One thing different about this year’s World Cup coverage is the prevalence of so many Women as presenters or pundits. In the world we live in it would seem almost inconceivable that we’d only have men filling these roles for fear of the “inclusion" argument exploding.
I have quite a binary view when it comes to issues of equality (I wanted to say Black and White, but that didn’t seem appropriate). That is I believe in equality of opportunity across the board and hate tokenism or political correctness. In that sense I couldn’t care less whether women are offering punditry, or not, only how good they are.
Nobody in the media world would dare call out Alex Scott or Eni Aluko as anything other than good pundits for fear of being accused of sexism. Personally I think they’re average to lower table. I also think that Jacqui Oatley is immensely irritating, but Gabby Logan is an excellent, consummate, professional.
To balance this I would rather listen to someone scratching their nails down a blackboard than Mark Pougatch, Roy Keane is pointless and boring and Lawro should be carted away. I also think that most of the foreign contributors are poor, although Slaven Billic is brilliant.
Not a politically correct view, but an honest one. What do you think?
Women and World Cup Punditry
posted on 3/7/18
comment by The_Dungeon_Master (U4830)
posted 34 minutes ago
"I care about knowledge, intelligence of the game, insight. Keane gives you that."
--------
Just goes to show how we see things differently because I find absolutely none of that from Roy Keane. Just old man mutterings and anger.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I like his anger. The other week he was asked his opinion on the Iran manager who was assistant at United when Keane was there. Keane said that his only regret was that he didn't rip his head off...great coach though. All with the same facial expression. It was brilliant.
posted on 3/7/18
I never thought I’d find a single poster who reckons Roy Keane is a decent pundit. Fair play. Personally I think Dunge is right. He’s just a miserable sod with anger management issues. Saying you wanted to rip someone’s head off is hardly adding to the debate
Martin O Neill is bonkers. He’s on a different planet. Love the guy and think he’s a great pundit but not surprised he has Bilic bemused. MON has most people bemused.
posted on 3/7/18
comment by Black Starr - The David Warner of 606 (U12353)
posted 3 minutes ago
I never thought I’d find a single poster who reckons Roy Keane is a decent pundit. Fair play. Personally I think Dunge is right. He’s just a miserable sod with anger management issues. Saying you wanted to rip someone’s head off is hardly adding to the debate
Martin O Neill is bonkers. He’s on a different planet. Love the guy and think he’s a great pundit but not surprised he has Bilic bemused. MON has most people bemused.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, Bilic has MON bemused, as he does most people. MON talks sense. Bilic does not.
Keane didn't add to the debate, he offered insight into the assistants time at United, stating that he had accused Keane of lacking loyalty.
posted on 3/7/18
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 31 seconds ago
comment by Black Starr - The David Warner of 606 (U12353)
posted 3 minutes ago
I never thought I’d find a single poster who reckons Roy Keane is a decent pundit. Fair play. Personally I think Dunge is right. He’s just a miserable sod with anger management issues. Saying you wanted to rip someone’s head off is hardly adding to the debate
Martin O Neill is bonkers. He’s on a different planet. Love the guy and think he’s a great pundit but not surprised he has Bilic bemused. MON has most people bemused.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, Bilic has MON bemused, as he does most people. MON talks sense. Bilic does not.
Keane didn't add to the debate, he offered insight into the assistants time at United, stating that he had accused Keane of lacking loyalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That might be interesting if I was watching celebrity big brother or reading Roy’s autobiography, but personally I couldn’t care less about his run ins with pretty much every other footballer and manager who has graced the modern game. Including the whole of the ROI World Cup squad.
If you’re the kind of person that loves getting the inside snoop on all the behind closed doors activity in football (you read the sun basically) then I’m sure Roy’s great. If you’re looking for an insight into how the games played, the guy is nothing more than an angry leprechaun. Minus the lucky charms
posted on 3/7/18
The BBC coverage is so much better than ITV, and radio 5 commentary is better than BBC.
posted on 3/7/18
comment by thorneyfox (U5061)
posted 1 minute ago
The BBC coverage is so much better than ITV, and radio 5 commentary is better than BBC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I agree. Doesn’t seem to matter which pundits ITV get the coverage is always gash
posted on 3/7/18
comment by Black Starr - The David Warner of 606 (U12353)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 31 seconds ago
comment by Black Starr - The David Warner of 606 (U12353)
posted 3 minutes ago
I never thought I’d find a single poster who reckons Roy Keane is a decent pundit. Fair play. Personally I think Dunge is right. He’s just a miserable sod with anger management issues. Saying you wanted to rip someone’s head off is hardly adding to the debate
Martin O Neill is bonkers. He’s on a different planet. Love the guy and think he’s a great pundit but not surprised he has Bilic bemused. MON has most people bemused.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, Bilic has MON bemused, as he does most people. MON talks sense. Bilic does not.
