Ex Players as Pundits.

One of the real concerns in the game is the power of agents and the ability of players to hold clubs to ransom. Football pundits in the media in the main are ex players and as we have seen recently with the VVD affair their comments in the main endorse the negative behaviour of players. Do ex players make the best pundits given their often inane comments and former club bias. Should we expect a football pundit working for the BBC to be objective in terms of club bias rather like we expect the BBC to be with the political parties. Do ex managers make better pundits than ex players and finally do we even need football pundits at all?

 

Trouble is this is an entertainments business & TV (Sky & even to a lesser extent BT) rule. Pundits & even more so, controversial pundits are just adding fuel to their fire. Look at the amount of dedicated analyst programs there are now. ****ing ridiculous if you ask me but someone watches them. I heard an interesting comment on TalkSport last eve & they were talking about the transfer "window", how stupid it is & how in the "old days" which I'd totally forgotten about, you could sell / buy a player throughout the whole season - remember Keegan to SFC, which was November ish, if I remember correctly. They mentioned, if you could buy/sell throughout, even a smallish club struggling financially could ease that situ by selling a player. Now they're screwed until the window & just get totally devoured by the sharks. Anyway, I digress; the gist was though, the window has been tweaked, is even controlled by TV - just look at the amount of time & air given to the transfer windows. It's all just a media circus & because of the £, we're screwed.

 

Pundits are there to give opinions, so they don't have to toe any neutrality line. That is why I don't get outraged by people like Jamie Redknapp going on about VVD...it's an opinion and does not affect anything. Whether players or managers make better pundits must depend on the person concerned....though I suppose managers have more experience having been players themselves and involved at management level. A pundit with contrary ideas (if sat with calmer people) makes for interesting discussions....as long as they shut up enough to let others speak.

 

The one BBC football program I consistently enjoy is the World Football Phone-in. Tucked away at 2am on a Saturday morning. Podcast available.
For those unfamiliar it has two journalists that specialize in a region of the world and they answer questions about football in their particular region. Because the show is 2 hours long and it's particular time slot it has the time to go into real detail and you hear some interesting insights into the significance of football culturally and politically in different countries.

The show tries to steer away from English football as much as possible and that probably adds a refreshing element.

 

Pundits and a lot of the media, imo, will say whatever gets them invited back to a big club.
It may not reflect their true beliefs but it would harm their careers if they voiced what most people are thinking, as they wouldn't get further interviews.
Helping them to land transfer targets, by keeping the chat in the public domain, will be a bonus for them.

 

The way Redknapp was arguing with Carra on saturday and mentioning VVD in every sentence like he was already a Liverpool player was beyond a joke. I know hes not directly involved with Liverpool but come on show some respect hes contracted to us.

 

Trouble is, they do influence at lot of neutrals & it's very rare we're on the receiving end of good publicity & therefore, it's generally negative for us.

 

What you have forgotten though is the reason why the transfer window was introduced. It was actually to try and stop clubs buying success. So at a critical point in the season they couldn't just nip out and buy a top striker.

I don't think its quite worked out as they intended.

 

Yes, but what other fans think about us has zero effect. It's what Les et al do that matters.

 

I think you grossly underestimate influence, Fran. These things have a spark and a momentum. Godders mentioned ex-players as pundits, and when they give their opinion, many current players will listen. They have spent their entire lives taking advice from experienced people and are not known to be mavericks. So when pundits openly suggest something should happen you can bet they can effect the outcome more than if they didn't say a word.

On the other hand, fans [yes, I have quoted the 'fan' post] have little effect, if at all. Dare I say that fans are relatively unimportant.?

 

Totally agree TSS. Players listen to ex-players & of course, players - as we've seen & suffered from over the past few years with internationals, certainly England. I probably called it wrong stating neutrals but I've got no doubt they do influence & as I said, we've "never" been on the end of positive comments.

 

I do like a good debate.
Trouble is its the same old club's (top 6) and the same old topics, how much they should spend, who they should buy and the different managers egos.

BORING

There are 19 clubs in the premier league and they should get equal coverage. (20 if we have to include joke club Liverpool)

Some ex players have made ok pundits any for me it's people I didn't like as players like Neville and claridge.

 

The debate is currently on sky now, Wright and Townsend discussing the best arsenal team.

When did they last discuss the best West Brom team. Never cos they don't know anything outside the top 6.

 

Indeed. And for reasons like that I am entirely uninterested in whatever the football media have to say.

 

I go to game.

I watch the whole match live.

Why should I be interested in what anyone other than someone who was at the match has to say about the game?

Has Robbie Savage ever said anything meaningful or interesting about football?

People say he is great entertainment value. Ok then go and get a real clown or comedian that would improve 606 100%..

 

Exactly. Yesterday I saw a discussion about why Liverpool need VVD....if they need him, I think we need him more.

 

It is with great smugness that I can say I do not have Sky.

 

I do like to hear different opinions. When I watch MOTD it's as much for the analysis as the games themselves and I am happy to sit and watch/listen to discussions on football. I guess that's part of the reason I come on here.

It could be so much better. Football is such a big topic but we just hear the same old twaddle on the so called elite.

 

Why? When all you get is vacuous nonsense.

 

I enjoyed people ripping him apart for blindly supporting Mark Hughes in anything he does.

He also had the nerve to criticise the pay of his co-presenter - trying very badly to make a joke out of it. Fell very flat