Potential ESPN pundits- Who should they go for?

Jayob10

Read a great article this morn. The general idea behind the article is good, I myself would prefer lesser known names as pundits if it meant they were articulate and possessed good knowledge of the game. Can't stand lazy punditry.

Anyway here is the article.

John Nicholson football 365
Just Don't Employ Stupid People, ESPN - John Nicholson - Football365 News
Just Don`t Employ Stupid People, ESPN
Posted 20/07/09 11:30 am

Ray Stubbs has left the BBC to present ESPN's Premier League coverage. It doesn't bode well for ESPN's new Premier League channel.

The man they should have gone to is obviously James Richardson. He's intelligent without being aloof, he's witty without being a smart-arse, has a wide knowledge of English and European football and can pronounce foreign names. None of these things can be said confidently said about the worthy, but a tad dull, Raymondo.

So you've got that one wrong ESPN, now before you do anything else stupid, stop and think how you're going to cover the Premier League. Do you want to be new and different or just pump out the usual low-grade slurry?

Please don't make television for the least demanding and most stupid viewer, okay? Instead, be intelligent, erudite, original and entertaining. This is not too much to ask, it will not go over most of our heads.

Let's start with commentators. If they were clever, they'd poach John Murray from 5live. His Northumbrian burr would add a new flavour, he's knowledgeable, quick to improvise, passionate and his voice goes all squeaky when he's excited, all of which is good.

And there's one other new voice they could draw on: Shaka Hislop. He already commentates on Italian and Spanish football for ESPN. An intelligent, educated man, he would bring a refreshing, original voice to proceedings.

And here's another thing ESPN; make sure your pundits are coherent and capable of constructing a sentence, then make sure they are bright enough to say something interesting.

Other sports don't have any problem doing this - look at the cricket, you don't hear Mike Atherton, Ian Botham, Shane Warne, Geoff Boycott, Michael Holding, Nasser Hussain or any number of other ex-pros short of an interesting sentence because they're articulate, intelligent men. Intelligence is the key. ESPN - don't employ stupid people!

Who amongst us has not sat in front of our TV as some top, top spouter of top, top punditry does his thing and thought, why have they asked someone who can't even string a few words together to string a few words together?

We all know who the thickies are. They might be nice lads, but that's just not enough. I suspect TV execs think these men are just like their audience and thus viewers will empathise with them. They're wrong. They should be seeking to elevate standards not chase down the lowest common denominator.

Of those we've already seen on our screens there are a few who could perform well for the new channel. Steve McManaman was a cheerful presence on Setanta, The Waddler divides opinion but for me remains one of the most radical and interesting voices. Gary McAllister is an interesting and perceptive man, while Dion Dublin has an easy charm and Matt Le Tissier is one of Soccer Saturday's most enjoyable presences. I like Ray Parlour too, he's not Brain of Britain but he has an eager puppy-like manner, clearly loves football and can be genuinely funny too.

There must be others, as yet untried, who have something to offer beyond the repetition of cliches as though it's original thought. All it takes is a bit of effort to find them.

But don't stop there ESPN. There should also be a much higher profile for women in your coverage. Why ignore talent because of its gender? Rebecca Lowe covered the Blue Square Premier really well on Setanta. Helen Chamberlain deserves a live football gig. Top players Sue Smith and Faye White have both done TV work to a high standard and are positively professorial in comparison to the likes of Sir Les, Merson and Redknapp, who, let's be honest, shouldn't even be asked to talk for money. There's no reason to exclude women from covering men's football.

For non-British input, ESPN should be going to the likes of Marcel Desailly, Jurgen Klinsmann, Paolo Di Canio and Luca Vialli - all men who know English football, know European and African football, are intelligent, interesting, wear killer suits and speak English better than Merse - as indeed do most dogs - plus they don't have the dazed expression of a man recently hit on the head with a cricket bat.

They would bring a brighter, progressive flavour to proceedings, even if in Di Canio's case it might involve invoking the spirit of Il Duce. So be it. Let's debate right-wing politics in a football context, I'd take that over the usual 'he'll be disappointed with that/he's took a touch/them's the things that count' rubbish that passes for a lot of 'analysis'.

Why not find some interesting, perceptive members of the public to participate? Is an inarticulate, boring ex-player more preferable to an educated, articulate, interesting member of the football public? Only to TV executives it seems.

