RTE Football, Our Football

Jazzy

I recently wrote an article and am yet to have it put up anywhere (i could on one site, but id have to do it in HTML) so I thought I might post it up here and see what people think of the content. Any criticisms are welcome

RTE Football, Our Football

When one watches the BBC you can’t help but notice the certain style and demeanor about pretty much every program it produces. From gardening to nature and even to celebrity reality shows the BBC just does it differently. It keeps to a certain set of principles and tries more often than not to abide by them. This isn’t to say that the BBC is incapable of producing poor shows, there is plenty I would not watch on its flagship channels, it is though that step ahead when it comes to principle and this shows most of all in their sports coverage. Compare an England international football match shown on the BBC and then on ITV and the difference is clear. Whilst the BBC is and has to be patriotic, it always maintains a degree of humility and realism that can be beyond reproach when it comes to broadcasting sport. They always keep to the facts and are always ruled by their guiding broadcasting principles, at least to the best extent that they can.
Now to Irish shores and its national broadcaster, the RTE. This is the company that as an Irish citizen I would be paying my TV license to (thanks Dad). It is much the same as the BBC. They have their principles as a broadcaster; they want to produce the finest quality shows for Irish people of all demo graphs, they want to be impartial in all journalistic manners and they want to keep the Irish people informed and entertained the best way they know how. Why then, when it comes to football coverage and analysis do we seem to be so far behind? Football is the most popular sport in the world and its impact upon modern culture is well documented, it would be in moot to try and explain here the significance the beautiful game has among so many people. So why do the RTE continue to approach football in such a haphazard and lethargic way?
RTE football mainly covers Premier League teams based in England, from its Champions League broadcasts to its flagship football program, The Premiership. The backbone of these broadcasts is of course, the actual football itself, but what differentiates these programs from other broadcasters is the analysis of the match(s) themselves. On ITV we see a very tabloid style of analysis with sensationalism and opinions that come mostly from the heart and not the head. On TV3 we also see this same style of analysis. The BBC approach the subject with a clear in depth review that allows for personal opinion but never strays from the facts. Hearts are spoken but the facts are also clearly laid out for the viewer to be able to approach and reflect on the match with the most relevant information at hand. With RTE, we should expect to see this same approach and while viewing early on we can see elements of this, but when it comes to the panel of experts chosen to analyze the game it all begins to go downhill. Instead of fact based information, we see and hear blatantly controversial opinions which are of no use to a viewer other then to incite a nervous belief of how a team is going to perform.
Taking for example the Champions League 2nd round tie between Liverpool and Barcelona, we have Johnny Giles, Eamon Dunphy and Liam Brady as our match experts, the A-Team of RTE football. Before the match we hear comments from Eamon Dunphy talking about the Barcelona team and their young player, Lionel Messi. He quotes “Now that’s a real footballer, unlike Cristiano Ronaldo”. I’m sorry Eamon, but what does Cristiano Ronaldo have to do with either Liverpool’s or Barcelona’s team for the match? Even though his comment is already irrelevant, it is also just plain wrong. Ronaldo has scored 16 Premier League goals and 2 league goals so far this season. Messi has scored 6 league goals (including a hat trick against Real Madrid) and 1 European goal. Both players play on the same position for their team (attacking right winger) and both players frequently get their game. Ronaldo also has one of the highest assist rates in the Premier League, whereas Messi doesn’t even feature in the top 10 in La Liga in Spain. Why then must Dunphy say this? What sense does it make and what is its purpose?
The reason I believe, seems to just to be to upset certain viewers and keep others amused. It bears no relevance for the match in question, but it does go along with Dunphy’s blatant anti- English football stance. For years now he has been telling us how the Premier League isn’t all its hyped up to be (hype, a favorite word of Mr. Dunphy) and how this reflects in England’s national side. Any attack against a player who is “hyped” is a good thing for Dunphy as it helps to prove his fairytale that English football is just all hype. Would business men around the world be willing to pay the reported £40 million price tag for Ronaldo if he was just all hype? Do business men not do their research before handing over such vast sums of money? Are they all just sucked in by the “hype” of Sky Sports and the Premier League? Doubtful. The fact is that 3 Premier