Popular Post chrisp65 Posted October 9, 2023 Popular Post Share Posted October 9, 2023 10 minutes ago, Seat68 said: Female ex players have lived and breathed football for most of their lives, I couldn't guarantee it but I would make a fairly strong case that unlike male players, they will also have been watching the men's game and had a significant interest in that. Yes, but they don’t have a penis so we can’t take them seriously. I’m just amazed people actually listen to any of the talking heads around football. Life’s too short for that shit, I have zero interest in a graphic of a square of space behind the defence with Alan Shearer telling me they’ve got to do better, they’ve got to do better. I’d prefer an extra 5 minutes of highlights from the actual game. 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted October 9, 2023 VT Supporter Share Posted October 9, 2023 14 minutes ago, chrisp65 said: I have zero interest in a graphic of a square of space behind the defence with Alan Shearer telling me they’ve got to do better, they’ve got to do better. I’d prefer an extra 5 minutes of highlights from the actual game. Yep. If it was Don Unai doing the analysis, on the other hand, I'd be all over it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich192 Posted October 9, 2023 Share Posted October 9, 2023 3 hours ago, KentVillan said: The female commentators and pundits have more to prove as well, so they often come across as having done more research. It’s not just about understanding the patterns of play, it’s about doing the boring work knowing who has been in form, who’s been injured, who’s in favour with the manager, who the fans like, etc. Nothing worse than a commentator who doesn’t know this stuff and just makes it up on the fly. I’m sure I read that Richards was notorious for doing the bare minimum research, and relies on his personality to hide it. The vast majority of women who present and analyse are at least competent, and usually really good. The only one I dislike, and she’s been mentioned on here before is Aluko. Even Karen Carney, despite being a Bluenose is really knowledgable, and insightful. And I’m sure it comes down to as you and a few others have said, they need to work harder to prove their worth due to Neanderthal gammons who don’t like to listen to women. I mean who would you rather listen to, Alex Scott or Danny Murphy? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted October 9, 2023 Share Posted October 9, 2023 7 minutes ago, Rich192 said: I mean who would you rather listen to, a depressed air conditioning unit with a poorly fitted fan or Danny Murphy? it’s the Toshiba for me ever time Rich. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KentVillan Posted October 9, 2023 Share Posted October 9, 2023 1 hour ago, Rich192 said: Even Karen Carney, despite being a Bluenose is really knowledgable, and insightful. Yeah she’s very good. Ultimately what you want is for them to actually do their job of spending several hours before the game brushing up on things you might not know, and combining that with their general football knowledge. You do see the difference when they get (most) managers on as pundits. They just have a better work ethic and better analysis of what’s happened. Big Ron was good for this, as much as he was a dinosaur, he watched the game like a manager not like a dossing ex pro trying to get through unscathed for the pay cheque. I don’t care whether they’re male or female. And as @chrisp65says, I’d probably rather just have an extra minute or two of highlights from the game. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomav84 Posted October 9, 2023 VT Supporter Share Posted October 9, 2023 5 hours ago, El Segundo said: There are good and bad pundits and commentators of backgrounds. What I find a little strange though is where they employ female ex-players to comment on the men's game as if they have more insight into that than the average punter or journalists and broadcasters who are not ex-pros. I'd question whether they actually have more basis to comment on the top level men's game than someone who has played at level 4, or 8 or 10 of the men's game. It's bad enough having male ex-pros who are incapable of forming proper opinions and sentences and just churn out cliches and truisms. But at least they can say they have had first hand insight into how it is. is this serious? you realise level 10 is basically pub teams right? you think they are more qualified than a former WSL player who has actually earned a living playing football? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KentVillan Posted October 9, 2023 Share Posted October 9, 2023 38 minutes ago, tomav84 said: is this serious? you realise level 10 is basically pub teams right? you think they are more qualified than a former WSL player who has actually earned a living playing football? Tbf Level 10 is mostly semi pro sides with stadiums, and I think they would comfortably beat any pub side (and probably an elite women’s side). But yes that still has very little to do with punditry. The elite women’s player’s lifestyle and depth of tactical coaching will have been much closer to the Premier League men’s players than some lad who works as a plumber during the week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted October 9, 2023 Share Posted October 9, 2023 Tier 10, what’s that Worcester City? Some of those players will be great athletes with a great reading of the game but enjoying the day job paying the mortgage and enjoying a weekend drink and just not in to it enough to commit any more to it. Some of those players will need L left and R right written on their boots for them. A woman that’s played international football could realistically be miles better informed than either of those player types. She could also need L and R written on her boots. The deciding factor will not be a penis no matter how much Kevin might think it is. