The Student Room Group

Dumbing down of football punditry - Robbie Chav-age

Hi guys'n'gals.. great to be here. Just joined.

My current bugbear is dreadful footie punditry. Argghh.. how many more semi literate ex footballers can they wheel out?


I personally feel there's an unnecessary invasion of ex professional footballers. These guys apparently qualify on the basis they once played the game. What other industry would set such a narrow criteria? Years ago, when leaving the sport, they'd take up coaching or management. Now they're considered "ready made" sages of football.

I do feel the tsunami of football coverage has inadvertently increased the inclination to make a simple game sound complicated. Thus, these guys, Savage, Neville, Wright et al are adopting a new football speak or language. This to justify their being there and of course to make their analysis sound scientific.


Terms continually being used include:

Between the lines;
high pressing game,
in transition

.............Argghhhhhhhhhhhhhh stop it!



Anyway, this is my impersonation of Robbie Savage. He represents better than most the sad dumbing down of the beautiful game.


http://youtu.be/L0_qo3kb7vU


Just to add, i'm writing this with a smile on my face. I'm just genuinely curious as to what others think about the current state of punditry?

Would be great to hear your views on this matter.

s

Scroll to see replies

Most pundits are **** these days, there's a lot worse out there than Robbie Savage...

- Andy Townsend
- Garth Crooks
- Paul Merson
- Paul Scholes
- Graham Souness
- Steve Claridge

I like Neville & Carragher, but beyond that there isn't much quality out there.
Original post by sr90
Most pundits are **** these days, there's a lot worse out there than Robbie Savage...

- Andy Townsend
- Garth Crooks
- Paul Merson
- Paul Scholes
- Graham Souness
- Steve Claridge

I like Neville & Carragher, but beyond that there isn't much quality out there.


PRSOM

lol at Garth Crooks "science of football" All most of them seem to go on about is the space and then go on to draw shapes on a screen.
Keane was alright, and Neville is good. Townsend and Redknapp are tragically bad though.

If you think they over-analyse in England you should see the punditry in France.
Reply 4
great responses.

I just think Savage, is rude and aggressive if people don't agree with his opinion. Bad broadcasting full stop.


It seems he's become the most popular of them all. He's on 606, BT have just signed him up. They can't get enough of the chav smiles


I compare that to say John McEnroe, in tennis. One of the all time greats.. so you respect him for that. But also very cerebral and charismatic.


As a player, Savage, was just a water carrier at best. Very average guy. He just possesses no humility.


I think punditry was ok with Hansen and Lawro. Now the BBC feel compelled to get altra tactical as they fear competition from BT, Sky et al


Let's face it, it's not rocket science is it? Football success is about having the best players in your team. That's governed by how much money a team has to spend.


The idea that these tattooed specimens can follow some form of choreography is laughable. Football is spontaneous. Give Gordon Strachen, some credit. Last night, he said i don't care what system you play is about good players.


I rest my case milad


smiles


s
(edited 9 years ago)
I like Paul Scholes as a pundit tbh.

ITV pundiryt can and should be ignored tbh. I only watch it for Roy Keane, who isn't even there normally anymore.

Mostly BBC is at least reasonable.

Sky's "serious" pundits are actually good. But they have silly ones like Merson and Gillette soccer Saturday team who are just there for purely comedic value. Lets be honest, nobody wants to watch serious, dry pundity for like 4 hours when you can't even see the match.

Overall I'd say punditry is a mixed bag like anything else.
Disagree with the notions that tactics don't matter, footballers are too unintelligent to follow tactics (literally why do people think this?) and that punditry shouldn't be "too tactical", like, wtf that's the whole point. Commentary =/= punditry.
Original post by Guru Jason
PRSOM

lol at Garth Crooks "science of football" All most of them seem to go on about is the space and then go on to draw shapes on a screen.


Some of the older posters on here should remember Andy Townsend's ''Tactics Truck''. Deary me.

Wish I could find it on YouTube somewhere.
Original post by sr90
Most pundits are **** these days, there's a lot worse out there than Robbie Savage...

- Andy Townsend
- Garth Crooks
- Paul Merson
- Paul Scholes
- Graham Souness
- Steve Claridge

I like Neville & Carragher, but beyond that there isn't much quality out there.


At least Merse has a bit of charisma though, the rest neither entertain or inform.
Ive said it before, but people who've only experienced English punditry are not even aware of exactly how inferior it is.

