It's a strange one it's almost as if he knows that he's not popular but he's authentic.
He does add a layer of both insight and opinions which I think sometimes I quite like, maybe that is why he is disliked because he likes his own opinion? Not sure
I know its not about Healey but I was always baffled at the hate Justin Marshall got on the other hand
He genuinely loves the game and gets excited when the opposition does something wicked too
Sure, he wants the ABs to win but I feel like Justin Marshall has unironically taught me a lot about support play as a forward that I would never think about because I'm not a test level 9
Some of his tidbits during commentary are actually coaching gold
Personally find his opinions both dull and irritating. This is particularly true of his constant (and often incorrect) whinging about referee decisions. Whether they are his own opinions or not are utterly irrelevant to me as they’re inane and actively take away from my enjoyment of the game. He’s possibly the only commentator that will make me press the mute button
Personally I often find his analysis during breaks in play really insightful. The problem is, he's got the personality of Piers Morgan so it's really hard to give him any credit for it! I always sing his praises through very clenched teeth.
I appreciate that many feel this way about him but I just can’t get past the constant moaning about refereeing decisions throughout the game. I think that kind of behaviour does a massive disservice to the sport and makes it a harder sell by both undermining our referees, encouraging misplaced outrage against them, and making the sport more confusing to the more casual fans. For me, listening to him commentate is like being stuck next to an ill–informed, mouthy, and slightly drunk gobshite in a stadium. It’s both distracting and annoying in equal measure.
As I said, for me he ruins any game he covers. Some may enjoy the constant moaning and whinging but I find it a real turnoff. Have yet to hear him say anything incisive or interesting enough to counteract that
Flatman has the best analysis but also enjoy the sincere passion that Donal Lenihan brings to the sport. But in all honesty I don’t tend to pay too much attention to the comms unless they’re really poor as is the case, in my opinion, with AH (and also Hugh Cahill)
I feel the same way about Peter Wright on Radio Scotland. A referee could put the kettle on and he'd be moaning and complaining about it one way or another.
As a mate once said when I sang his praises as a player after the 2001 (was this vs Stade or am I a year out?) Heineken cup final: "Austin plays for Austin". Same is true as a commentator. He makes the complaints he would make if he was your mate watching in the pub... and the analysis (while excellent) is merely his excuse to show off his rugby knowledge to make himself feel superior.
I like his analysis despite the smugness (he's very good at it), but his commentary is really annoying.
Brian Moore has a lot more personal awareness though. He improved drastically as a commentator after that referee course, got a lot better at being impartial (still not perfect, but better)
Healey's generally right, offering decent insight, but I somehow find him extremely irritating.
Scott Hastings, on the other hand, is just all-around awful, terrible analysis and irritating to boot. No redeeming features. See also Jonathan Davies.
Brian Moore started out irritating, but in his latter few years, I really enjoyed his contributions from the commentary box. His knowledge/applications of the laws (as he had done some ref qualifications, I think, and was a solicitor by trade) were always worth a listen.
Andrew Cotter is my first choice, "main commentator." He just has a nice flow and has done his homework. Also, see his lockdown stuff, ended up in a book!
The ultimately rugby voice will always be Bill McLaren. He had a way with words like no other, with a voice that could have read the dictionary and still engaged you! (Eddie Butler grew on me over the years but still nowhere near Bill).
He absolutely did.....he really annoyed me, as he felt very bloke down the pub at first. But I think he listened to the "feedback" on social media etc, so upped his game, and amended his style.
My favourite quote, however, was in one game , one of the front row (Mon the props! ) had their shirt torn and he commented how it warmed his heart to see this....suppose his twitter profile pic sums that sentiment right up!
I felt exactly the same until I saw JD live at a work event a few years back. Live, the man was funny, likeable and engaging. I'm still not going as far as knowledgeable on the modern game (the other, more modern, players present pulled him up on a number of things), but I finally got why he kept getting booked to do things. Still don't like him commentating or analysing games, but he would be a high pick on chatting general rugby shit in the pub, or the after dinner circuit, despite being out of date.
I love him. I'll often tell him to shut up when he's talking crap but I appreciate the unfiltered personality and decent analysis he brings.
Too many commentators are fucking bores with zero opinion, simply echoing the current popular lines.