League teams are in the Quarter- Finals of the Champions League and all 3 have very good chances of going on and lifting the trophy. The myth is that in La Liga football is of a higher and better class than in England, almost a form of football snobbery. The argument being that the top four teams in English football are just so far ahead of the rest of the pack. Is this not true in La Liga also? Barcelona, Real Madrid, Valencia and current high lifers – Sevilla leading the pack. As far as the Spanish National side is concerned, they are infamous bottlers who failed to get out of their group in Euro 2004 and in the 2006 World Cup they whimpered out to France (3-1) in the second round. This is much the same as England’s previous tournaments where the team seemed to bottle it and under-perform in crucial matches.
The point of this is that these seemingly minor comments constitute for a lot more then just a simple off the cuff remark. They are from a man who seems more interested in getting his name in the paper for both good and bad reasons and to attempt to enforce his opinion of football upon the fans. It is now the year 2007, 85 years after Irish independence from British rule, yet we see our main broadcaster allow anti- British comments (albeit, only anti- British football comments) interfere with viewing and analysis of a sport. It is an extremely tabloid-esque way to broadcast to the public and shows little or no sense of principle. Of course the ratings are constantly high for these programs and the controversy surrounding the panel makes people tune in more, not to get the relevant information, but to wait to hear what is going to be said next. Is this how national broadcasters justify misinformation and shoddy analysis?
Of course, if it’s not Eamon Dunphy standing on his soap box preaching to anyone that will listen to him that makes you want to change channel, it could be the two accomplices. Johnny Giles is a celebrated Irish footballer of fantastic pedigree who was also a fantastic Football pundit. Over the past three years though his high standards have really begun to deteriorate. It is as if Eamon Dunphy has finally bent Giles into becoming an extremely pessimistic pundit who really doesn’t care for any match he watches. He seems tired and his opinions and contributions to the analysis of the game are much more negative then what they once were. Liverpool knock out Barcelona (the current champions) of one of the world’s most prestigious tournaments, the Champions League and what does Giles think? He thinks it wasn’t that good a match and that neither team deserved to go through. Well that’s just fantastic. Liverpool become only the second team ever in English history to go to the Neu Camp and win and he thinks neither team deserve to go through? If you aren’t excited about the sport you’re analyzing and are also broadcasting to thousands of homes then maybe you need to think about your current profession.
Liam Brady on the other hand appears to be the saving grace of RTE football. He is honest, gives credit where it is due and always goes by the facts. He will give his opinion honestly and doesn’t seem to have any pre- meditated reason to make comments. The problem is, he simply becomes drowned out by Dunphy and to a lesser extent the veteran pundit, Giles. It quickly turns into what seems like a scene taken from any pub around the country of three old men bickering about how it isn’t what it was while soothing on a Guinness. Is this how the country needs its football analysis broadcast to it? A man being controversial for the sake of it, another man who seems like not even a lightning bolt to the nether regions could wake up and another who says the right thing, but always ends up looking the bad guy because of the sheer volume of his co- presenter. We pay our license fees for this?
RTE needs to realize that for presenting the most popular sport in the world, they need a change of guard, fresh blood. People who would actually be enthusiastic about what they are watching yet factual and who have the right set of principles, not hidden agendas concerning how much newspaper space you can take up. If the RTE is to maintain its high standards then this is a change that needs to happen sooner rather than later as at the minute, its football coverage is on a sharp decent down to the pits of glossy magazines and Red Top tabloids, yes they are fun to read but bear absolutely no relevance to what is actually going on, quite like something else I know…

hope you enjoyed reading it.

edit - updated with a scrubbed up version

smackbunnybaby

its a very well written article Jazzy, however it is totally the opposite to what i myself think.

let me refer you to an article i read in the English Guardian about a month ago.
I would be inclined to go for this view regarding RTE Versus BBC and Co.
In addition to this i cant stand to watch punditry on any station other than RTE, it is so bland and formulaic.just because you are a footballer doesnt qualify you to be a great analyst.There was some rubbish about Dunphy not being fit to run his opinion as he never reached the heights of the game such Alan Shearer or Gary Lineker.This is absolute rubbish.

