Rate the TV commentators and pundits

[moomba]

Keys, Scholes, Sounness, Matterface, Keown. Buy some beers with the change and watch the game on mute.

If thats not allowed Humphrey, Richards, Keane, Fletcher and McCoist.

 

[Bradesmaen]

Cates, Scott, Keane, Fletcher, Jenas and some spare change.

 

[Cruyff14]

Neville, Keown, Keane, Cates, Tydesley.

 

[jd2010]

Roy Keane has a point to an extent about being an international not being enough

 

[jd2010]

5 - Linekar
2 - Scott
2 - Shearer
3 - Tydseley
3 - Jenas

 

[Art Vandelay_]

Roy Keane has a point to an extent about being an international not being enough

4-0 win.
Clean sheet.

Point emphasised in 3 places is Roy has a point. A point that says we aren’t too good.... A 4-0 win brings this on.

5 - Linekar
2 - Scott
2 - Shearer
3 - Tydseley
3 - Jenas

Will never understand the love affair with Jenas. Very meh pundit.

Others all very solid

 

[sorted]

I've changed my mind on Karen Carney. She goes on a bit much as though she's trying too hard to prove she knows what she's talking about, when all the other expert comments guys have played Premier League.

 

[SM]

I've changed my mind on Karen Carney. She goes on a bit much as though she's trying too hard to prove she knows what she's talking about, when all the other expert comments guys have played Premier League.

She's played at the top level too.

 

[RPCB]

She's played at the top level too.

It’s amazing at this point. Karen Carney played in the Women’s Super League for years, represented her country 144 times and she is also an Olympian. Her co-commentator for the Chelsea/Everton match happened to be Peter Drury, who has never played professional football. So with the logic used here, Karen was more qualified to commentate the Chelsea/Everton match and is she is as qualified as any commentator. Lets be honest, some are bloody shocking.

I have the Chelsea/Everton match on now and Karen has focused on the action on the pitch. I don’t know what she has tried too hard about. Perhaps she used buzz football terms like “4-3-3”. I don’t know.

 

[SM]

It’s amazing at this point. Karen Carney played in the Women’s Super League for years, represented her country 144 times and she is also an Olympian. Her co-commentator for the Chelsea/Everton match happened to be Peter Drury, who has never played professional football. So with the logic used here, Karen was more qualified to commentate the Chelsea/Everton match and is she is as qualified as any commentator. Lets be honest, some are bloody shocking.

I have the Chelsea/Everton match on now and Karen has focused on the action on the pitch. I don’t know what she has tried too hard about. Perhaps she used buzz football terms like “4-3-3”. I don’t know.

Some will use any excuse I guess.

 

[sorted]

She's played at the top level too.

Women's top level is about the same as men's under 15s.

 

[DBAH0]

It’s amazing at this point. Karen Carney played in the Women’s Super League for years, represented her country 144 times and she is also an Olympian. Her co-commentator for the Chelsea/Everton match happened to be Peter Drury, who has never played professional football. So with the logic used here, Karen was more qualified to commentate the Chelsea/Everton match and is she is as qualified as any commentator. Lets be honest, some are bloody shocking.

I have the Chelsea/Everton match on now and Karen has focused on the action on the pitch. I don’t know what she has tried too hard about. Perhaps she used buzz football terms like “4-3-3”. I don’t know.

I'm just glad it wasn't Jim Beglin. He's probably not having a great time of it ATM though.

 

[TheGreatBarryB]

Quite a few top coaches in a number of sports never played at the top level. Even today in football guys like Rodgers, Sarri, Nagelsmann have never played. So don’t see that you necessarily have to have played to commentate.

 

[sorted]

It’s amazing at this point. Karen Carney played in the Women’s Super League for years, represented her country 144 times and she is also an Olympian. Her co-commentator for the Chelsea/Everton match happened to be Peter Drury, who has never played professional football. So with the logic used here, Karen was more qualified to commentate the Chelsea/Everton match and is she is as qualified as any commentator. Lets be honest, some are bloody shocking.

I have the Chelsea/Everton match on now and Karen has focused on the action on the pitch. I don’t know what she has tried too hard about. Perhaps she used buzz football terms like “4-3-3”. I don’t know.

Peter Drury is a professional TV commentator. The format is to have an ex Premier League player alongside to give expert comments. Carney is not qualified in this regard.

 

[moomba]

Good footballer doesn't equal good commentator.

Many examples of that.

 

[SM]

Women's top level is about the same as men's under 15s.

Yikes.

 

[SM]

Peter Drury is a professional TV commentator. The format is to have an ex Premier League player alongside to give expert comments. Carney is not qualified in this regard.

Because she's not male so physically can't have played in the PL? Come on mate..

 

[RossFC]

Women's top level is about the same as men's under 15s.

Much worse actually. A lot of these boys are only a couple of years off first team football.

 

[moomba]

Physically they might not be able to complete but there is good technical, skilful football in the women's game. Without a lot of the cheating and moaning you get in the mens.

Any bloke would be pleased with this in a derby game.

 

[SM]

Much worse actually. A lot of these boys are only a couple of years off first team football.
View attachment 1073728

Those are pretty misleading matches and pretty disappointing to see them used as evidence of any sort of inferior knowledge of the game in this context. Expected better from you Ross.

 

[RossFC]

Those are pretty misleading matches and pretty disappointing to see them used as evidence of any sort of inferior knowledge of the game in this context. Expected better from you Ross.

I was told by someone on the board that history doesn't care. No matter how misleading things are.

 

[SM]

I was told by someone on the board that history doesn't care. No matter how misleading things are.

Huh?

 

[Loonerty]

Physically comparing men and women's football is difficult because of course the women would be disadvantaged, maybe a bit technically as well but that'd be as much down to the fact that I'd say until recently they haven't played from nearly the same age as boys do. Just like the AFLW.

That doesn't mean they aren't taught the exact same things that the men are taught. Mentally, there is no difference aside from maybe some instinct in some cases. And there'd still be women who are very good mentally.

Luckily, you don't need to be able to hit a rocket to be a commentator. So what does it matter? Because women aren't as good as men at the sport, they don't know sh*t about it?

******* turn it up.

 

[sorted]

Those are pretty misleading matches and pretty disappointing to see them used as evidence of any sort of inferior knowledge of the game in this context.

The Matildas also lost 4-1 to the Colorado Rapids U15's boys. We are not talking elite level boys - they are 14 year olds from club sides in relatively low standard leagues. It's true that it's hard to judge how seriously these games were played but there are reasons why national women's teams are playing practise games against U15 boys club teams - they are similar standard of skills and physicality.

Lower playing ability is not evidence of inferior knowledge of the game. Peter Drury and Martin Tyler have not played the game to a high standard but are very knowledgeable. But you would not have them commentate together. The accepted format is a professional commentator supplemented by expert comments by a former player from the league/club we are watching.

 

[Loonerty]

The Matildas also lost 4-1 to the Colorado Rapids U15's boys. We are not talking elite level boys - they are 14 year olds from club sides in relatively low standard leagues. It's true that it's hard to judge how seriously these games were played but there are reasons why national women's teams are playing practise games against U15 boys club teams - they are similar standard of skills and physicality.

Lower playing ability is not evidence of inferior knowledge of the game. Peter Drury and Martin Tyler have not played the game to a high standard but are very knowledgeable. But you would not have them commentate together. The accepted format is a professional commentator supplemented by expert comments by a former player from the league/club we are watching.

Unreal.
I hope other people see the funny thing with this post.