Bellend commentators

[Penk Wolf]

Why not say pundits then? That's a whole load different to a commentator.

Might be in the minority here, but i think Jacqui Oatley is really not very good. Still miles better than Fielden though.

I think I’ve now clarified it.

Anyway, had to laugh at Terry Butcher last night on 5 live.

“Nigeria have to be careful from the corner, they’ve already conceded two from a corner. One from the left and one from the right, albeit that came from a penalty.”

 

[jlo]

I can't recall Eni Aluko's commentary, but Alex Scott was pretty insightful yesterday and well worth her place on the pundits panel.

 

[jd1981]

No problems with Alex Scott’s punditry yesterday, knew here stuff and obviously had done plenty of research prior to the game.

 

[Johnny75]

No problems with Alex Scott’s punditry yesterday, knew here stuff and obviously had done plenty of research prior to the game.

But no more insightful than had DW been in the panel? Why would bring a woman qualify you for being on the panel? Seems as though Scott and Aluko are on their just for the sex they are and that's a piss poor way of choosing anything.

 

[sycophantia]

But no more insightful than had DW been in the panel? Why would bring a woman qualify you for being on the panel? Seems as though Scott and Aluko are on their just for the sex they are and that's a piss poor way of choosing anything.

Just the way things are, Scott is female and black so ticks 2 boxes, she is also pretty and had played football for England and can string a few sentences together. As far as I know DW hasn't played for England, dunno if he's pretty as I've never met him...even if he is more insightful, he just doesn't tick enough boxes.
I actually think Scott is ok, miles better than Phil Neville, even if he has had a stellar career and played for the mens team

 

[Lord Knows]

What I find with female pundits such as Scott and Aluko is that they parrot stuff they have heard on some basic coaching course without having the ability to independently think for themselves so that we dont get insight. Most pundits try and give their interpretation on events when I feel they should be looking at the coaches involved interpretations of the game and the problems those coaches and players are having during the game.

 

[MARKakaJIM]

The were both shit yesterday when they were talking about Pogba. To be honest I'd got no idea who the woman was but she was just going on about those passes that he makes, what passes? She made no attempt to clarify what she was actually talking about, there'd been no highlight real showing Pogba playing a particular type of pass over and over, it's like she was being asked to talk about something she had no knowledge of so just rattled off some generic shit and hoped no-one challenged anything. Perhaps even worse though was Neville trying to suggest that Pogba's biggest stength was his aerial presence and getting on the end of crosses when arriving late in the box, I don't think I've ever seen him do that! If anything, certainly since moving to United at least, he seems to be really poor in the air for a man of his size, he had some really high profile fuck ups defending set pieces. I'd say his heading is probably one of the weakest parts of his game, up there with playing with the brain of a 5 year old every now and again or thinking it's a game of FIFA street.

 

[YoungWolf]

Neville works in the women’s game but apparently it’s okay for him to be on the punditry team...

 

[jd1981]

But no more insightful than had DW been in the panel? Why would bring a woman qualify you for being on the panel? Seems as though Scott and Aluko are on their just for the sex they are and that's a piss poor way of choosing anything.

That’s the world we live in unfortunately political correctness has been pushed to stupid lengths, trust me I believe best people should employed for each role but it doesn’t happen. Think they call positive discrimination which is a load of bollocks.

 

[YoungWolf]

Let me guess “they are stealing our jobs!”? Bloody women working in a mans game, shouldn’t they know their place?

 

[White Wolf]

Neville works in the women’s game but apparently it’s okay for him to be on the punditry team...

He was involved in the men's game though would probably be the counter-argument. He's still an idiot who contributes nothing however.

Wish we heard more from Drogba as he was much more insightful.

 

[YoungWolf]

He was involved in the men's game though would probably be the counter-argument. He's still an idiot who contributes nothing however.

Wish we heard more from Drogba as he was much more insightful.

Indeed, which further suggests they thibk only men can talk about football

Agree on Drogba - but I then I’d better not praise any ethnic minorities either because I’m being a social justice warrior

 

[Johnny75]

Let me guess “they are stealing our jobs!”? Bloody women working in a mans game, shouldn’t they know their place?

And this kind of shite doesn't help and you're better than cheap shots like that. Being chosen because you played football at a standard which is no better than tier 9 of the men's game to comment on a men's game because they're women makes no sense and is a little insulting to us as viewers.

But so is employing idiots like Hoddle, Lawrenson, Larsson, Phil Neville and Keown.

 

[Johnny75]

Indeed, which further suggests they thibk only men can talk about football

Agree on Drogba - but I then I’d better not praise any ethnic minorities either because I’m being a social justice warrior

Don't talk shite and you can pack that racism garbage in its bang out of order.

 

[YoungWolf]

Ah yes the extensive high level playing experience = being knowledgeable about football argument. Now which user on this forum have I seen often debunk this theory?

 

[White Wolf]

Indeed, which further suggests they thibk only men can talk about football

Agree on Drogba - but I then I’d better not praise any ethnic minorities either because I’m being a social justice warrior

I don't think that's a fair representation of what is being argued by Johnny and sycophania. What they took issue with is people like Aluko being there because they were women and have played at what is a very very poor standard of football. It would be like getting Gary Hackett or someone from the Chinese league to talk about the game. When they turn out to be poor pundits I don't see why people can't complain as they haven't justified being there. I want Lawrenson and Hoddle to fuck off too as they are rubbish.

Drogba isn't there because he's black he's there because he played at a really high level and has a good understanding of the game and you can't complain about that. I just want to hear good pundits.

 

[YoungWolf]

But Scott is a pretty decent pundit (i am not the only one on here who thinks that) so why is she not allowed to talk about football according to them?

 

[Johnny75]

But Scott is a pretty decent pundit (i am not the only one on here who thinks that) so why is she not allowed to talk about football according to them?

So why not employ DW* as he's bloody knowledgable and moreso than most of the others?

(apols DW for using you as a stick)

 

[YoungWolf]

Indeed, why not?

 

[Johnny75]

Ah yes the extensive high level playing experience = being knowledgeable about football argument. Now which user on this forum have I seen often debunk this theory?

You know I don't subscribe to that theory you cheeky git. WW is right in that pundits should be on there for being good and I don't think either Scott or Aluko are good and they are clearly there because they're women and that's my point.

Dogba is very good, more like him would be great.