Again, don't think i am taking a dig at your article, it is very good, just not what i believe myself.

The Irish eyes who will not have left Ronaldo smiling
RTE's John Giles, Eamon Dunphy and Liam Brady have no peers when it comes to football punditry.

Alan Ruddock
February 22, 2007 02:29 AM
At what point did television producers decide that football fans were to be treated with contempt? Was Jimmy Hill too abrasive for the modern age, too likely to upset fragile egos (though, in fairness, it could have been the beard)? Blandness is now almost universal on British TV, whether it's the crafted dialogue on Gary Lineker's Match of the Day, Steve Ryder's obeisance at the feet of sporting gods or Jim Rosenthal's - well, better to let that one lie. On Sky, where Andy Gray and Richard Keys at least attempt analysis, the surface is barely scratched and conventional wisdoms go unchallenged. "The lad will be disappointed with himself for that performance" now comes at the top end of the most stinging rebukes and most of what passes for television analysis would not pass muster in a pub. With few alternatives on offer we mutely accept it, nodding sagely that the lad could, indeed, have done better. There is, however, a better way.

In a brief clip on Tuesday night John Giles, Eamon Dunphy and Liam Brady demonstrated that they have no peers in the business of football punditry. Two great players and a former journeyman player turned great controversialist were dissecting Manchester United's win against Lille. They didn't dwell for long on the referee (two correct decisions, one goal disallowed, one awarded) or get overly excited by Lille's foot-stomping childishness but focused on analysing different elements of the game.

Brady and Dunphy had prepared a package of Cristiano Ronaldo's entire contribution - completing, to memory, one pass out of 10, while losing possession or fluffing scoring chances every other time he received the ball. The clip concluded with Ronaldo's substitution, head shaking at the injustice of it all, spitting in disgust and shrugging his way past Sir Alex Ferguson, his manager.

Giles, Brady and Dunphy - along with Bill O'Herlihy, their host and interrogator - are brought together by RTE, the state-owned Irish broadcaster, to analyse football. They do not hold their punches. Brady and Dunphy have little time for the hype that surrounds Ronaldo, while Giles's scepticism is slightly more restrained.

For all three, Ronaldo is talented but well short of the greatness that has been bestowed on him by his manager and the British media. They see his flaws, his petulance, his failure to deliver on the biggest European occasions but they also see deep cynicism at work.

The hyping of Ronaldo, in their eyes, is about inflating his value for the balance sheet, and has little or no connection with reality. Ronaldo is a commodity rather than a footballer, a player measured not by his contribution on the field but by his potential contribution to the bottom line, so long as the marketing of him can deliver a profitable transfer.

Agree or disagree, but it is an analysis that demands a response and cuts through the hyperbole that usually gushes forth from British TV studios. Critically, RTE's gang of four treat their viewers as intelligent and informed fans and approach each match they review with a determination to provide insight and provoke response.

Their approach is in stark and dismal contrast to what passes for analysis on British television. There are rare exceptions - Martin O'Neill was a breath of fresh air during the World Cup and Graeme Souness occasionally punctures the mood of celebration - but for too much of the time producers and pundits appear to treat viewers with contempt.

It is not beyond the wit of the BBC, ITV, Sky or Setanta to recognise one simple fact: fans are not morons. They deserve better than pap and I am convinced they would respond enthusiastically if treated with respect. It might, however, knock a few million off Ronaldo's asking price.

ziggy

This post has been deleted.

