Jo Konta complains about questioning

Fridge

Rookie
Reporters, for the most part, suck. Very rarely will you get a reporter who has enough knowledge of the game to ask legitimate, interesting questions
 

Lozo1016

Semi-Pro
Idk whose side I'm on, but I think the way we treat players in this particular situation is unfair. If Zverev goes out and says something like, "Tsitsipas didnt actually play that well, I was just bad," we rip Zverev for being a spoiled little punk who refuses to give his opponent credit. If Konta says something like, "Strycova just played really well, she played at a high level," then she's not taking sufficient accountability for her poor performance. Ya can't really win either way.
 
Last edited:

ghostofMecir

Hall of Fame
Reporters, for the most part, suck. Very rarely will you get a reporter who has enough knowledge of the game to ask legitimate, interesting questions
Probably true, but you also have to realize that most of them are under constraints to ask particular types of questions, i.e., usually board and general in scope that will get published.

The posters here know more about the game than the general reading public and would be interested in specicic questions the general public wouldn’t. That’s why you see the same 90% of questions/answers after any match published.
 
Economics? Ewww....I'd rather take journalism. :sick: I commend you my friend for getting a degree in that because it always kicked my butt. :p
I went in not really sure which one I wanted so I did a lot of Economics courses as electives in case I wanted to switch. By time I realized I did I was 80 credits in out of the 120 to graduate so I did both.

Journalism still has honorable people but it’s got a dark underbelly for sure that I quite honestly did not wish to handle/deal with.

Back in the day it would have been a lot more fun. Now anyone with a Twitter account and a blog think they’re a journalist.

Love Economics though. I did work in the journalism field outside of graduation just to see, liked the people but too many politics and people trying to steal scoops from each other.

To get back to topic of OP tennis journalists seem even worse.
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
I went in not really sure which one I wanted so I did a lot of Economics courses as electives in case I wanted to switch. By time I realized I did I was 80 credits in out of the 120 to graduate so I did both.

Journalism still has honorable people but it’s got a dark underbelly for sure that I quite honestly did not wish to handle/deal with.

Back in the day it would have been a lot more fun. Now anyone with a Twitter account and a blog think they’re a journalist.

Love Economics though. I did work in the journalism field outside of graduation just to see, liked the people but too many politics and people trying to steal scoops from each other.

To get back to topic of OP tennis journalists seem even worse.
One of the economics fields was ok. I think it was macroeconomics. Microeconomics? Omg...I hated it. I had to take it as an elective in order to get my degree and it was much worse than high school, and I hated it then. Ugh. I commend the people who are good at it so kudos. (y) It just ain't for me. Lol.

We live in a world where Hannity is the most watched show on a news network and is considered a journalist. You are much more qualified to be considered a journalist than he is but that is the world we live in now. So not surprising how terrible some of these "sports journalists" are.
 
One of the economics fields was ok. I think it was macroeconomics. Microeconomics? Omg...I hated it. I had to take it as an elective in order to get my degree and it was much worse than high school, and I hated it then. Ugh. I commend the people who are good at it so kudos. (y) It just ain't for me. Lol.

We live in a world where Hannity is the most watched show on a news network and is considered a journalist. You are much more qualified to be considered a journalist than he is but that is the world we live in now. So not surprising how terrible some of these "sports journalists" are.
All the broadcast people nowadays are salty ex athletes that take jobs from people that go into extreme debt trying to get the jobs they’re handed on a platter. To add insult to injury/unemployment... with a much greater salary to boot.
 

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
All the broadcast people nowadays are salty ex athletes that take jobs from people that go into extreme debt trying to get the jobs they’re handed on a platter. To add insult to injury/unemployment... with a much greater salary to boot.
This is true. Ex athletes get anchor jobs like nothing while people who have the education and experience in that field are passed over. Sad world.
 
This is true. Ex athletes get anchor jobs like nothing while people who have the education and experience in that field are passed over. Sad world.
Just wish there was more of a balance. Of course they bring something to the table that is unique. But a lot of the time its just some salty incoherent babbling more fit for this website than the airwaves. Paul Pierce was my favorite Celtic as a ball player but my god as an analyst? I can’t stand him dude. Thankfully I don’t see our favorite tennis players doing that to us. The only real athlete to broadcast guy I like more than when he was an athlete is Tony Romo.
 

