Talk:Alan Green (broadcaster)

}}}}

Exidence?
Too many people are deleting facts about him. There is no real evidence to prove he supports one team or another but he has made documented racist comments and regularly makes ruthlessly negative comments about players, managers and referees in his commentaries. There are hundreds of players and dozens of referees and managers that he has attacked or rubbished with insulting comments that he would never dare repeat face-to-face. People removing these comments should take the time to listen to him for an hour and they will realise that most of the negativity about him is justified.

It is a cultivated image and something Green does not hide so there seems no real need for Wikipedia to discuss neutrality.

Green wants to be controversial and is willing to say anything to be so.

Anyone who's ever listened to him knows that he is a Liverpool fan! That's like saying where's the evidence that Michael Jackson is black. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.46.157.9 (talk) 22:13, 10 December 2006 (UTC).

Green is a relentless moaner and it is likely that that style causes people to form opinions as to who he supports. It is a personality issue with him as he moans throughout his football commentaries in a way no other commentator does; but when commentating on rowing and golf he commentates normally. It is likely that he has now developed an inability to commentate properly on football as he finds it impossible to stop moaning; it is difficult for people to understand what is actually happening in the game. The people colour commentating with him often descend into the same mind-set. It is interesting to listen to him from a psychological point of view but not if you want to know what is actually going on in the game! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.110.10.65 (talk) 20:08, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Deleted "accusation" of paedophilia. Classy. Redmark68

Added some quotes, moved the more important racist comments criticism to the top of the controversy section, removed unqualified accusations of "obvious bias", added some background to the Ferguson feud, contextualised the Everton 'thinly veiled attack', and added a quote from a fellow broadcaster on Green's style and enthusiasm. Redmark68

Claiming Alan Green is a Liverpool fan is here'say. Fans opinions, based on his feud with Alec Ferguson. It is no sort of fact, and doesn't belong on a factual web site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.128.223.67 (talk) 17:38, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

These sort of petty, plastic articles are what make wikipedia poor at times. A scorned United fan, using a wikipedia page, to publish every negative thing he can find on the guy, and just ignore everything decent he has done in sports commentary? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.128.223.67 (talk) 17:42, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Not mentioning Green's obvious bias towards Liverpool Football Club - whether he claims to be a fan or not - can only ever paint a distorted picture. A great deal of what he says in commentary (even in games involving neither Liverpool nor their strongest rivals) is tainted by his allegiance to the club... far more so than with any other commentator in the mainstream British media. Quoting an allegiance to Linfield is like stating that Robbie Williams is a fan of Port Vale without ever mentioning he was in Take That. Elements of this forum seem to have turned into a Liverpool v Manchester United feud. Asking for the inclusion of relevant information is not about club loyalties, it's about representing the truth. Even if Green chooses to continue to deny his Liverpool allegiance, it is still relevant to mention the strength of the suggestion that the allegiance exists.


 * This is all your personal opinion. If you have no cites from reliable sources then it doesn't go into the article.  Contrary to your claims, Wikipedia is not a forum for opinions. -- Escape Orbit  (Talk) 08:36, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

It is interesting that Greens own comments are not considered a "reliable source". Anyone visiting -- Escape Orbit (Talk) page will find that not only has the editor a problem with their own spelling and grammar; they often quote Wikipedia rules that do not exist and interpret the ones that do exist in irrational, inconsistent and self serving ways. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.28.103.62 (talk) 10:29, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

It is stated that Wikipedia is not a forum for opinions but time after time facts about Green are deleted. There are no real facts to support the view he supports Liverpool but there are hundreds, if not thousands, of instances of Green being relentlessly negative and making racist and deliberately inflammatory comments in order to further his own career rather than reflecting what actually happens on the pitch.

Any commentary he does provides ample evidence to support this view but as soon as these, factual, quotes are put on the page (quotes actually said by Green) they are removed for being inflammatory or because Wikipedia is not about "opinions"!

The people deleting these facts are what is bad about Wikipedia and not the people using quotes from Green himself to demonstrate what Green does to develop his own career irrespective of what is happening in the game he is commentating on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.28.103.62 (talk) 12:43, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

High profile bloopers
When Emile Heskey scored the fifth goal against Germany in England's 2001 World Cup qualifier Green uttered 'it's another goal for Liverpool' (since all three goal scorers were Liverpool players). The commentary was subsequently editted by the BBC and the BBC and no longer appears when 5Live play archive recording.


 * Hardly embarrassing, that was deliberate, and the fact was mentioned many times in all media for quite some time afterwards.--BadWolf42 16:11, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Another embarrassing moment came in the 2005 Champions League final. Just before half time Hernan Crespo put AC Milan 3-0 up at which point Green proclaimed 'AC Milan are the 2005 Champions League winners'. Liverpool subsequently came back to win the match on penalties. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.77.212.153 (talk) 15:38, 22 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Yes. And? --BadWolf42 16:11, 17 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Furthermore, anyone watching that game would've been of the same opinion - under no circumstance could anyone conceive of Liverpool's incredible comeback...therefore how is it embarrasing? -- Oliverdrew 23:16, 11 August 2008  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.103.28.115 (talk)

Opinions
I've edited the line "The subjects of Green's criticisms have famously included ... also Manchester United, who he hates", as this sounds awfully opinionated.Frediculous biggs (talk) 22:43, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm deleting the bit about him being a massive Liverpool fan. It's amusing how many different supporters think he's biased against their club, he's not, he simply is opinionated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.46.3.130 (talk) 12:16, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Rowing section
Is any of that actually true? Aside from the nonsense about how his commentary is brilliant, he is NOT the guy who has been commentating on the rowing for the BBC, unless over the summer his voice has changed. Worthy for deletion I think, so I will do just that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Safcf189 (talk • contribs) 11:39, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Safcf189 is clearly not someone bothered about facts; it is a shame he is allowed to edit on Wikipedia.