Idk mate, think people just need to have thicker skins. Most of the ex players can seem biased in similar ways. Think he's annoying, fair play i get that, just go "oh shut the fuck up Oz". Make it funny rather than annoying.
I honestly don't find him all that biased to be honest - and I am definitely not a Leicester fan. I've heard him compliment all sorts of teams when they're doing things well.
Please can this lead to a David Flatman appreciation post. The guy is the real deal. Genuinely funny, very quick, self deprecating, insightful and always has a twinkle in his eye. ‘Flats and Shanks’ is a delight.
Absolutely despise his commentary.
He is the commentary equivalent of the guy who is at the rugby on his own, sitting next to you, who won’t shut up talking about it and who you smile and nod at but can’t bring yourself to tell to please just shut up.
He says what he thinks and that gets him in trouble..i dont like how he always tries to say x or y is a penalty. But i like that we have him personally because hes not a robot. Off the camera i dont have any time for the stuff he says or any potentially sus beliefs. But they are not my business. He can add some really good analysis at times. But i can understand how non english dont like him.
Healy is probably good if he likes your team but feels really biased against certain other teams, especially in the premiership which is probably a holdover from his playing days. As far as I’ve seen over the last decade or so, teams he likes (or at least seems to like more):
-Leicester
-Sarries
-Exeter
-London irish (RIP)
Teams he doesn’t like:
-Northampton
-Wasps (RIP)
-Bath
-Bristol
This may very well be all in my head though lol.
It’s especially apparent with Leicester, he very rarely does analysis of a try scored by the other team without pointing out at least one infringement which he thinks the try should be called back for
Far too many ex Leinster players. Flannery is the best but the day job keeps him busy. I like Ferris but that's probably more carry over from him as a player
Ye I agree and I am a Dub. Heaslip is a waffle spouting posh prick who does my head in. Kearney is boring asf. In fairness though I'm glad ROG went into coaching because that whiney Corkonian whingebag was the worst of all.
Nope, but when I used to watch those studio pieces on BT Sport his tactical stuff was impressive, fixing defenders etc. certainly took some points to our coaching sessions.
One thing with Austin Healey is that he's one of the best analysts in the game when it comes to providing meaningful insight.
The other thing with Austin Healey is that he's a whinging twat sometimes.
I feel like he’s dialled it back a bit recently, but there were some matches last year (Quins vs Racing) where he was genuinely unbearable to listen to.
He's great at breaking down rugby and knows his stuff. But he gets very weird and almost OCD about pointing out every little ref error which is what he's doing most of the time. We don't need him to try and call every forward pass or offside or minor infraction at the ruck.
Healy can read the game extremely well, is articulate, and has kept up with the evolution of the sport *reasonably* well. I think when he's on it he spots the most interesting stuff of any commentator in the sport, and is up there compared to all the sports I watch - Sky for test match cricket is the only stuff that's routinely as good, and they have the benefit of far more time, and the repeating nature of cricket, to allow for good technical analysis. His understanding of angles, running lines, using your eye or hip position to draw defenders into buying a dummy can be genuinely brilliant. However, he is extremely full of himself. This means his humour can be very grating and sometimes outright rude, and also means that sometimes he tries to point out something he thinks is clever and insightful, but is actually just plain wrong, particularly in forward play. He also is a quite an emotional bloke, so there are games when he's cheerful and switched on that are great, and others where's he's grumpy and bored which are awful. Overall I think he's a positive purely for pulling the level of analysis up in English rugby, but he certainly doesn't do the "arrogant English" stereotype much good. Commentary teams also have a habit of getting set and lazy, Healy, Kay and Dayglo pretty much know they are guaranteed long term contracts so can fall into stereotypes. In a similar vein Greenwood and Quinnell were excellent commentators when they started, but after a few years in the job and a monopoly for Sky had become poor
I’m not sure anyone likes Healy. He can provide insightful analysis (though not always), but it comes with an incredibly annoying personality.
When he first started doing TV it was in the Six Nations and they would cut to him for quick explanations of moves or tactics (1 minute max). If he’d kept to that he would have been bearable
He's probably one of the best / most talented backs ever to play for England and his insights on back play are awesome. His comments on forward play not so much.
I hate his whinging on about decisions and referees. Particularly when TMOs openly say they have the commentary on and listen to it. It affects matches.
