World Cup Pundits

[From Despair To Where?]

Already getting so riled up by some of the punditry. Mark Lawrenson acts like a cynical schoolboy who can't be arsed to do anything except sit there making snide comments. Cannavaro, heroic footballer as he is, can't speak English. Danny Murphy saying that 'we don't know much about player x'. I know I shouldn't get annoyed by these things but it's their fcuking job to know about these things.

Best of all, as always, Tyldesley and Townsend - making out that the referee had made a huge mistake for the Uruguay penalty, realising that in fact he hadn't, and then trying to say that he had got the decision right by pure luck. Err no, you got it wrong you fcuking idiots, why not show a bit of decency and admit it.

How bad can ITV get?

Tyldesley and Townsend are a total anachronism. It's like they won a raffle at the local care home to commentate on a football match. The Beavis and Butthead of football commentary.

I think I've only seen a pundit admit they were wrong once - Kevin Keegan, USA 94, Leonardo fractures Tab Ramos' skull. Keegan thinks Ramos is feigning, sees the replay, admits he got it completely wrong.

[stealthpapes]

Jonathan Pearce is already doing my head in.

The goal-line technology used for the second France goal was clear and obvious, yet he still went on about whether the tech said no goal or goal.

Then he shouts goal when the French shot clearly missed.

I'm missing the Sky team already (never thought I'd be saying that)

This also annoyed me.

BBC miles better, though Shearer is finding it difficult to keep his frustration and dislike of Thierry Henry in check (a number of times when Henry was been speaking in his languid style, punctuated with long pauses, Shearer has simply spoken over him usually changing the subject).

I thought Shearer had improved - he's being a bit more cynical and a bit more opinionated.

[tulip]

Thierry Henry is soooooo cool. His accent is fab.

[soggy biscuit]

Thierry Henry is soooooo cool. His accent is fab.

My mrs is finding it hard not to slide off the seat when she see's Henry. He was great and is quite cool so she can have that one.

[Royal Rother]

Already getting so riled up by some of the punditry. Mark Lawrenson acts like a cynical schoolboy who can't be arsed to do anything except sit there making snide comments. Cannavaro, heroic footballer as he is, can't speak English. Danny Murphy saying that 'we don't know much about player x'. I know I shouldn't get annoyed by these things but it's their fcuking job to know about these things.

Best of all, as always, Tyldesley and Townsend - making out that the referee had made a huge mistake for the Uruguay penalty, realising that in fact he hadn't, and then trying to say that he had got the decision right by pure luck. Err no, you got it wrong you fcuking idiots, why not show a bit of decency and admit it.

How bad can ITV get?

Tyldesley and Townsend are a total anachronism. It's like they won a raffle at the local care home to commentate on a football match. The Beavis and Butthead of football commentary.

I think I've only seen a pundit admit they were wrong once - Kevin Keegan, USA 94, Leonardo fractures Tab Ramos' skull. Keegan thinks Ramos is feigning, sees the replay, admits he got it completely wrong.

Ermm, no he didn't. Well not at first. He INSISTED he was right, again and again and again despite the pictures showing the event in graphic detail.

The main commentator was left almost speechless at Keegan's ridiculous stupidity.

Well that's my recollection anyway!!

[Royal Rother]

Thierry Henry is soooooo cool. His accent is fab.

My mrs is finding it hard not to slide off the seat when she see's Henry. He was great and is quite cool so she can have that one.

Yeah he's cool, but am I alone in thinking there's been a fair bit more style than substance to his contributions so far.

[LUX]

BBC>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>ITV (bears are catholic etc)
Cannavaro is a hero on the pitch, rubbish in the studio. I think Vialli is on Italian TV for this WC. A great loss.
That said, Viera is in two places at once. He is on ITV...............and is a French tv pundit too.
Robbie Savage is terrible (but he is not alone)

[winchester_royal]

Henry is pretty but rubbish. Speaks only in cliches and thinks that pouting is a suitable substitute for enlightening punditry. A shame that Seedorf appears to have been relegated to the B team so that Henry and Shearer can compete for the biggest dullard on tv crown.

I enjoyed the Poyet and Hoddle combo on ITV yesterday. Just a shame that they have that Chiles creature jumping around like an irate toddler next to them.

[tulip]

Thierry Henry is soooooo cool. His accent is fab.

My mrs is finding it hard not to slide off the seat when she see's Henry. He was great and is quite cool so she can have that one.

