interesting read

comment by tslufc (U12903)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Elsbels - Just Some Guy (U21658)
posted 2 hours, 7 minutes ago
comment by Lorralorimer (U18994)
posted 59 minutes ago
comment by Elsbels - Just Some Guy (U21658)
posted 11 hours, 35 minutes ago
On MOTD they said Maddison had a future as a pundit, I wouldn't be surprised to see Paddy Bamford following a career in Sports Journalism after he retires. The guy is so intelligent and articulate. Mind you the BBC seem to be heading away from intelligent and articulate, Alex Scott can only just about string two sentences together.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ha, I know what you mean. Mind you, Alan Shearer was bloody useless at first, so there's hope for her.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thought Rachel Yankee was doing a reasonable job but she seems to have been dropped. Alex Scott is everywhere, her and Jenas.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, Jenas pops up all over the BBC schedules and Alex Scott as well. I would much rather hear the views of someone with playing and managing experience but the BBC obviously prefers young/pretty face presenters/summarisers
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Both of those people have playing experience.

Alex Scott ticks a lot of boxes, female, mixed race, gay, who cares that she is poorly educated and her diction is chronic, Jenas just ticks the Leeds hating kant box.

Alex Scott is very good at her job. She's one of the better pundits out there.

She offers a lot better insight than Alan Shearer.

comment by Elsbels - Just Some Guy (U21658)
posted 4 hours, 12 minutes ago
Alex Scott ticks a lot of boxes, female, mixed race, gay, who cares that she is poorly educated and her diction is chronic, Jenas just ticks the Leeds hating kant box.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Poorly educated? Pretty sure she has a degree in sports journalism or something. She's actually much better qualified than almost any other pundit.

Just be direct about why you don't like here, and stop pretending that it's anything other than what we all know it is

I thought Scott was fine on the telly the other weekend.
Far better than some other female pundits I could mention....

The BBC do this with presenters, pick a winner and then make them omnipresent until people tire of them. They’re gone ‘all in’ on Alex Scott. I think there are some excellent female presenters... Baldwin, Logan... but Personally, I’ve always found Alex Scott to be monotone and forced in terms of delivery and blandly stating the obvious in terms of content, so I zone out now when she’s speaking... but maybe I’ve just caught her on bad days and should take my blinkers off.

The standard of football punditry has always been pretty dire in my opinion, genuine insight is pretty rare. Couldn’t care less on gender. I do think that women are judged differently, the blokes talk bollox all the time, if one of the women does it, it gets highlighted. To some degree presenters have to learn on the job, and in our quota driven pc world we’re getting a fair few chucked in at the deep end so it magnifies it.

comment by milkyboy (U12731)
posted 1 hour, 18 minutes ago
The BBC do this with presenters, pick a winner and then make them omnipresent until people tire of them. They’re gone ‘all in’ on Alex Scott. I think there are some excellent female presenters... Baldwin, Logan... but Personally, I’ve always found Alex Scott to be monotone and forced in terms of delivery and blandly stating the obvious in terms of content, so I zone out now when she’s speaking... but maybe I’ve just caught her on bad days and should take my blinkers off.

The standard of football punditry has always been pretty dire in my opinion, genuine insight is pretty rare. Couldn’t care less on gender. I do think that women are judged differently, the blokes talk bollox all the time, if one of the women does it, it gets highlighted. To some degree presenters have to learn on the job, and in our quota driven pc world we’re getting a fair few chucked in at the deep end so it magnifies it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

It's quite clear there is a form of quota selection currently at Sky Sports, which will always mean that some presenters are given the job without the necessary experience and therefore struggle to begin with. That's not to say it should or should not be happening by the way. I'm not getting in to that on here. I hope that it has the desired impact and is successful.

The standard of punditry has been terrible for a long long time now. The vast majority of 'punditry' has very little to do with insight into the sport. It's purely a storyline or narrative with no insight into what is actually happening. Seem to be much more interested in creating a soap than explaining the elements of the game that we as fans don't see. I suppose it's easily explained though. The fans that want the extra insight and the in depth tactical analysis will tune in regardless. The pundits are trying to attract those less interested to the channel and the best way to do this is to create drama. I imagine this is a clear instruction from the broadcasters and we are quite possibly taking the frustration out on pundits who probably know a lot more than they are allowed to let on.

Very much agree with the opinions of Milky and Faith.

What a bland lot most of them are on Sky and other channels, but the former is the worst in my view.
Though I think we also have to acknowledge the policies from the tv companies to conform to present day political considerations does tie the hands of presenters, the rhetoric might well be " behave yourself and stay bland"

I guess it’s possible they’re sitting there wanting to explain the finer intricacies of the game... but are instructed to explain that the winners just ‘wanted it more’

Or it could be that most pundits think tactics are small mints

Think the reality is that punditry is just a cushy after playing job, and means very little to people who are, in the mainstream, already loaded. It's also just becoming far too easy to do. Seeing far fewer PL players choosing to go into coaching, because punditry opportunities are offered to nothing players like Jamie O'Hara or Gabriel Agbonlahor, both of whom share the enviable achievement of throwing their careers off a cliff.