George Turner

Hall of Fame
Idk who's side I'm on, but I think the way we treat players in this particular situation is unfair. If Zverev goes out and says something like, "Tsitsipas didnt actually play that well, I was just bad," we rip Zverev for being a spoiled little punk who refuses to give his opponent credit. If Konta says something like, "Strycova just played really well, she played at a high level," then she's not taking sufficient accountability for her poor performance. Ya can't really win either way.
In both cases the player appeared to be saying what they thought, and it turned into a story. British Reporters like to find stories, this reporter seemed to be poking the bear so to speak.

How good is Konta's British accent? Does she sound like a native?
She sounds like she could be a British PE teacher. Although i'm no Konta fan i personally have a soft spot for her voice. :)
 

ghostofMecir

Hall of Fame
The only real athlete to broadcast guy I like more than when he was an athlete is Tony Romo.
Romo is probably the best analyst I’ve ever heard in any sport.

—Few ex coaches or players bring up technical details as he does. I don’t know why, but they don’t. They’re immersed in minutiae while playing and coaching, but when they broadcast, they sound off half-assed sports’ cliches.

—He always mentions something new that perhaps viewers haven’t thought about all the while predicting plays based on formations and pre-snap movement.

—While other analysts and play by play people question why a team manages the clock they way it does, Romo lists WHY both teams would play it the way they did giving the benefit of the doubt to people making very quick, complex decisions. He ALWAYS has a counter for when someone says, “Why didn’t they call timeout there?”

—He’s extremely personable in the way he sounds, and while it’s obvious he knows more than the viewer ever will, he doesn’t sound condescending to the play-by-play man or to the audience.

—He was extremely underrated as a player because his team didn’t win. Obviously, the player with the most power to decide games has to share in any blame, but he acquits himself extraordinarily well in advanced metrics in late game situations, under pressure (QBR when being blitzed for example)
 
Last edited:

NoleFam

G.O.A.T.
Just wish there was more of a balance. Of course they bring something to the table that is unique. But a lot of the time its just some salty incoherent babbling more fit for this website than the airwaves. Paul Pierce was my favorite Celtic as a ball player but my god as an analyst? I can’t stand him dude. Thankfully I don’t see our favorite tennis players doing that to us. The only real athlete to broadcast guy I like more than when he was an athlete is Tony Romo.
Yea not every good athlete makes a great analyst. Well actually most of them don't. I thought Dan Marino and Charles Barkley were ok as an analysts but I couldn't name a whole lot who I thought that about.
 

Cupcake

Rookie
Reporters ask questions they think the public will want to know the answers to. And of course they want to keep their jobs. If they asked nothing but polite vanilla questions, and got polite vanilla answers, very few readers would be interested in what was written or said. People are not interested in Rafa catching a fish, or how well FAA treats his dog, or that Konta visits her 92 year old auntie every week.

Look at the popularity of Kyrgios fluff-ups. Or Tomic fines. There are always several threads here because that's what many people are interested in - guys/jerks that shake things up. And this news that we seek is brought to us by reporters.

It's not the reporters at fault, it's the public who want to read about things that interest them. The public - you know - us.
 
Romo is probably the best analyst I’ve ever heard in any sport.

—Few ex coaches or players bring up technical details as he does. I don’t know why, but they don’t. They’re immersed in minutiae while playing and coaching, but when they broadcast, they sound off half-assed sports’ cliches.

—He always mentions something new that perhaps viewers haven’t thought about all the while predicting plays based on formations and pre-snap movement.

—While other analysts and play by play people question why a team manages the clock they way it does, Romo lists WHY both teams would p,ay it the way they did giving the benefit of the doubt to people making very quick, complex decisions. He ALWAYS has a counter for when someone says, “Why didn’t they call timeout there?”

—He’s extremely personable in the way he sounds, and while it’s obvious he knows more than the viewer ever will, he doesn’t sound condescending to the play-by-play man or to the audience.

—He was extremely underrated as a player because his team didn’t win. Obviously, the pkayer with the most power to decide games has to share in any blame, he acquits himself extraordinarily well in advanced metrics in late Gs w situations, under pressure (QBR when being blitzed for example)
Great post. You have touched on literally every reason why I’m a big fan of his.

I was a fan of his as a football player too which actually makes it all the more impressive I like him even more now.

He’s got the charisma, knowledge, and voice for broadcasting. Plenty with some of those attributes. Very few with all of them.
 

MeatTornado

Legend
—Few ex coaches or players bring up technical details as he does. I don’t know why, but they don’t. They’re immersed in minutiae while playing and coaching, but when they broadcast, they sound off half-assed sports’ cliches.
Most of them don't go straight from the field to the booth.