Mr. Presentable

Nicely put, but as "biased" as anything Giles and Dunphy might say. It's important to remember that, whether you agree with what they say or not, they are former professionals and actually know what they are talking about most of the time.

I suspect your motivation for the piece comes not from the quality shortfall of the RTE panel, but of your grievance with their less that worshipping of C Ronaldo. Are you, out of curiosity for reasons of balance, by any chance a Man Utd fan?

A Dub in Glasgo

Article is well written but far too long for the point you want to make ie

'I don't agree with the analysis from the pundits from RTE and I think the EPL is the best'

RTE are providing in-depth coverage for a foreign league that you support. Maybe you should consider your self lucky that they provide this in-depth coverage including punditry instead of covering the home league. Although the BBC do not provide coverage of the other British leagues, it would be inconcievabe if their regional 'results service' and 'news service' did not concentrate on the local league.

I have not seen RTE's coverage of the EPL for ages although I do see the BBC's coverage. The pundits on the BBC can be very bland and safe. Give me a pundit who challenges some of the 'hype' any day of the week.

BaZmO*

ziggy67 wrote:

Also maybe you should be asking the question why RTE are showing a foreign league constantly while putting a tiny fraction of their budget into their own national league, after all you wouldn't expect the BBC to do similar would you?

Got there before me.

Nicely written piece but like most of the others that have replied already I don't actually agree with it.

PiE

ziggy67 wrote:

Also maybe you should be asking the question why RTE are showing a foreign league constantly while putting a tiny fraction of their budget into their own national league, after all you wouldn't expect the BBC to do similar would you?

Supply and demand.

Kingp35

Well written but i disagree with pretty much everything you have said. Whenever there is a game on I will ALWAYS watch the RTE panel ahead of any other panel. They are the best in the business because they are not afraid to their opinions, no matter how controversial they are. You may not agree with everything they say but this does not mean they are a poor panel.

The only thing I would say is wrong with RTE is that they dont show enough Eircom League football. Other than that their is nothing wrong with their football coverage.

redspider

Ah, the re-occuring debate about the RTE pundits - its debated here often and there are many threads on the topic. I'll mention a few points below. First though, RTE and BBC:

Jazzy wrote:

(RTE) is much the same as the BBC. It has its principles as a broadcaster; it wants to produce the finest quality shows for Irish people of all demo graphs

Well, RTE is not, nor is the BBC, the great television producing entity that you claim I'm afraid. RTE is incestuous in my opinion and full of all sorts of problems preventing it from being much better. It is an inefficient organisation that has many many ills. I know, because I know 3 or 4 people that work in there, and hear about all the crap that goes in there. RTE is an Irish solution for an Irish problem!

You hit on one of the problems perhaps, the football analysis and the analysts.

You are right, the talk is what you will here down in the pub. The RTE producers and management are happy enough though as long as the audience figures are maintained, and like a Punch and Judy show or a poorly written yet popular soap, they are doing well on that score.

The RTE analysts all have different characters. You are right, having been doing this for 20-plus years, it is time to get in new blood.

Dunphy is dumb-phy. He knows he has to be controversial. He's been playing that card for decades. He is playing the same record as when he said that Maradona was no good, Platini was "rubbish", etc. If he was a drunk in the corner of a bar no-one would give him any credence. RTE gives him a platform, ironically a station he has had problems with and who he has tried to take on head to head versus the Late Late show and Pat Kenny, someone who he dislikes intently (seemingly).

Giles has a better football brain, but is no Ph.D when it comes to football management and tactics. He is from a more simpler era, he is now, alas, a has-been. I still have a lot of time for Johnny, but times have moved on and he is being left behind. Note that he was not successful at football management. He was a good player. But was he a great player ? That is the question ;-)

Brady, the best footballer of the lot didnt alas make it as a manager. His analysis is okay at times but he is blighted by his connections with Arsenal. As most matches concern English clubs, he cant be impartial. Nor can he be about continental teams when he himself did so well in Italy, one of the few players to have done so. He talks them up.