Green commentated well on the radio for the BBC in every rowing event at the Olympics; maybe the person who deleted this does not listen to the radio? You can see his name here. http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2008/06_june/19/olympics8.shtml

The fact that he doesn't think United are the best team on the planet, like other "company" guys like Clive Tyldsley, does not mean that he supports there rivals.

Working for the BBC, Green has no real issue with increasing viewing/listening figures, for commercial gains. Guys like Andy Gray, Martin Tyler and Clive Tilsdley suck up to United, as they have big support, and they need big audiences for advertising reasons - and big audiences mean sucking up to United fans.

The BBC and it's commentators generally fall out with United all the time, as they aren't prepared to play that game —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.128.223.67 (talk) 16:16, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Pronunciation
Please read Wikipedia policy on biographies. If he is known for his pronunciation then please add some cites from reliable sources that demonstrate this. Otherwise it would it appear that the addition is original research and personal opinion. We can then consider if this is notable enough to be in the lead of his biography. (Which I doubt.) Thanks -- Escape Orbit (Talk) 15:46, 29 April 2009 (UTC)


 * If you are referring to the way he says penalty area, then yes I agree it is pretty weird. Ask any British football fan. He's just about the most well known presenter there is! —Preceding unsigned comment added by PointOfPresence (talk • contribs) 20:19, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Disputes/complaints
Do we need these to be two separate sections, as they seem to be basically any controversy surrounding him rather than being clearly defined 'disputes' and 'complaints'. Could we not just put it all under 'controversy' or something like that? AlexR4444 (talk) 10:55, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

It does not really matter as many people have provided quotes and links from reliable sources that meet Wikipedias criteria and they are simply removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.28.103.62 (talk) 10:19, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Can you explain how the two comments (firstly, all those doing a Mexican wave should be shot, and secondly, that tannoy speakers at footrball mathces should be drowned at birth. Personal, I think it should also be regarded as high profile.

This has been discussed at length before. If you want to add a "controversy" or "dispute" you need to add cites from reliable sources that clearly explain something that Green has done/said as being controversial and/or causing a dispute. It is not enough for you to say "I heard him say this, and I think it's controversial". Nor is it enough to cite posts from some online football forum by anonymous fans moaning about him. IP Editor 82.28.103.62 in particular had this explained a number of times, but couldn't understand it. -- Escape Orbit (Talk) 17:14, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Is there any evidence to support this or are you just being condescending?

Everyone can understand the point that Escape Orbit is making but he himself has regularly deleted quotes from Green where there is no need to add that they are controversial - if a persons own words are not considered relevant to their profile it is difficult to work out what is allowed. The issue seems to be that many of the Wikipedia editors state that "reliable sources" need to be quoted, but then simply remove everything claiming the sources are not reliable. It is impossible for anyone to get a real understanding of Alan Green who has no qualms about making derogatory comments about players, managers, games and anything else that meets his eye; it is his personality and whilst there could be some debate about whether he is putting it on or why he does it, it is undeniable that Green himself courts publicity by relentlessly being controversial - but if his own words cannot be used to demonstrate this then, presumably, Wikipedia will not reflect this.

Editors do not want controversy on Wikipedia, but with Green it his decision to be controversial and the BBC are clearly happy to support him as they regularly now use him as a "colour man" as well as commentator and regard it as part of the entertainment. Unfortunately there are editors on Wikipedia that will not bother to check anything and simply remove wording that does not meet vague and unclear guidelines that tend to be at the whim of the editor.


 * Controversial information on Biographies of living persons must be cited from reliable sources. Forums are not reliable sources.  "I heard it on TV" is not a reliable source.  I don't know how this can be made any clearer for you. -- Escape Orbit  (Talk) 13:05, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

I have never heard Alan Green on the TV as he is a radio man - therefore to put "I heard it on the tv" in parentheses as if it was quote, really does strengthen the point I was making; you simply make things up to make a point. You repeatedly attribute quotes to me that were never made, to make your point, and then end with condescending statements. In your comments above there are other statements attributed to me that were never made and you use them to undermine me rather than address the actual comments I made.
 * Please follow Wikipedia policy and cite from a reliable source. Anything else is arguing over irrelevant detail. -- Escape Orbit (Talk) 23:38, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Honesty is not "irrelevant detail" - As and editor on Wikipedia you should be honest and not make things up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.28.103.62 (talk) 08:56, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Where is Alan Green
We are well into the new season and I yet to hear Alan Greens superb commentary.

There are football commentators and then there is Alan Green, without doubt the best radio commentator around.

SO WHERE IS HE??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.134.255.19 (talk) 21:48, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

You need to get a life! Relentless moaning is not "superb commentary"! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.170.200.148 (talk) 23:52, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Alan Green (broadcaster). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070930064409/http://www.boltonnews.co.uk/display.var.1611608.0.0.php?act=complaint&cid=487963 to http://www.boltonnews.co.uk/display.var.1611608.0.0.php?act=complaint&cid=487963
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927022002/http://www.radiotoday.co.uk/news.php?extend.1518 to http://www.radiotoday.co.uk/news.php?extend.1518

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:32, 7 October 2016 (UTC)