Tony has the unique perspective of actually playing against all these players and running the same plays that he's calling on tv. Compare that to Phil Simms who he took over for. When Phil retired in the early 90s the game was completely different. I'm sure he keeps up with football, but he doesn't know the ins and outs like an active QB who analyzes film every week would know. We'll see if Tony is still as popular 10 years from now after a whole new generation has come through.

And most networks want them to keep it simple too. They want everyone to understand what is happening and not get bogged down in the details. Hopefully the positive reception to Romo will shift that line of thinking in the future.
 
Most of them don't go straight from the field to the booth.

Tony has the unique perspective of actually playing against all these players and running the same plays that he's calling on tv. Compare that to Phil Simms who he took over for. When Phil retired in the early 90s the game was completely different. I'm sure he keeps up with football, but he doesn't know the ins and outs like an active QB who analyzes film every week would know. We'll see if Tony is still as popular 10 years from now after a whole new generation has come through.

And most networks want them to keep it simple too. They want everyone to understand what is happening and not get bogged down in the details. Hopefully the positive reception to Romo will shift that line of thinking in the future.
Bernard Tomic and Nick Kyrgios need to grace us in the booth one day.
 

Tshooter

Legend
I ran it through google translate because I didn’t understand what the Gentleman was asking and it came back with: “Wus up with dat choking ?”

She gave a bit of a snarky reply. Most pros I think can fend off this question with some innocuous reply.

I didn’t watch the match but in my professional sometimes listening to questions opinion it sounds like she choked.
 
Last edited:

reaper

Legend
If a player has fallen apart in a match, why would a journalist not ask about it? They should avoid the salient issue to be "respectful?"
 

Raiden

Hall of Fame
If a player has fallen apart in a match, why would a journalist not ask about it? They should avoid the salient issue to be "respectful?"
Konta does have a history of smacking down Brit media personalities (who probably got used to bullying other players then out of habit proceed to do the same on Konta.

Djokovic should try this Konta schtick (say something like "don't patronize me"). He should stop getting lost in intricate arguments on details and focus more on the tone of the questioner. Remember who he is and who they are and not act like he's with his relatives at the dinner table.
 

reaper

Legend
Konta does have a history of smacking down Brit media personalities (who probably got used to bullying other players then out of habit proceed to do the same on Konta.

Djokovic should try this Konta schtick (say something like "don't patronize me"). He should stop getting lost in intricate arguments on details and focus more on the tone of the questioner. Remember who he is and who they are and not act like he's with his relatives at the dinner table.
I don't understand the reference to bullying regarding the question put to Konta. If in the opinion of a journalist a player chokes repeatedly in big matches it's a fair line of questioning. If the player doesn't choke the question can be batted away easily, if they do choke the substantive matter is addressing the psychological issue not the temerity of the reporter.
 

Bartelby

Talk Tennis Guru
The journalist did indeed patronise her as the journalist's role is not to coach from the sidelines.

He obviously did it to provoke a more interesting answer than my opponent played better, but self-flagellaton is best done in private.
 

reaper

Legend
The journalist did indeed patronise her as their role is not to coach from the sidelines.
They probably should just do away with the artifice of the mandatory post match press conference. The reporters seem obliged to avoid "mentioning the war" in the event of a player implosion, making it more a propaganda piece for the player than anything else. Better suited to North Korea.
 

Bartelby

Talk Tennis Guru
Sport is part of the entertainment industry these days, so it is indeed an artifice designed to promote the product.

But the press has mostly stopped asking critical questions of politicians, so I think that's where we need to start if we wish to avoid NK.

They probably should just do away with the artifice of the mandatory post match press conference. The reporters seem obliged to avoid "mentioning the war" in the event of a player implosion, making it more a propaganda piece for the player than anything else. Better suited to North Korea.
 

reaper

Legend
Sport is part of the entertainment industry these days, so it is indeed an artifice designed to promote the product.

But the press has mostly stopped asking critical questions of politicians, so I think that's where we need to start if we wish to avoid NK.
Yes but part of that entertainment is watching someone who's just been paid about 10 times the average annual salary to lose at tennis project that they're a victim in some way. A curly question assists the process.
 

jon70

Semi-Pro
I didn't hear anything disrespectful from the journalist. She seemed fine until he mentioned learning from the loss to possibly win a Slam, which is oddly when she decided to take offense.

There are journalists who go about their work to provoke, but on the other hand most of them probably ask fair questions only to be met with personalities like Nick Kyrgios.
 
Top