You didnt mention the other participant in the Panto, Bill O'Herlihy. He plays the part of the buffoon, the clown, the court jester.

Bill: "I put it to you gentlemen that Liverpool could have been 3 up at half-time".
Dunphy: "Ha, You know nothing Bill. Nothing, I tell ya".
Bill: "I know that".

(and Bill wins a broadcaster of the year award !?!?! - go figure!)

As has been said before, RTE have no need to show Apres Match because the 'panel' do a good job of self-parody and are a comedy act all to themselves.

Another angle you didnt hit on was the analysis of the Irish international matches. Dunphy criticizes every manager we've had except Giles. He idolises players that were around before the TV age. He didnt even see these players playing either, by the way! Also, his expectations of Ireland winning the world cup are completely unrealistic. When we do punch above our weight, he complains, when we dont, he complains. Himself and Giles look back at the old days with rose-tinted glasses.

Redspider

BaZmO*

redspider wrote:

The RTE producers and management are happy enough though as long as the audience figures are maintained, and like a Punch and Judy show or a poorly written yet popular soap, they are doing well on that score.

redspider wrote:

The RTE analysts all have different characters. You are right, having been doing this for 20-plus years, it is time to get in new blood.

Why would they need to get in new blood if they are getting the viewing figures?

The Rooster

The RTE pundits are by far and away the best. Simply because they give their opinion. You don't have to agree with their opinion, and often they can rant on too long, but still they're the best we have available.

BBC, ITV and Sky Sports are totally bland. Nobody says anything negative about a player, with the exception that Johnny Foreigner gets accused of diving from time to time.

SectionF

RTE football mainly covers Premier League teams based in England, from its Champions League broadcasts to its flagship football program, The Premiership. The backbone of these broadcasts is of course, the actual football itself, but what differentiates these programs from other broadcasters is the analysis of the match(s) themselves.

You've hit the nail on the head there. To my knowledge, most viewers in Ireland experience no shortage of coverage of British football, from British channels, so what is the logic behind RTÉ's lavish spending duplicated subject matter? The answer is that it's, quite simply, pantomime aimed at a cheap ratings boost.
What it isn't is public service broadcasting.

redspider

BaZmO* wrote:

Why would they need to get in new blood if they are getting the viewing figures?

True, RTE dont see it that they need new blood, and anyone they have tried (Houghton, Steven) have not been as controversial as they would like. In my opinion though, after listening to the 'Giles & Dunphy show' for 20+ years, its time to get in some new people. Keep Brady. Getting in new valid pundits is ont easy. They could do worse than John Toshack. He knows his football but is still very much a Liverpool fan which will blight his analysis of them at least.

> The answer is that it's, quite simply, pantomime aimed at a cheap ratings boost. What it isn't is public service broadcasting.

Agree. (although entertainment is a public service!)

PHB

RTE are not giving their opinion, except maybe Giles. Dunphy spends his entire time criticising. It doesn't matter what match it is, he criticises. It doesn't matter if he contradicts himself, he still criticises.

BBC/Sky are overly positive, and hype up the league, and their panel is really just a chat about the game, what the panel thought were the reason for the goals, and really just a quiet chat about it. They tend not to be negative.

RTE respond to this, and they go completely negative. I do take Ronaldo as the prime example, because it is the perfect example. Every week it's the same ****, Ronaldo is not this, not that, Sky and BBC have hyped him up. What is hilarious is that I don't think you could count BBC or Sky as one of Ronaldo's friends. The difference between BBC and Sky? After BBC practically inventing a national hate campaign against a player, when he plays a good season, they can accept his footballing talents. RTE on the other hand, are filled with bitter bitter bitter pundits, who can only ever see the negatives in games.
If he scores 2 goals in a match, it's cause they were against a **** team, and apparently he never does it in big games in the premiership or europe.
Cue the panel after his goal against Fulham or his assist against Lille, they just criticise him for not having any end product.
They basically talk out their ass non-stop, and are too stupid to realise how wrong they are.

