Kevin Keegan

SlowDownDerek said:
Lol, are you one of those people who still judges yourself by what happened at school decades ago? I didn't think those people existed in real life. Were you a prefect? I need to know if I'm in trouble.
Click to expand...
I hadn’t thought about my schooling in over 30 years until I joined this message board and was subjected to the perennial schoolboy in chief
 
Kicking a ball up and down a field....come on !
...from the knees or ankles down..a women is no different from a man.
Football is Football....just a game.. that's all it f√cking is !
 
The reason why we can’t compare greats like Pele and Maradonna, the game has changed and comparisons are not possible. Same way I feel about a 50+ yo analyst talking about the modern game. Unless you are a player whose career is cut short by injury, there really is no possible way of saying only those who have played the game at this level is applicable. Male or Female, shouldn’t matter who provides the colour commentary.
 
We are all pundits aren’t we?

Tbh You have to take everyone’s opinion and words as just their own perception of what they see?

Every game now is so forensically analysed to the point of boredom anyhow!

I don’t need someone to tell me what I’m watching and if it’s good or bad…I have probably watched more hours of football than most TV experts, even if I haven’t experienced playing it to their level?

As for comparing women and men’s football..it will be trash talk IMO
 
Cherriess said:
About as seriously as I take the posters on here regarding Chris Sutton for sure!!

But seriously, I don't think being a good pundit requires you to have been a particularly good player, male or female and when you watch half the stuff they come out with, having been a top player certainly doesn't make someone a good pundit.
Click to expand...

Pretty much nailed it with your first reply.

Having an ex-pro is helpful in providing some insight into small scenarios but you never get that. What you get is a player making a lung-busting run getting a toe to the ball and the 'keeper saves and the comment "he won't get many clear-cut chances like that" while the Opta statty marks it down as 0.02 xG.

All the best football stuff I watch now has nobody who's notable for playing unless they also manage.

Channelling Brian, ex-players are basically just trading on celebrity status to get them in the door at which point they just use their media training from their playing days to fill airtime with bollox and they're good for a decade or so.
 
Ive always enjoyed the argument that unless you've played Premier League you cannot have an opinion or have no knowledge. We get degrees in this county after 3 years of studying. Ive been studying football for almost 45 years. In particular Bournemouth. Why should any pundit on TV have more knowledge about what Bournemouth should or shouldn't do on the pitch? Why should any pundit tell me how well a player has or hasn't performed? We might not all agree but not having played in the premier league doesnt discount any of us as having the technical nous to read a game of football.

Eddie Howe never played at the highest level, you think Alan Shearer has any more right to break down Eddies performance as manager than any of us? This is the Alan Shearer who didnt like the appoint of Eddie as manager and was emotional in the stands last night. Indeed hes PROVED he cannot manage but still gets to criticise the appointment and performance of Eddie.

Most of the best managers of the last few decades were never great players. Which just proves the point.
 
Keegan was probably among the top 10 strikers for England ever and I loved watching him play his 100% energy game...remember him at DC for Scunthorpe
. ..but he is one of the majority of players who just talks rubbish in front of a camera.
 
Kudos said:
Pretty much nailed it with your first reply.

Having an ex-pro is helpful in providing some insight into small scenarios but you never get that. What you get is a player making a lung-busting run getting a toe to the ball and the 'keeper saves and the comment "he won't get many clear-cut chances like that" while the Opta statty marks it down as 0.02 xG.

All the best football stuff I watch now has nobody who's notable for playing unless they also manage.

Channelling Brian, ex-players are basically just trading on celebrity status to get them in the door at which point they just use their media training from their playing days to fill airtime with bollox and they're good for a decade or so.
Click to expand...

It's the entertainment industry though so you arguably need people with sufficient gravitas in the punditry roles. If you're going into a title decider where everything is on the line do you want Roy Keane sat next to Patrick Vieira on the sofa or Robbie Savage and Karen Carney? It's not particularly about what they say it's about the credibility of what they say when talking about football at the highest level.

Let's face it they all talk shite in the end anyway.
 
