with the Broncos.

Even when they play the Broncos, it's Cowboys this, Cowboys that...

Because she works for Nine.

 

[tommy]

Gender tokenism is a legitimate discussion to have, as it does happen, not just in RL either. However I don't believe Yvonne should be a part of that discussion, I have always thought she was excellent at her job. Erin Molan on the other hand....

 

[1910]

For the life of me I cannot think of a single thing a commentator, male or female who has never played the game could offer, that was insightful . I'm not saying there hasn't been but I'd like an example of this insight especially if you could do that for Samson. Ex-players are much much more likely to take us into that world and give us things to think about. If I want to know about head injury I'll ask a neurosurgeon or neuroscientist. I won't ask one of their relatives or a plumber !

Jim Maxwell has called over 300 Test matches since the 70's for the ABC- never played cricket test. Outside of Benaud he would be the most respected voice in Australian cricket.

Gerard Whatley- great caller of all sports and journalist- never played Test cricket, ridden a Melbourne Cup winner or played AFL.

Dennis Cometti- Great AFL caller never played AFL.

Bruce McAvaney- Never ridden a Melbourne Cup, won an AFL Grand Final, or been to the Olympics- called every one since 1980.

 

[Renegade]

As a father of four, including three young wonderful girls, this thread is so disappointingly revealing.

Luckily, for the most of us involved, the NRL isn't played and broadcast in a misogynistic vacuum. It's a national entertainment platform requiring a range of hosts and personalities to anchor the relevant network shows. As mentioned previously the anchors role is indeed to engage and appeal to a broad and growing market which so happens to include both male and females. And this idea shouldn't need to be a subversive emasculation of anyone's seemingly vulnerable sense of machismo. (I was going to say masculinity but what a bruiser of a word right)

In what way is it subversive emasculation? You are clearly making an assumption that a female on a panel is perceived as a threat to those that do not rate her in her role, which is a lazy and disingenuous argument, supplemented only by throwing around labels to augment your own position. You openly admit to the fact they are there to appeal to a specific type completely underlines my point that they are there first and foremost to appeal. Does it not occur to you that they are playing you as a fool, knowing people like yourself would lap it up? Do you not see the laughable hypocrisy on show in this thread alone, talking about how good she is but yet mentioning the fact she is good looking?

I agree that an anchor definitely requires a certain aptitude and base knowledge of the content to maintain credibility in their role. However, their role is primarily to engage the experts and keep the resulting conversations presentable and palatable as a broadcast medium.

By my scorecard, and in my opinion the only valid points on which I can judge Yvonne's performance, I think she has done a super job. And I for one will be disappointed to loose her from my free to air coverage. Not because of her tits as a few so eloquently pointed out, but that I think she has a very warming and welcoming air. A pleasantry. Coupled with a strong enough football caliber to carry her own.

If you are entertained by an essential gatekeeper, good for you, I'm not. I believe she adds nothing to the role apart from transferring conversation over to another panelist.

The ease and willingness to so bluntly and negatively deride gender inclusion in this thread baffles me. The fact that even having 'one' women in a cast of many poses a kind of assault on some peoples archaic convictions of rigid gender roles is telling. Irrespective, if you have honestly watched Yvonne's performance, tokenism is the last critique you should be making.

Again, you make the (incorrect) assumption that a females presence is threatening to those that don't think she's all that great. There can be no argument as to why she's on the panel, to suggest otherwise would be ignorance in the extreme. Unless of course, you think she was picked solely for her footballing knowledge in which case lol ok then.

My point is that if this thread was about a guy jumping networks with a similar role i.e Shirvo. A critique of his performance would never had eluded to, or in this case so overtly brought to the spotlight, the idea that his gender was a factor. Or worse, some kind of impairment.

Or, you know, one's critique can be on what they add to the show, kinda like this one? That could be easily misconstrued as an assault on gender though because it's easier to throw labels and feel morally superior than it is to discuss something.

But by all means, continue to assume those that don't rate a females performance on a panel and see her as a token appeasement to appeal to other types are misogynistic, MRA's, anti-feminists, etc etc.

 

[Super Freak]

Because she works for Nine.

It's a presenters job to talk up both teams.

When the Cowboys are on, she doesn't say much about the Broncos.. There was one game there, I can't remember which one it was, one of the other panel members had to actually interrupt her and start talking up the Broncos.

All she wanted to talk about was JT and how great the Cowboys have been..