• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

The Match of the Day Thread

I never really understood why they get ex pros to analyse a game. Journalists are far better at it, offering more insight and and don't use phrase like "Top, top player" or "Top drawer". I'm cringing at the thought of Paul Merson back on television. He is funny to some degree, but his insight's are just terrible, continuing the dumbing down of TV
 
clownfoot said:
I never really understood why they get ex pros to analyse a game. Journalists are far better at it, offering more insight and and don't use phrase like "Top, top player" or "Top drawer". I'm cringing at the thought of Paul Merson back on television. He is funny to some degree, but his insight's are just terrible, continuing the dumbing down of TV
Click to expand...

Hear hear. I find it infuriating. What the fudge are Lawrenson and Shearer doing as MOTD pundits, earning hundreds of thousands of the taxpayers' money? Pundits should be articulate, charismatic and insightful; MOTD pundits are none of the above. Lawrenson looks like a fudging snowman that's been out in the morning sun, melting and sagging into his chair. Lineker has become a cheesy, smug chump. And now we have Redknapp and McCarthy to add to the mix... great. Why not throw Paul Ince in there too?

I'll be sticking purely to the live Sky games and MOTD2 now I think.
 
They already have Lineker and Hanson talking gonad*s, now they've got a talking Ballsack.
 
So we are all agreed that MOTD is brick. Who would we want as host/pundits and how would we change the format to make it better?
 
It doesn't matter to Motd that they have no one who can analyse at football game, all they every show is goals and (more importantly to them) refereeing decisions. They spend the majority of theit time after games giving their opinions on penalties, offsides and sending offs. None of the analysts involved have never even read the rules of the game are still calling offsides on rules from 20 years ago. Last season they finally learned that the whole of the ball has to be over the line.
They should just employ 3 ex refs and get on with it if decisions are what they are interested in.
 
Hully said:
MOTD2 is so much better, can't the BBC see that?
Click to expand...

Probably not as Dixon is the one leaving.


The problem is that MOTD isn't targeted at the people who discuss football here. Its target at more casual fans. There is a reason that Lineker is considered a success and has been promoted to cover a wider range of sports. A "a cheesy, smug chump" is just the ticket.
 
milo said:
So we are all agreed that MOTD is brick. Who would we want as host/pundits and how would we change the format to make it better?
Click to expand...
I think what would be good is to have some differing opinions - i.e. those with knowledge in certain areas. So instead of having all former pros, they could have one former player, a journalist/presenter (like James Richardson), a coach and a scout? They may not be as known as Redknapp, McCarthy et al., but they'd be able to hold a conversation without resorting to cheap cliches and phrases like 'triffic player' every few minutes.

Just a suggestion.
 
Pity Dixon is leaving, seeing him in physical pain having to admit that we were playing great football, was one of the highlights of last season.
 
milo said:
So we are all agreed that MOTD is brick. Who would we want as host/pundits and how would we change the format to make it better?
Click to expand...

On a personal level, I just find most of the pundits annoying and dislikeable. Perhaps that's linked to my second point, that it's always the same faces. I don't see why that's necessary .... variety is the spice of life; let's see some different people every other week. And thirdly, I would like to more see tactical analysis. I know that some people get sick of so-called armchair fans or FM-players discussing tactics at length and in depth, in a way that some might find pretentious. But at the moment there is hardly any analysis of tactical elements of games at all, and the stuff that is there is very superficial.

More than anything, I feel like it needs freshening up - new faces, new segments etc.
 
Good point, why do they need regulars? Hansen gets something like £30,000 per show. I think he makes some good points but he does tend to get repetitive over a season. No need to pay him loads to say the same and much better to bring in guest pundits alongside semi-regulars. Even Shearer might be acceptable twice a season.

Gordon Strachan used to write for ... I think, it was the Guardian ... and he was very good. He could add something.

And what about young and upcoming managers. Give them a chance to say something and get known.
 
If I could stomach it, it would be interesting to compare comments on Liverpool's first match under a new manager and our first.
 
Hansen will slag off Ekotto, tell us all we're the same old Tottenham who cant defend, Whereas Liverpool were unlucky to lose 3-0 and would have won had they not had Agger sent off

Shearer will still have a boner because his beloved Toon won but I do think he will compliment Defoe on his display
 
Park Lane James said:
I think what would be good is to have some differing opinions - i.e. those with knowledge in certain areas. So instead of having all former pros, they could have one former player, a journalist/presenter (like James Richardson), a coach and a scout? They may not be as known as Redknapp, McCarthy et al., but they'd be able to hold a conversation without resorting to cheap cliches and phrases like 'triffic player' every few minutes.

Just a suggestion.
Click to expand...

I agree. I think that a ref would be particularly interesting when most of their current pundits and commentators do not know the rules of the game.
 
Quite harsh about MOTD here. I'm sure if Shearer or Hansen had the time to do analysis like Neville does on Sky they could be equally as insightful.

Also remember that they only have a few hours between the games and the show.

I'd like to see a show with better football analysis/debate, but MOTD is a highlights show with the 'analysis' just there for replays and segway between games. It's harsh to dismiss it based a specification it doesn't follow.

I think Goals on Sunday is great, and its what MOTD could do with more preparation and air time, but that isn't possible for a Saturday night show

Plus, I quite like Linekar
 
milo said:
I agree. I think that a ref would be particularly interesting when most of their current pundits and commentators do not know the rules of the game.
Click to expand...

This is something they really need. A referee to explain decisions to viewers would be excellent. They have it in American sports and it works well
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back