In Holland for instance, for a big WC or CL game, or even Den Haag vs Vitesse FFS, they'll literally spend about an hour going into very precise tactical analysis. At the very least, at the level of Gary Neville on MNF. Discussions on the average clearance length of a fullback compared with the average standing position of the opposition midfield are pretty standard. Like when Holland played Spain, they literally spend 10m discussing how certain Spanish midfielders like to turn when they receive the ball and how Holland needed to press in a very specific way to combat their possession game.

In England it goes:
-10m of crap 'banter' from Adrian Chiles
-Show recent goals with pundits remarking ''what a cracker'' now and again
-More crap banter
-ad break
-Final consensus that the team that's more 'up for it' will win

During the WC, when they get in continentals like Seedorf, Cannavaro, I can genuinely see them pretty baffled at what the hell is going on. As if they're waiting for somebody to ask them an intelligent question...
(edited 9 years ago)
Have to say I'd like more dedicated tv time for the lower leagues, but Sky/BT have such a monopoly on the PL and push it in our faces so much they make it seem as if the FL doesn't mattter. During International breaks they don't even show highlights of the lower league games, and even a thrilling 3-3 draw in League 2 for example is restricted to showing just the goals in 30 seconds on the Football League Show, whereas a dull PL 0-0 draw between two big teams is analysed for days on end.
Original post by Zürich
At least Merse has a bit of charisma though, the rest neither entertain or inform.


Merson is decent tbh. I don't know how people can be so arsed over punditry anyway.

David Pleat used to be good also, but for all the wrong reasons.
Ferdinand is just awful, can barely enunciate his woeful 'insights'. Really hope he doesn't go full time once he retires.
Andy Townsend is the worst, he's paid to say 2 words:
"Yeah Clive".
Original post by Zürich
Ive said it before, but people who've only experienced English punditry are not even aware of exactly how inferior it is.

In Holland for instance, for a big WC or CL game, or even Den Haag vs Vitesse FFS, they'll literally spend about an hour going into very precise tactical analysis. At the very least, at the level of Gary Neville on MNF. Discussions on the average clearance length of a fullback compared with the average standing position of the opposition midfield are pretty standard. Like when Holland played Spain, they literally spend 10m discussing how certain Spanish midfielders like to turn when they receive the ball and how Holland needed to press in a very specific way to combat their possession game.

In England it goes:
-10m of crap 'banter' from Adrian Chiles
-Show recent goals with pundits remarking ''what a cracker'' now and again
-More crap banter
-ad break
-Final consensus that the team that's more 'up for it' will win


During the WC, when they get in continentals like Seedorf, Cannavaro, I can genuinely see them pretty baffled at what the hell is going on. As if they're waiting for somebody to ask them an intelligent question...


I almost choked on my lunch. LOL hilariously accurate
Original post by somemightsay888
Andy Townsend is the worst, he's paid to say 2 words:
"Yeah Clive".


&

'Better'

&

'But that's better from England'
Original post by Zürich


In England it goes:
-10m of crap 'banter' from Adrian Chiles
-Show recent goals with pundits remarking ''what a cracker'' now and again
-More crap banter
-ad break
-Final consensus that the team that's more 'up for it' will win




Original post by somemightsay888
Andy Townsend is the worst, he's paid to say 2 words:
"Yeah Clive".



Original post by Wilfred Little
&

'Better'

&

'But that's better from England'




omg dying!
Original post by KingStannis
omg dying!


Almost forgot, cinematic montage of the England managers' press conference with clips of England's past failures spliced in. Then the cliche of how 'expectations are different these days'.

Then some banter from Chiles or Ian Wright saying ''come on man, we're England we can do this''

Cannavaro just looks at the floor wishing he'd taken the RTE gig instead.
Original post by Zürich
Almost forgot, cinematic montage of the England managers' press conference with clips of England's past failures spliced in. Then the cliche of how 'expectations are different these days'.

This, with Gabriel Clarke doing the voice over.
Original post by Zürich
Almost forgot, cinematic montage of the England managers' press conference with clips of England's past failures spliced in. Then the cliche of how 'expectations are different these days'.

Then some banter from Chiles or Ian Wright saying ''come on man, we're England we can do this''

Cannavaro just looks at the floor wishing he'd taken the RTE gig instead.


Not to mention Chile's constant, incessant references to Keane being "hard" whenever 'analysing' any tackle whatsoever, Townsend's insistence that England are playing very well whenever he checks the possession stats and they have more than 55%, the ridiculous "maybe this is where England will start winning again" motif, an hours build up to a game which the analysis amounts to "yeah, they're leaving gaps at the back" and just...lol, like i said, just forget itv

Quick Reply

Latest