Down in little, friendly New Zealand, relations between the media and the county’s most successful Super Rugby club haven’t been very friendly lately. 

The Crusaders had won the last seven Super Rugby titles in a row. But the Canterbury club, which gave us superstars like Richie McCaw and Dan Carter, didn’t go so well this year. They missed the playoffs. And that put plenty of heat on their new coach Rob Penney. 

Things got especially tense in May when a reporter from 1News (Thomas Mead) posed a series of questions to Rob during a press conference.

 

“Do you expect to still be here in this role next year?”

“Would you consider stepping aside?”

“Where does the blame lie? Does it lie with the players? Does it lie with you?”

 

That sort of stuff.

The hard questions.

Repeatedly. 

And the response they drew from Rob was unsurprising. 

He tried his best. 

He got frustrated. 

He accepted responsibility.

He gave short answers. 

He got more agitated. 

Then, when he was removing his microphone after the interrogation, he slipped up. 

Speaking to his Crusaders’ media manager (Jack Fletcher), while still being recorded, Rob said: 

 

“He’s a disgrace that c_ _ _.”

“Who is he?”

 

That then became the big story.

Rob has since apologised to the Crusaders CEO (Colin Mansbridge). 

And Colin has since apologised to Thomas.

—--  —--  —--

A version of what happened in New Zealand last week plays out around the world daily. 

That’s understandable when ‘asking the hard questions’ has become such an ingrained part of the sports media landscape.

But by viewing an interview (or a press conference) through the lens of the questions being asked, we’re kinda missing the point.

The focus shouldn’t be on the questions. 

As followers of sport, we’re after insights that help us to more deeply understand the experience of the person in the spotlight.

So if the answers go nowhere, so does the overall interview. 

That happens time and time again when a reporter gets on a roll asking their list of hard questions.

Because the questions are only one side of the conversation.

(And they’re the wildly less interesting side).

—--  —--  —--

A better approach is to look at the ways in which thought-provoking insights can be unearthed.

With a good interview being similar to a good conversation, setting things up for success requires an interviewer to:

• know the subject ✅
• do their homework ✅
• take time to establish rapport ✅

Then, off that footing, they’re in a position to ask questions that delve deeper.

But the focus there is on revealing the fascinating answers. 

Not just on asking the hard questions.

It’s a subtle yet significant difference.