This isn't just a Ronaldo view. Take Liverpool in the CL for example. The year they won it. He just couldn't accept he was wrong. He just couldn't accept it. Win after win, they didn't deserve the win. He couldn't even admit Gerrard was a good player.

The guy has no clue about football, all he knows is that he likes Roy Keane, that's about it.
Just because it's their opinion doesn't make it good. Aside from the contradictions non-stop, their opinions tend to be based on nothing more than personal hatreds and a reaction to the English media (although I do like Giles, he is always the same. 'Didn't track back, should have, they scored' 'Didn't pass and move, should have, they didn't score' Nice and simple, although he hates any sort of flair, which is why he appears to agree with Giles.

The ultimate example of RTE being complete idiots, was their coverage of the Europe XI vs. Man Utd. They had prepared a highlight real of all the times Ronaldo had done tricks and they hadn't come off. Like what the **** do they think a charity match is meant to look like? That on it's own is fair enough, but you know why they are a complete waste of space?
After Ronaldo is taken off at half time, the commentators spend the second half complaining that nobody is doing entertaining.

The panels are terrible, the only people I'd listen to are Giles and Souness when he's on.

I enjoy football, which is why I would always watch Sky or BBC over RTE.
BBC and Sky are too positive, but RTE are too negative. Both are equally bad, but at least one of the panels actually enjoy football.

Also, Redknapp, Linekeer, Hanson are all giving their opinions. It's just they don't hate football, they actually enjoy it.

BaZmO*

redspider wrote:

and anyone they have tried (Houghton, Steven)

Houghton is a legend when he's on the panel, for one reason only, that big dopey grin he has on his face at the end of the show when the host is thanking the panel. Check it out the next time he's on. He always does it and it cracks me up every time.

Mr. Presentable

PHB wrote:

Ronaldo is not this, not that, Sky and BBC have hyped him up.

Funny how almost every debate in here disintegrates into dismissal of anyone who doesn't follow the Sky Sports view as uninformed (or worse) :rolleyes:

PHB wrote:

.... their opinions tend to be based on nothing more than ..... a reaction to the English media.

You're absolutely correct, and it does seem they go over the top in their efforts to create a balanced view.

But what did you think of the OP's article, which was the point, after all?

Dont be at yourself

RTE is an absolute shambles of a broadcaster, I genuinely cringe when I watch some of their output and if I lived in the Republic, I would make a point of not paying my TV license fee.

All that said, their football coverage is much better in terms of analysis (biased as it is) than the likes of Sky, ITV and BBC. I just wish they'd cover more European football - I'd love if they showed La Liga or Serie A, because we might get some unbiased analysis from them!

Dont be at yourself

Also, Redknapp, Linekeer, Hanson are all giving their opinions. It's just they don't hate football, they actually enjoy it

Redknapp doesn't have an opinion - he just talks in circles, spouting footballing cliche after footballing cliche, saying how every player is 'a good lad' and 'i'm sure they'll up for it in the second half' ad nauseum during the break.

And while Giles may be repetitive, when it comes to repetition, he isn't fit to lace the boots of Alan Hansen - who has more often than not sleepwalked his way through coverage, giving his 'he's got power, he's got pace, he's got commitment' spiel much more often than Giles wheels out his 'honesty of effort' sermon!

Jazzy

cheers for all the feedback lads & ladies, much appreciated.

for the record, Im a Liverpool supporter.
I think Dunphy does know quite a bit about football and im sure if anyone tried to argue footy with him, they would be shocked as he actually knows his stuff... but if he was reasonable and said what he knew he wouldnt get ratings and would be branded boring and opinionless.

