I don't know who produces that Humberside post game show but they're on the wrong career path whoever they are.

Those saying "I want to hear from fans who've been to the game" are missing an important problem with this - nobody rings in. They put a guy on the air after the Catalans game who was clearly drunk and on a very bad phone line so you couldn't hear a word he was saying. Gollum then tried to go back to him on four seperate occasions. That's how desperate they are for people to ring in. The Welsh bloke, who talks a bit of sense sometimes, gets on every week because he's the only one calling in.

So the programme then essentially becomes 30 minutes of fill while they wait for Gentle to be interviewed - which as said usually happens about five minutes before the end of the programme so has to be cut short. Ten minutes of that fill is now taken up by an interview recorded before the match, so already dated. The only time that worked was when it was Pearson. The rest of the time it's been, one example, Richard Whiting talking about his hopes for the rest of the season after a match in which we've all just seen Richard Whiting leave the field injured.

After that we have 15 minutes of Gollum reading out the phone and the text number (usually incorrectly), then asking Richardson what he thought of the game, then the numbers again, then asking Richardson about the performance of a specific player, then off to the studio for a round up of texts and Tweets and - again as they don't get any - we get puerile nonsense like "great result for the boys today, Briscoe for England, come on you Hull" and "referee bad but two points is all that counts come on you Hull" then it's back to Gollum and those numbers again.

It's criminal that a broadcaster of his experience is as bad at filling now, after all these years, as he is but it's also ridiculous that he's required to fill for so long. A phone in show should always be planned around the worst case scenario that nobody phones in. What are we going to do? What are we going to talk about?

Paul Cooke is actually a decent start. Forthright opinions, controversial figure, he'll not only get people ringing in to disagree with him but he's actually capable of starting something resembling a debate with the other "experts" in the meantime. I'd get rid of Gollum (would have done so a long time ago to be fair) and replace him with somebody who can first and foremost host a radio show (he can't) and secondly ask some proper questions. Then get somebody else alongside Cooke (possibly Murdoch but definitely not Richardson) who will go at it with him and have a proper debate/row that will then encourage callers to ring in.

TalkSport is a vile horrible thing but they do this trick of having one presenter with one view and one presenter with a diametrically opposite view (whether they believe it or not) really well and callers flood in to tell one he's talking nonsense. Cooke is ideal for this.

And while I'm ranting, Craig Murdoch and James Smailes please note that asking for the thoughts on today's game, then asking if anybody is injured, and then running through each player one by one saying "Yeaman went well today didn't he?", "Manu went well today didn't he?" Did you think Westerman went well today Peter?" Is not an interview. You can hear the disdain in Gentle's voice as he replies "Oh yeh, you know, Kirk/Willie/Joe/Bruce/Brian is a good player. Look, we've just get to get that consistency into our game" and then repeats the same thing for every player.

Ask him a question for the love of God.

Sorry, it's my line of work, and it's cringeworthy to listen to it done that badly.

"Judas". Grow up.

The guy was a great player for us, scored the winning try in a Challenge Cup final and made the mistake of wanting to get more money in a career that lasts maybe 20 years if you're lucky to avoid serious injury.

Some folk need to get a grip and look to the future.

Excellent post
I hope you forward this to RH.

Here here

You're an idiot. Truly. Blaming a player who left for 5 years of mediocrity?

The reason for the poor last few years is Hetherington, pure and simple. Rule was her puppet. We did not replace Cooke, the club would not spend money.

Don't post anymore, you're a fool.

If you can`t start a post with something more constructive than calling someone an idiot then you really need to sit back and take a good long look at yourself.
Behind a keyboard you can act as hard as you like, you still come over as an ill educated smackhead. Keep your hand on your d*ck where it has better results and leave the keyboard alone.
Read and digest the post, think about your reply and then think about the `replacements` we brought in and tried.
I never said he was to blame for the last five years, I stated he was the catalyst for it.... simple enough for you?
I stated he was responsible for our `Demise`, at no time did I state he was the reason it has lasted so long.

Interesting post that. The specific point I've quoted reminds me of the Hull KR TV interviewer who supplies common sense answers within his own questions so Sandercock or the player are reduced to merely offering agreement.

'So Craig, such-and-such this week, they're in really good form so I guess you'll be looking for a strong 80-minute performance from the team?'
'Yeah, that's right Brendan...'

Okay, I don't think CS enjoys the media side much, but if he was given an open question 'Your thoughts ahead of this week's match?' it might lead somewhere [ia bit[/i more interesting.

I've said it before and I'll say it again.. Paul Cooke is a dispicable 'human being' who deserves everything he gets.. And that's nothing to do with rugby. I never will respect him he's simply a waste of skin and oxygen!!

sandy's interviews are great. he starts off with the excuses ........ too many internationals, too many kids, refereeing decisions etc. and then gets on the defensive and says he can't answer any questions after suffering a "heartbreaking defeat".

Comedy gold

I think I love you

Maybe an approach for RH would be for them to tee up a couple of articulate and sober fans in advance, say a miserable fecker and a club apologist, to call in post match to get the ball rolling. Someone independent (e.g. Cooke, but not necessarily him) to pitch in. A presenter there to moderate/summarise, not stick their two penneth in. No texts to be read out of the facile type you describe above. The post match interviews are the same every week, but I wouldn't expect much insight from these beyond comments on rotation, injuries, referees etc. What I would like is better stuff in the week - features on the academy set-up, say, who's emerging, pathways to first team. Maybe a weekly player profile - say Danny Houghton on his journey to pivotal first teamer, what he learned off Berro, insight on his dedication to fitness etc.

Exactly, one very basic and obvious technique. Sports Tonight Live - the Kelvin McKenzie venture with Mike Parry on the front - does this, and Setanta Sports did it previously when they had a station on Sky. Before the season starts they go round all the clubs in the Football League, compile a contacts list for each of them - fan reps, website editors, journos etc - who they know they can call up immediately after a game or when a news story breaks. They know not enough people are watching to generate a high enough number of decent callers so they do it artificially in this way, in the hope of building reputation and audience to the point where people are actually calling in. I do bits for Sports Tonight and I know the day before it happens that I'll be "phoning in" to take part, and I'll be introduced as somebody who has "phoned in to have their say" when in reality they took my contact at the start of the year, added it to their database, and then ring me after relevant matches I've been to.

Is it beyond Humberside to have a list of ten frequent contributors for FC, KR and City who they can phone after a game for an articulate opinion?

Barnet FC your the man.

im no lover of RH having a list in one sence is a good idear but if the same so called callers are on all the time they ld have listeners saying its hogged by the same people all the time. If i remember right thats what happen with peter adamsons programme

Can we also have a list of people we do not want on?