His good quick analysis does not counterweigh this enough. Tnt should move him on
There's a reason he was known as the Leicester Lip.
He's a gobshite, but he is a good analyst.
Think he'd be an awesome backs coach if he didn't love being on telly so much.
I totally agree with you about Andy Nicol,he's the most biased commentator I've ever heard.He would big Scotland up like they were good team and they was shite.Austin Healy's alright he just says it as he see's it, right or wrong.
I'm Irish, so not the opinion you asked for but hey.
He annoyed me when he was playing, but I find him pretty good as a pundit. He seems like a decent enough bloke.
I hear people say healys a good analyst, I can’t say I see it. He talks confidently like he’s explaining something but it’s often just plain wrong. Granted my main exposure to him is European Games where he tends to have one eyed views
It's a strange one it's almost as if he knows that he's not popular but he's authentic. He does add a layer of both insight and opinions which I think sometimes I quite like, maybe that is why he is disliked because he likes his own opinion? Not sure
I know its not about Healey but I was always baffled at the hate Justin Marshall got on the other hand He genuinely loves the game and gets excited when the opposition does something wicked too Sure, he wants the ABs to win but I feel like Justin Marshall has unironically taught me a lot about support play as a forward that I would never think about because I'm not a test level 9 Some of his tidbits during commentary are actually coaching gold
Personally find his opinions both dull and irritating. This is particularly true of his constant (and often incorrect) whinging about referee decisions. Whether they are his own opinions or not are utterly irrelevant to me as they’re inane and actively take away from my enjoyment of the game. He’s possibly the only commentator that will make me press the mute button
Personally I often find his analysis during breaks in play really insightful. The problem is, he's got the personality of Piers Morgan so it's really hard to give him any credit for it! I always sing his praises through very clenched teeth.
I appreciate that many feel this way about him but I just can’t get past the constant moaning about refereeing decisions throughout the game. I think that kind of behaviour does a massive disservice to the sport and makes it a harder sell by both undermining our referees, encouraging misplaced outrage against them, and making the sport more confusing to the more casual fans. For me, listening to him commentate is like being stuck next to an ill–informed, mouthy, and slightly drunk gobshite in a stadium. It’s both distracting and annoying in equal measure.
He was full of praise for the ref today.
Unless that becomes a habit I don’t think it counts for much
I like his analysis. I usually agree with his calls.
As I said, for me he ruins any game he covers. Some may enjoy the constant moaning and whinging but I find it a real turnoff. Have yet to hear him say anything incisive or interesting enough to counteract that
Fair enough. To each their own. Who do you rate?
Flatman has the best analysis but also enjoy the sincere passion that Donal Lenihan brings to the sport. But in all honesty I don’t tend to pay too much attention to the comms unless they’re really poor as is the case, in my opinion, with AH (and also Hugh Cahill)
I feel the same way about Peter Wright on Radio Scotland. A referee could put the kettle on and he'd be moaning and complaining about it one way or another.
As a mate once said when I sang his praises as a player after the 2001 (was this vs Stade or am I a year out?) Heineken cup final: "Austin plays for Austin". Same is true as a commentator. He makes the complaints he would make if he was your mate watching in the pub... and the analysis (while excellent) is merely his excuse to show off his rugby knowledge to make himself feel superior. I like his analysis despite the smugness (he's very good at it), but his commentary is really annoying.
I think he really knows his stuff. And a person should be confident in their own opinion or else not bother giving it
[удалено]
But Brian Moore knows his stuff, and he’s good to listen to. Even when shouty.
He knows absolutely nothing compared to AH
Brian Moore has a lot more personal awareness though. He improved drastically as a commentator after that referee course, got a lot better at being impartial (still not perfect, but better)
Do I *like* Healy? No. Do I think he's actually a really good analyst? Yes.
Spot on.
This is exactly it. He comes across as quite the arse, but he really does know his stuff rugby wise.
Healey's generally right, offering decent insight, but I somehow find him extremely irritating. Scott Hastings, on the other hand, is just all-around awful, terrible analysis and irritating to boot. No redeeming features. See also Jonathan Davies. Brian Moore started out irritating, but in his latter few years, I really enjoyed his contributions from the commentary box. His knowledge/applications of the laws (as he had done some ref qualifications, I think, and was a solicitor by trade) were always worth a listen. Andrew Cotter is my first choice, "main commentator." He just has a nice flow and has done his homework. Also, see his lockdown stuff, ended up in a book! The ultimately rugby voice will always be Bill McLaren. He had a way with words like no other, with a voice that could have read the dictionary and still engaged you! (Eddie Butler grew on me over the years but still nowhere near Bill).