Dont get me wrong, I think Jamie Redknapp is a joke as a pundit, but that isnt the point. it doesnt make RTE any better.

and Ziggy67, the former CL holders were an English team and the current holders faced English opposition in the final. there are also 3 EPL clubs still in the CL and only 1 Spanish team. I think thats all in moot anyway as I dont think its a true reflection on the "skill" of a league as to how far they go in the CL or UEFA cup. La Liga & the PL are around the same skill wise imo, they are both currently the best and most exciting leagues in the world with a vast array of fantastic players.
I just think people get too into flag waving for whichever league they follow or support, fanboyism if you will

~Rebel~

First off, good article Jazzy, not my own opinions either though im afraid.

Most of the stuff has been said and argued by others, so ill just give my thoughts on 2 elements.
I prefer RTE, because as much of a pantomime as it can be, at the end of the day, they actually do analysis which is more then i can say about the others, except for Andy Gray on Sky. BBC occasionally make a brief effort "well he's chipped in a lovely ball there and the big man has smashed it in on the back post". Say what you see stuff for the majority (Hanson is decent but is dragged down by the others). And the BBC don't lay out the facts as you say, they actually often don't show clips of diving etc on the show.

On the Spain part, Messi was injured for a lot of the year, his 7 league goals came from 12 appearances. The top 4 in each coutry against each other is debateable, but i would say the english would come out on top. Its the balance of the league that is more impressive in Spain. Its much more regular to see an upset of a midtable team beating a top team away we'll say. Also it far more likely for a Spanish team to rise up and challenge the big guys, think Sociodad a few years ago. This year Seville have gone from distant 5th to battling it out for the League. Last year Osasuna broke into the top 4, the year before that Villareal and Betis were in the top 4, the year before again Deportivo were right up there till the end in the race for the title. This just doesn't happen in england, theres no one off chance for a team to put something together to race up the table because the top 2 in particular beat everyone else so consistantly. I cant see different teams pushing themselves up there each year for a season of glory which regularly happens in spain. Even when Everton managed to usurp a truly awful liverpool league into 4th, they did so with negative goal difference and over 30points off the top.

ziggy

This post has been deleted.

Mossy Monk

what is so great about the BBC pundits? did you not see them during the World Cup? they were a joke

leninbenjamin

simple solution: if you don't like the RTÉ coverage don't watch it.

Raskolnikov

The Rooster wrote:

The RTE pundits are by far and away the best. Simply because they give their opinion. You don't have to agree with their opinion, and often they can rant on too long, but still they're the best we have available.

BBC, ITV and Sky Sports are totally bland. Nobody says anything negative about a player, with the exception that Johnny Foreigner gets accused of diving from time to time.

I have to agree with that. At least there is an attempt at debate and discussion. Contrast it with the woeful BBC coverage which is more like a post-match commentary rather than analysis.

Zebra3

The reality is that all football punditry has been dumbed down since the early 90s.

Back in the 80s, the only people who watched football were those who actually genuinely followed it. Since the arrival of the Premiership and through BSkyB's marketing it has been dumbed down* to try and interest/include those that don't know anything about the game, but feel the need to be "in the know" for the chat in work/college/boozer.

Usually the only time I ever "watch" any punditry is after a match is over and I'm waiting for them to repeat an interesting incident. Even then I'll ignore the crap being spoken. I'm following/playing football long enough to form my own opinion.

I will make an exception for those times I'm lucky enough to sit down and watch the Spanish football as they'll spend quite a lot of time filling you in on what's happened lately off the field which is more of a news update than punditry. BSkyB's coverage of Spanish football is like the way English football was treated in the 80s. It was automatically assumed anyone watching knew a good deal about the game.

*BSkyB have admitted this themselves.

Ardent

How anyone could prefer the automatons on BBC/Sky over the boys on RTE is beyond me.

Sure, they'll p*ss you off from time to time but they are at least honest in their opinions - no insipid cliches or safe insights from Dunphy, Giles, Brady et al, thankfully.