Druss_the_Legend said:
Ive always enjoyed the argument that unless you've played Premier League you cannot have an opinion or have no knowledge. We get degrees in this county after 3 years of studying. Ive been studying football for almost 45 years. In particular Bournemouth. Why should any pundit on TV have more knowledge about what Bournemouth should or shouldn't do on the pitch? Why should any pundit tell me how well a player has or hasn't performed? We might not all agree but not having played in the premier league doesnt discount any of us as having the technical nous to read a game of football.

Eddie Howe never played at the highest level, you think Alan Shearer has any more right to break down Eddies performance as manager than any of us? This is the Alan Shearer who didnt like the appoint of Eddie as manager and was emotional in the stands last night. Indeed hes PROVED he cannot manage but still gets to criticise the appointment and performance of Eddie.

Most of the best managers of the last few decades were never great players. Which just proves the point.
Click to expand...

Aside from your inflated view of your football knowledge, which just doesn't compare to someone who has played professionally... Eddie Howe is a manager and people who haven't had the best career as a player often make great managers. That said nobody was paying Howe to be a pundits until he had proven himself at the top level as a manager.
 
Druss_the_Legend said:
Ive always enjoyed the argument that unless you've played Premier League you cannot have an opinion or have no knowledge. We get degrees in this county after 3 years of studying. Ive been studying football for almost 45 years. In particular Bournemouth. Why should any pundit on TV have more knowledge about what Bournemouth should or shouldn't do on the pitch? Why should any pundit tell me how well a player has or hasn't performed? We might not all agree but not having played in the premier league doesnt discount any of us as having the technical nous to read a game of football.

Eddie Howe never played at the highest level, you think Alan Shearer has any more right to break down Eddies performance as manager than any of us? This is the Alan Shearer who didnt like the appoint of Eddie as manager and was emotional in the stands last night. Indeed hes PROVED he cannot manage but still gets to criticise the appointment and performance of Eddie.

Most of the best managers of the last few decades were never great players. Which just proves the point.
Click to expand...

Yes, as @Kudos mentioned, it comes down to stature in the game its seems a fair bit, rather solid knowledge of all the teams.

Hell, it doesn't even seem like some of them having much going for I'm terms of charisma either. So it's clear many get the nod due to being known/status at the top level.

Problem I think some/many have with women suddenly appearing as pundits, is due to something askin to 'positive description. Many appear to have not a particularly decent amount of knowledge, or any kind of 'stature' beyond what we've they've achieved in the women's game. Many fans don't care about the women's game, and the quality/level of competition is still a million miles away from the men's game. Yeah you get some that no doubt are misogynist, but I think keegan and many see it along lines I've outlined, which doesn't sit well.

Historically, women that have been involved at all, iirc have all been attractive... wonder why.

Obviously things are changing, have changed, but women don't have tge sane gravitis in football as men. If a female pundit appears, they need to make a quick initial impression of really knowing their stuff, as they have less leverage as a former pl level footballer, so people are more likely to roll their eyes and think they're just there to fill a quota, because they're a woman.


I recall 2 or 3 years ago, on the radio listening to a game with a woman commentating and it was painful tbh. Really embarrassing, no idea how they got padt the selection process. Sounded like trying to overcompensate as she was aware of the fact she was a woman in a historically male dominated sport. She sounded like someone you'd hear/see down the pub watching England in a major tournament, trying to be 'one of the lads', but rarely watches any other football.

On the other hand, heard someone else (can't recall, but former England player) and thought she was spot on the whole game with her insights, perception. Didn't come across like trying to hard either. Much better than many of the make pundits.
 
Last edited:
SlowDownDerek said:
It's the entertainment industry though so you arguably need people with sufficient gravitas in the punditry roles. If you're going into a title decider where everything is on the line do you want Roy Keane sat next to Patrick Vieira on the sofa or Robbie Savage and Karen Carney? It's not particularly about what they say it's about the credibility of what they say when talking about football at the highest level.

Let's face it they all talk shite in the end anyway.
Click to expand...

Spot on. One of the main points in my waffle

Good thing or not, many have an issue if they sense any whiff of 'positive' discrimination in any walk of life. If someone has little stature, charisma and appears to lack perception/knowledge it causes people to roll their eyes, or question why that person got the role.

If you have the rep/stature you'll get more of a pass from the masses, even if you are a bit clueless outside of the big clubs, or lack personality/charisma.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;