Keane didn't add to the debate, he offered insight into the assistants time at United, stating that he had accused Keane of lacking loyalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That might be interesting if I was watching celebrity big brother or reading Roy’s autobiography, but personally I couldn’t care less about his run ins with pretty much every other footballer and manager who has graced the modern game. Including the whole of the ROI World Cup squad.
If you’re the kind of person that loves getting the inside snoop on all the behind closed doors activity in football (you read the sun basically) then I’m sure Roy’s great. If you’re looking for an insight into how the games played, the guy is nothing more than an angry leprechaun. Minus the lucky charms
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you like hearing the opinion of a multi-trophy winning player who gives great insight into the game, is honest and says what he thinks without cliched nonsense, then Keane's your man.
If you like somebody with no charisma, with points that actually anger you because they're so ridiculous and who every pundit looks at him with bemusement when he speaks, who talks a lot but doesn't actually say anything, then Bilic is your man.
posted on 3/7/18
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 59 minutes ago
comment by Black Starr - The David Warner of 606 (U12353)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 31 seconds ago
comment by Black Starr - The David Warner of 606 (U12353)
posted 3 minutes ago
I never thought I’d find a single poster who reckons Roy Keane is a decent pundit. Fair play. Personally I think Dunge is right. He’s just a miserable sod with anger management issues. Saying you wanted to rip someone’s head off is hardly adding to the debate
Martin O Neill is bonkers. He’s on a different planet. Love the guy and think he’s a great pundit but not surprised he has Bilic bemused. MON has most people bemused.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No, Bilic has MON bemused, as he does most people. MON talks sense. Bilic does not.
Keane didn't add to the debate, he offered insight into the assistants time at United, stating that he had accused Keane of lacking loyalty.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That might be interesting if I was watching celebrity big brother or reading Roy’s autobiography, but personally I couldn’t care less about his run ins with pretty much every other footballer and manager who has graced the modern game. Including the whole of the ROI World Cup squad.
If you’re the kind of person that loves getting the inside snoop on all the behind closed doors activity in football (you read the sun basically) then I’m sure Roy’s great. If you’re looking for an insight into how the games played, the guy is nothing more than an angry leprechaun. Minus the lucky charms
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you like hearing the opinion of a multi-trophy winning player who gives great insight into the game, is honest and says what he thinks without cliched nonsense, then Keane's your man.
If you like somebody with no charisma, with points that actually anger you because they're so ridiculous and who every pundit looks at him with bemusement when he speaks, who talks a lot but doesn't actually say anything, then Bilic is your man.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You’re arguing this point like it isn’t even subjective
Phil Neville has won trophies - hardly makes him a great pundit does it. If it’s based on trophies then Roy would win hands down - but you can win all the trophies you want and still be a complete caaant
posted on 3/7/18
comment by Baz tard (U19119)
posted 16 hours, 2 minutes ago
My view on female comedians and pundits are the same.
The good ones are good, the bad ones are bad.
—
Like men then?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Like anyone!
posted on 3/7/18
comment by Jobyfox (U4183)
posted 23 hours, 8 minutes ago
comment by JustTrue - (Ronnie wins his 7th Masters Snooke... (U13155)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by Jobyfox (U4183)
Gary (Lineker) was appalling (and I mean appalling) when he first started, but is really good (in my opinion) now.
========================================
Thats weird, I used to find quite entertaining before and refreshingly funny and perfect for a presenter. Now, he seems to say things that a spoilt child would say. Is he gonna go to the gym for one year and come out in his pants again?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You may not remember when he very first started (I'm old enough to). His voice was just a monotone with no rise and fall of intonation.
He was incredibly boring, but they persisted with him and he was obviously coached.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
His body rises and falls in extremely annoying jerking movements though and it’s time he got to grips with it.