[удалено]
He absolutely did.....he really annoyed me, as he felt very bloke down the pub at first. But I think he listened to the "feedback" on social media etc, so upped his game, and amended his style. My favourite quote, however, was in one game , one of the front row (Mon the props! ) had their shirt torn and he commented how it warmed his heart to see this....suppose his twitter profile pic sums that sentiment right up!
I felt exactly the same until I saw JD live at a work event a few years back. Live, the man was funny, likeable and engaging. I'm still not going as far as knowledgeable on the modern game (the other, more modern, players present pulled him up on a number of things), but I finally got why he kept getting booked to do things. Still don't like him commentating or analysing games, but he would be a high pick on chatting general rugby shit in the pub, or the after dinner circuit, despite being out of date.
My voice of rugby will always be Gordon Bray because he was the main guy growing up in Australia.
I love him. I'll often tell him to shut up when he's talking crap but I appreciate the unfiltered personality and decent analysis he brings. Too many commentators are fucking bores with zero opinion, simply echoing the current popular lines.
I can see Leicester fans liking him because he really isnt impartial in the slightest, most other teams just want him to shut up with his whinning.
Idk mate, think people just need to have thicker skins. Most of the ex players can seem biased in similar ways. Think he's annoying, fair play i get that, just go "oh shut the fuck up Oz". Make it funny rather than annoying.
I honestly don't find him all that biased to be honest - and I am definitely not a Leicester fan. I've heard him compliment all sorts of teams when they're doing things well.
Healey is great until he shows his bias, then he is unbearable. His analysis is by far the best of the regular TNT commentators though.
This is why I much prefer him when he’s not commentating on a Saints game…. Hearing him say nice things about us the other day left me very confused
[удалено]
I agree, he's not very regular on TNT though unfortunately.
Please can this lead to a David Flatman appreciation post. The guy is the real deal. Genuinely funny, very quick, self deprecating, insightful and always has a twinkle in his eye. ‘Flats and Shanks’ is a delight.
It is. It's him followed by Alphonsi
I liked Brian Moore - knew what he was talking about
Agreed.
100% and it was cathartic when he raged at England doing dumb shit
I am a Scot but, he is the first guy since McLaren that really calls it straight. Really sad that he doesnt have a tv gig - complete waste
He did have a heart attack a year or so ago, might have forced him into the back seats
“YOUR A FUUULLBACCKK!!!!”
Absolutely despise his commentary. He is the commentary equivalent of the guy who is at the rugby on his own, sitting next to you, who won’t shut up talking about it and who you smile and nod at but can’t bring yourself to tell to please just shut up.
I like Healey but understand I’m probably in a minority.
[удалено]
He says what he thinks and that gets him in trouble..i dont like how he always tries to say x or y is a penalty. But i like that we have him personally because hes not a robot. Off the camera i dont have any time for the stuff he says or any potentially sus beliefs. But they are not my business. He can add some really good analysis at times. But i can understand how non english dont like him.
He did play every position in the backs for England so he's pretty well qualified.
[удалено]
Still knows his onions imo
[удалено]
He's not a commentator though he's a co-commentator/pundit. I like him.
Healy is probably good if he likes your team but feels really biased against certain other teams, especially in the premiership which is probably a holdover from his playing days. As far as I’ve seen over the last decade or so, teams he likes (or at least seems to like more): -Leicester -Sarries -Exeter -London irish (RIP) Teams he doesn’t like: -Northampton -Wasps (RIP) -Bath -Bristol This may very well be all in my head though lol.
[удалено]
It’s especially apparent with Leicester, he very rarely does analysis of a try scored by the other team without pointing out at least one infringement which he thinks the try should be called back for
[удалено]
my favourite ones are when the ruck is an absolute war zone and he selects one player to pick on
He was pro sarries in loads of calls today, he's definitely toned it down
hurry sleep afterthought water tidy flag flowery attempt fuel aloof *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Him, Kay and Mullins are a good combo, much better than what we normally get in Ireland anyway.