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimmygreaves Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 Why is it bad that someone has a preference different to you? Discuss..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 4 minutes ago, jimmygreaves said: Why is it bad that someone has a preference different to you? Discuss..... Preference is not a problem, prejudice can be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomav84 Posted October 10, 2023 VT Supporter Share Posted October 10, 2023 58 minutes ago, jimmygreaves said: Why is it bad that someone has a preference different to you? Discuss..... because it's likely that 'preference' translates to other aspects of their life. men that have a 'preference' for men talking about men's football are likely to also have a 'preference' for hiring men when interviewing candidates for jobs, giving promotions, handing out projects, etc if someone has a genuine liking for danny mills and graham souness over alex scott purely because of their punditry ability then that's their prerogative. but this conversation arose from keegan giving a blanket statement that women shouldn't talk about men's football. that's sexism, pure and simple you say preference, i say prejudice 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wainy316 Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 13 hours ago, Rich192 said: I’m sure I read that Richards was notorious for doing the bare minimum Sounds like his playing career 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 Heres a solution have three options for punditry Men only Women only Man and woman together Let people have the choice for live games Everyone gets treated fairly. Sky get enough of our money so they can afford to facilitate this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wainy316 Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 Keegan isn't far off going full Mike Newell... Quote She should not be here. I know that sounds sexist, but I am sexist, so I am not going to be anything other than that. We have a problem in this country with political correctness, and bringing women into the game is not the way to improve refereeing and officialdom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodders Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 sub out the demographic I just prefer whites to blacks when it comes to punditry. I prefer Englishmen to Scottishmen when it comes to commentary etc. Men v Women is no different. Can have preferences within men or women but a blanket rejection of one group is daft. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Designer1 Posted October 10, 2023 VT Supporter Share Posted October 10, 2023 9 minutes ago, Wainy316 said: Keegan isn't far off going full Mike Newell... I would love it, LOVE IT...If you shut your **** gob Kevin. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 56 minutes ago, Demitri_C said: Heres a solution have three options for punditry Men only Women only Man and woman together Let people have the choice for live games Everyone gets treated fairly. Sky get enough of our money so they can afford to facilitate this I'm not listening to any **** blondes though, so let's have a 4th. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StefanAVFC Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 1 minute ago, Davkaus said: I'm not listening to any **** blondes though, so let's have a 4th. What about if I'm only interested in pundits of a certain race? I should have that option too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjmooney Posted October 10, 2023 VT Supporter Share Posted October 10, 2023 (edited) 9 minutes ago, StefanAVFC said: What about if I'm only interested in pundits of a certain race? I should have that option too. Yep. This is kind of why I started this thread, the cognitive dissonance between attitudes to racism and sexism. Being devil's advocate for a moment, I guess you could argue that all men and all women are biologically identical to each other, regardless of ethnicity, and therefore there is no logical justification for treating people differently on the basis of 'race'. Whereas there are biological differences between men and women (and not just as trivial as the old 'having a penis' trope), which arguably affect behaviours, and therefore must be taken into account. I don't buy it, but that's what this whole debate hangs on. Edited October 10, 2023 by mjmooney 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted October 10, 2023 Share Posted October 10, 2023 That reminds me, no old guys 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts