+ Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
What do people expect from the programme? To read some of the posts on here, it's a show with serious football analysis, but, for me, it's never been that - how can there ever be any real analysis of the matches being played or tactical discussion when the audience never gets to see anything of what's happening on the pitch apart from Football League goals in midweek games? Therefore, the whole argument about whether any replacements have the football knowledge and experience that the three sacked men did is a bit of a pointless one - did anyone ever learn anything about football tactics and fine points from anything Messrs Thompson, Nicholas and LeTissier said while the games were taking place?
They were seen as "personalities" as much as football analysts and, with Jeff Stelling staying, I think the same will apply to their replacements.
The title of this thread sounds like a woke joke beginning.
I recall one funny thing with Phil Thompson. He was commenting on a game between 2 of the lower teams in the Prem. Every time Stelling asked him what was happening he said 'nothing. There was not 1 attempt on target for the whole of the 1st half. He said the game was dreadful.
When all the games restarted someone else was talking and he suddenly let out a load groan. Stelling asked what was wrong and he said, "Terrible scene here at xxxxx" (Where ever it was)
Stelling asked him what was happening and dead pan he said "Both teams have come out for the second half"
It's a light entertainment show rather than some deep overly analytical tactics show, that is left to Monday mornings quarterback type shows.
Stelling is the glue that holds the show together, the midweek shows with that other guy are boring and matter of fact. The big question is whether the chemistry is there with the newbies whatever gender, ethnicity or AGE.
The problem with former professional footballers is they were good at football but are crap fans or pundits. Most of us want that terrace humour you get at the game, none of which has anything to do with playing the game at the highest level.
Sometimes you have to break up an winning but ageing team. I hope they get younger,lively, chippy, types. I don't care what gender or colour they are as long as they add something rather than a tick boxes.
Your point is valid, but I must comment on your thoughts on Phil Taylor. He's barely been seen on TV from his own choice. He doesn't attend many tournaments. As a commentator, on the rare occasions it has happened, I thought he's been humorous, not one bit judgemental and talks through it as if he was playing. I'd be more than happy for him to be a commentator. Things like humour and rapport can take some time.
When Rob Phillips started commentating on Radio Wales I didn't think much of him. He's now easily Wales' best football commentator and has a humour and rapport.
Absolutely. I was wording a similar response to the whole thread then I find you've done so far better than I ever could!
The show is generally so fast paced that it's impossible to give anything other than the bare bones of a situation. It's all about reporting on the games. It arguably doesn't require experts. Most of the reporters around the grounds are journalists. Only a small amount of reporters are ex-pros. They're the ones who get most of the attention and the biggest games, both on Sky and the BBC. Sky use more former players than the BBC but there's no evidence they are better off doing so.
low down as in lower than a snakes belly
Blokes clearly a **** , not defending him but he's clearly not a nonce is he , which is what you said he was
So you , on your birthday went up to this bloke and put him straight did you
That showed him
Not that u did it but it sounds good