Yeah he's cool, but am I alone in thinking there's been a fair bit more style than substance to his contributions so far.

Frankly who cares! One for the ladies.

[paultheroyal]

Pearce’s moments of madness in full:

Pearce: “Well look at the boos and the Honduran players. And look at this again. We’ve seen so many spurious goal line technology replays. AND IT SIGNALS NO GOAL! No goal has gone up on the screen. The fans have heard it, the Honduran players have seen it.”

Keown: “But it’s a goal there...”

Pearce: “OH GOODNESS ME. THEY’VE CHANGED THEIR MINDS NOW. Does goal line technology work or doesn’t it?”

Pearce went on to say “Well which replay are we supposed to believe? This was supposed to be a flawless system.”

Twat

[From Despair To Where?]

Already getting so riled up by some of the punditry. Mark Lawrenson acts like a cynical schoolboy who can't be arsed to do anything except sit there making snide comments. Cannavaro, heroic footballer as he is, can't speak English. Danny Murphy saying that 'we don't know much about player x'. I know I shouldn't get annoyed by these things but it's their fcuking job to know about these things.

Best of all, as always, Tyldesley and Townsend - making out that the referee had made a huge mistake for the Uruguay penalty, realising that in fact he hadn't, and then trying to say that he had got the decision right by pure luck. Err no, you got it wrong you fcuking idiots, why not show a bit of decency and admit it.

How bad can ITV get?

Tyldesley and Townsend are a total anachronism. It's like they won a raffle at the local care home to commentate on a football match. The Beavis and Butthead of football commentary.

I think I've only seen a pundit admit they were wrong once - Kevin Keegan, USA 94, Leonardo fractures Tab Ramos' skull. Keegan thinks Ramos is feigning, sees the replay, admits he got it completely wrong.

Ermm, no he didn't. Well not at first. He INSISTED he was right, again and again and again despite the pictures showing the event in graphic detail.

The main commentator was left almost speechless at Keegan's ridiculous stupidity.

Well that's my recollection anyway!!

I think you're right on most details there but Keegan did eventually put his hands up and admit he got it spectacularly wrong. It may have taken him 5 minutes but at least he did it.

We all know ITV are just shit when it comes to Sports coverage and Tyldesley and Townsend are the very worst of a very bad bunch. It all reminds me of that Ruud Van Nistelrooy goal in the Euros, where all the pundits and commentators were still adamant that the goal should have been disallowed for offside, even when a graphic was shown explicitly explaining the relevant law of the game, proving beyond any doubt that the referee was right to allow the goal.

They then fall back on the old spirit of the game defence rather than admit they don't know the rules, whereby a forward is expected in a split second to decide that it is morally wrong to score a goal with an injured player playing him onside. There's me thinking that it's the forward's job to put the ball in the net regardless of the circumstances and the official's job to decide whether it should stand.

These are also the same commentators who whinge about the Uruguay penalty yet expect someone playing for an English club in the Champions League to go down at the slightest suggestion of contact and they don't see the massive contradiction staring them in the face

[From Despair To Where?]

Pearce’s moments of madness in full:

Pearce: “Well look at the boos and the Honduran players. And look at this again. We’ve seen so many spurious goal line technology replays. AND IT SIGNALS NO GOAL! No goal has gone up on the screen. The fans have heard it, the Honduran players have seen it.”

Keown: “But it’s a goal there...”

Pearce: “OH GOODNESS ME. THEY’VE CHANGED THEIR MINDS NOW. Does goal line technology work or doesn’t it?”

Pearce went on to say “Well which replay are we supposed to believe? This was supposed to be a flawless system.”

Twat

It's 2 separate incidents within a second of each other so I can almost excuse the confusion but the first replay from the effort off the post was irrelevant. A commentator should be aware of the overall passage of play and have at least some clue as to what is actually going on. But just in case Jonathan Pearce isn't entirely sure, I think we're supposed to believe the replay showing the ball clearly over the line.

I know people either love or hate Jonathan Pearce but I've always thought of him as a pretty decent commentator. He's made himself look an absolute clown here though.

[paultheroyal]

Agree in that he never bothers me but last night he had a total mare.

Right dogs dinner about it and carried it on for ages. When Keown bails you out you know it's a oxf*rd up.

Then to call it 3-0 when shot was wide... Cherry on the top!