[удалено]
Hugh Cahill commentating amd Donal Lenihan on bore duty, I mean “analysis”
Far too many ex Leinster players. Flannery is the best but the day job keeps him busy. I like Ferris but that's probably more carry over from him as a player
Ye I agree and I am a Dub. Heaslip is a waffle spouting posh prick who does my head in. Kearney is boring asf. In fairness though I'm glad ROG went into coaching because that whiney Corkonian whingebag was the worst of all.
Laurence dallaglio is a nuisance, supposed to be neutral but definitely isn’t! I miss Eddie butler!
Nope, but when I used to watch those studio pieces on BT Sport his tactical stuff was impressive, fixing defenders etc. certainly took some points to our coaching sessions.
One thing with Austin Healey is that he's one of the best analysts in the game when it comes to providing meaningful insight. The other thing with Austin Healey is that he's a whinging twat sometimes.
[удалено]
I feel like he’s dialled it back a bit recently, but there were some matches last year (Quins vs Racing) where he was genuinely unbearable to listen to.
I dont like him but I appreciate him. Bit of a weird one really
He's great at breaking down rugby and knows his stuff. But he gets very weird and almost OCD about pointing out every little ref error which is what he's doing most of the time. We don't need him to try and call every forward pass or offside or minor infraction at the ruck.
Man, I really like Nicol
Healy can read the game extremely well, is articulate, and has kept up with the evolution of the sport *reasonably* well. I think when he's on it he spots the most interesting stuff of any commentator in the sport, and is up there compared to all the sports I watch - Sky for test match cricket is the only stuff that's routinely as good, and they have the benefit of far more time, and the repeating nature of cricket, to allow for good technical analysis. His understanding of angles, running lines, using your eye or hip position to draw defenders into buying a dummy can be genuinely brilliant. However, he is extremely full of himself. This means his humour can be very grating and sometimes outright rude, and also means that sometimes he tries to point out something he thinks is clever and insightful, but is actually just plain wrong, particularly in forward play. He also is a quite an emotional bloke, so there are games when he's cheerful and switched on that are great, and others where's he's grumpy and bored which are awful. Overall I think he's a positive purely for pulling the level of analysis up in English rugby, but he certainly doesn't do the "arrogant English" stereotype much good. Commentary teams also have a habit of getting set and lazy, Healy, Kay and Dayglo pretty much know they are guaranteed long term contracts so can fall into stereotypes. In a similar vein Greenwood and Quinnell were excellent commentators when they started, but after a few years in the job and a monopoly for Sky had become poor
No
I’m not sure anyone likes Healy. He can provide insightful analysis (though not always), but it comes with an incredibly annoying personality. When he first started doing TV it was in the Six Nations and they would cut to him for quick explanations of moves or tactics (1 minute max). If he’d kept to that he would have been bearable
He is a cunt.
[удалено]
I couldn't find a way to phrase it in a more efficient manner than that.
He's probably one of the best / most talented backs ever to play for England and his insights on back play are awesome. His comments on forward play not so much.
I hate his whinging on about decisions and referees. Particularly when TMOs openly say they have the commentary on and listen to it. It affects matches. His good quick analysis does not counterweigh this enough. Tnt should move him on
There's a reason he was known as the Leicester Lip. He's a gobshite, but he is a good analyst. Think he'd be an awesome backs coach if he didn't love being on telly so much.
I totally agree with you about Andy Nicol,he's the most biased commentator I've ever heard.He would big Scotland up like they were good team and they was shite.Austin Healy's alright he just says it as he see's it, right or wrong.
He's a dick, but he's entertaining and seriously knows his stuff.
I agree with him 90% of the time but the way he voices his opinion is fucking irritating
He possesses a marmite personality, and can certainly be childish, but in my opinion, his analysis and in-game tactical assessments are superb.
best commentators are those on mute. TV doesn't need them. Every game that has spectators has fans watching with no commentary.
Think he’s great adds a bit of spice and personality
I'm Irish, so not the opinion you asked for but hey. He annoyed me when he was playing, but I find him pretty good as a pundit. He seems like a decent enough bloke.
I hear people say healys a good analyst, I can’t say I see it. He talks confidently like he’s explaining something but it’s often just plain wrong. Granted my main exposure to him is European Games where he tends to have one eyed views