Jazzy

ziggy67 wrote:

So why did you think it is "snobbery" for people to prefer La Liga earlier if you can accept that it is comparable with the Premiership?? Because they have the temerity to disagree with your opinion perhaps? Fanboyism indeed!

(For the record i follow the Scottish league, but i watch a lot of other football too)

im not saying its snobbery to prefer one league over another, that would make me a massive hypocrite. Im saying that there is alot of ppl out there who have the unfounded opinion that La Liga is better skill wise then the PL, and the majority of those ppl i have met / listened to have a very snobbish attitude as regards football.

and if i was so anti- other ppls opinions, then I would be flaming alot more ppl that have replied here wouldnt I because the majority of the replies have disagreed with my opinion, so to that degree I dont really know what you mean by "Because they have the temerity to disagree with your opinion perhaps?".
well i do know what u mean, ur just not right about it

~Rebel~

The skills on display in Spain are better then the premiership, thats obvious from watching any match. They give more space to play in and ball control is noticeable better in your average game outside of the top four then it is in England. Skill level is only one facet of the game, i do love watching the passing and movement and skill in Spain, but i also love the raw speed, power, agression and passion shown in the premiership.

As i said on the previous page, the Spanish league tips it for me as the balance of teams is better over the whole league, in that every year new teams come up and make a challenge to the big boys which never never happens in england anymore.

copacetic

Jazzy wrote:

i Im saying that there is alot of ppl out there who have the unfounded opinion that La Liga is better skill wise then the PL, and the majority of those ppl i have met / listened to have a very snobbish attitude as regards football.

Why is their opinion 'unfounded'? Just because you disagree doesn't make someone elses opinion unfounded.

I couldn't disagree more with most of your article, but you are entitled to your opinion. You could do a bit of work to try and make it more objective. Which might see it taken more seriously.

BKtje

Good article Jazzy and i would indeed be of the same opinion as yourself for much of it.
Basically i see it as this when watching the various channels:
Sky give a hell of a lot of stats and play by play action (generally by Andy Gray after the match). While it is interesting i would generally head off for 15mins at half time.

BBC is generally more about a chat and the positives of the game (as has been said). I generally find it enjoyable tho as quite often they are having little jokes with eachother (if this is approriate is another thing up for debate) while analysing the positives.

RTE is always very negative and critisizes overly much. I really don't need to be told it's a bad game for 15mins at half time or afterwards. I watch football for the good things that happen in the game, the exciting good to watch things and i'd rather that they focus on those aspects for the majority. Of course the negatives have a place but quite often the entire dicussion is taken up by them.

Ideally i'd like a pundit team that do all of the above but unfortunately that rarely seems to happen.

Before you ask, yes i do watch The Premiership (and champs league)on RTE.
The former because it is generally on earlier and i head out afterwards but if i had the choice or if i stay in i always wait for BBC (or if there'sa decent game i watch Sky's Game of the day). The Champions League coverage i generally watch on RTE as i'd prefer them over ITV's anyday of the week.

I don't think this pundit panel "problem" is soley with the football side of things. There are times that i pray for the likes of George Hook to shut up while watching rugby (my dad, bro and myself actually chose to watch the BBC commentary of Ireland vs Scotland) but thats a different issue.

Lastly, ask the majority of football(soccer) fans in Ireland who they support and the majority will mention and EPL side over an Irish team. That is why RTE have their flagship football show showing and analysing the English game. The blame for that can't be laid soley at RTE's doorstep (for the record i support more coverage of the irish leagues by RTE, although the last time i had an interest in it Shamrock Rovers were still playing in the RDS).

el rabitos

BaZmO* wrote:

Houghton is a legend when he's on the panel, for one reason only, that big dopey grin he has on his face at the end of the show when the host is thanking the panel. Check it out the next time he's on. He always does it and it cracks me up every time.

thank god! i thought i was the only one that noticed that, ridiculously hilarious tbh.