[Ouroboros]

Last night's episode was symptomatic of the culture in football punditry of stressing the controversy, outrage and indignation over description and analysis. I suspect that the break-down in the stadium PA (Pearce: “That’s what £16bn gets you”) had primed him to put across a “what a shambles this is” angle in his commentary. All it took was an angry reaction from the partisan crowd and Honduran players and staff for Pearce to feel that he was in the midst of a Big Story. The first use of goal-line technology in the World Cup is a farce, and Pearce is the man whose words will forever accompany that infamous incident. “It’s up for grabs now...”... “They think it’s all over...”...” OH GOODNESS ME. THEY’VE CHANGED THEIR MINDS NOW!”


Every commentator has such an ego now. They all think they’re fucking wordsmiths, but they’re all just cunts.

[donface]

Phil Neville?
Has an irritating way?
Of talking?
Like a computer that's been given all the words?
But hasn't?
Mastered speech patterns?

[stealthpapes]

We all know ITV are just shit when it comes to Sports coverage and Tyldesley and Townsend are the very worst of a very bad bunch. It all reminds me of that Ruud Van Nistelrooy goal in the Euros, where all the pundits and commentators were still adamant that the goal should have been disallowed for offside, even when a graphic was shown explicitly explaining the relevant law of the game, proving beyond any doubt that the referee was right to allow the goal.

The one where the Italian went off the end of the pitch?

[6ft Kerplunk]

Phil Neville?
Has an irritating way?
Of talking?
Like a computer that's been given all the words?
But hasn't?
Mastered speech patterns?

This. Mowbray was obviously operating the NevilleTron2000 and couldn't press the buttons quick enough.

[soggy biscuit]

Pearce’s moments of madness in full:

Pearce: “Well look at the boos and the Honduran players. And look at this again. We’ve seen so many spurious goal line technology replays. AND IT SIGNALS NO GOAL! No goal has gone up on the screen. The fans have heard it, the Honduran players have seen it.”

Keown: “But it’s a goal there...”

Pearce: “OH GOODNESS ME. THEY’VE CHANGED THEIR MINDS NOW. Does goal line technology work or doesn’t it?”

Pearce went on to say “Well which replay are we supposed to believe? This was supposed to be a flawless system.”

Twat

Just heard a repeat of Nevin on Radio 5 during the incident, it was even worse. 'HE HAS GOT IT WRONG, HE HAS GOT IT WRONG......HE IS WRONG!!......IT IS NOT A GOAL......WHAT A SHAMBLES!!!' then radio 5 had a debate over the 'shambolic' system and how the footballing community are going to doubt any goal it gives now

[From Despair To Where?]

We all know ITV are just shit when it comes to Sports coverage and Tyldesley and Townsend are the very worst of a very bad bunch. It all reminds me of that Ruud Van Nistelrooy goal in the Euros, where all the pundits and commentators were still adamant that the goal should have been disallowed for offside, even when a graphic was shown explicitly explaining the relevant law of the game, proving beyond any doubt that the referee was right to allow the goal.

The one where the Italian went off the end of the pitch?

That's the one.

Thanks to the Laws Of the Game stickers that were in the Panini Football 84 album, I knew that a defender going off the pitch behind the goal is still classed as in play and therefore playing the forward onside.

It's definitely a law that needs refining but the decision was correct.

[From Despair To Where?]

Pearce’s moments of madness in full:

Pearce: “Well look at the boos and the Honduran players. And look at this again. We’ve seen so many spurious goal line technology replays. AND IT SIGNALS NO GOAL! No goal has gone up on the screen. The fans have heard it, the Honduran players have seen it.”

Keown: “But it’s a goal there...”

Pearce: “OH GOODNESS ME. THEY’VE CHANGED THEIR MINDS NOW. Does goal line technology work or doesn’t it?”

Pearce went on to say “Well which replay are we supposed to believe? This was supposed to be a flawless system.”

Twat

Just heard a repeat of Nevin on Radio 5 during the incident, it was even worse. 'HE HAS GOT IT WRONG, HE HAS GOT IT WRONG......HE IS WRONG!!......IT IS NOT A GOAL......WHAT A SHAMBLES!!!' then radio 5 had a debate over the 'shambolic' system and how the footballing community are going to doubt any goal it gives now

Has no-one in this whole JP face saving exercise pointed out that this "shambolic" system correctly identified that the ball did not cross the line from the shot off the post and then correctly identified that the ball did cross the line when the keeper fumbled?

If that's shambolic, give me shambolic every day of the week