And in further pursuit of a higher-quality output, there should be no football journalists allowed on discussion shows. They're always keen not to upset players and managers because they need to keep them onside for interviews and access. Too many of them have players and managers as friends who they want to puff up, such as Ian Ridley's constant advancing of Tony Adams (remember him pushing Houllier and Adams as an England management team!) or NOTW Chelsea fan Rob Beasley's star-struck, cringing references to 'big JT'.

If journalists are to be used, why not go for the cream such as Hugh McIlvanney or writers such as Harry Pearson? Men who need not fear the consequences of upsetting the latest Premier League ego-maniac. As soon as you let the tabloid mentality into the building, you start dragging proceedings downmarket. And we've had enough of stupid, downmarket football coverage with its obsession with 'headline' players like Owen, Beckham and Terry.

We're blessed with comprehensive quality coverage of football on the pitch but off the pitch it's a different matter; Gary Newbon staring blankly at me while listening to some lager-fuelled cockney on a phone-in about how foreign players lack passion is not my - nor almost anyone's idea - of a good time, surely.

Being bright, intelligent, clever and original doesn't mean it has to be the sporting equivalent of an Open University degree course on quantum physics. However, there is a strong, deep streak of anti-intellectualism in British culture generally and football specifically; as though being stupid is more cool than being clever. ESPN could try and counter-balance that.

They have nothing to lose and everything to gain by taking a more upmarket, erudite, cultured tone. We understand better quality products cost more money - just make it worth the money and we will pay it.

The BBC don't trust us to do that - which is why we're mandated to pay them �3.6 billion a year for owning a TV - rather than have the opportunity to opt out of the licence fee and pay for what we want to watch of their output. They could potentially generate more income that way, but it's not safe or guaranteed and they clearly don't trust their product or their customers enough not to legally force us to pay them.

ESPN has the opportunity to raise the bar for everyone; to shake up and refresh the football broadcasting industry, but have they the courage, understanding or the vision to do so? Sadly, Stubbs' appointment already suggests it's a revolution that will not be televised.

If you could hand pick the punditry team for ESPN who would ye choose and why?

That_Guy

Good article. Good read.

Hard to know who'd I pick.

Jimmy MaGee??? (For all roles)

Tom65

Pat Dolan. I don't have ESPN so it would save me having to endure his "analysis".



I'm surprised so many people dislike Ray Stubbs. What is wrong with him or his analysis?

yom 1

As long as Craig Burley isnt involved! He makes baby jebus cry.....

Bubs101

Did I read this wrong or did he say Desailly had good English????

Also, the answer is Kamara

Jayob10

yom 1 wrote: »

As long as Craig Burley isnt involved! He makes baby jebus cry.....

I always thought Craig Burley was ok. A little over the top but ok. You can see he loves his football and he doesnt sit on the fence.

Matt Le Tissier is a knowledgable guy, I think if money was no object and I was in charge at ESPN, id hire Jeff Stelling in the role he works at Sky and James Richardson in the Richard Keys role for live games. Revolutionise analysis on the live games. Make it more critical and in depth before, half time and after the game.
Sky tend to insult your intelligence sometimes, bringing in special guests (e.g Phil Neville for a Man utd game) and they are not up for calling it as they say it.

Aidric

We all know who the thickies are

So why not list them?

while Dion Dublin has an easy charm

Ya but he's still sh1te as an analyst.

Eire-Dearg

Marcel Desailly is a great pundit, knows what he's talking about. Did he say they've appointed Alan Stubbs as pundit, isn't he just a presenter?

killwill

DUNPHY!!!

mike65

Danny Mills (don't laugh he does five live a bit and is quite good)

Seaneh

Bubs101 wrote: »

Did I read this wrong or did he say Desailly had good English????

Also, the answer is Kamara

Marceal has great english, he is fulent in 4 languages and english is his second language.

ShriekingSheet

I stopped reading when he said Macca was good.

mike65

Barry Davies and Big Ron, fantastic!

Sparks43

espn should get the special 1

best epsisode this year

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OX3NuNAEQQ

Sunset V

People who don't use over used clichés like :

Keeper had no chance
Top corner
Sent the keeper the wrong way
Top drawer

And nicknames like:
The Gunners
The Reds
The Magpies

The Gunners are Arsenal and Arsenal only. Using "The Gunners" is lazy journalism.

Bubs101

Seaneh wrote: »

Marceal has great english, he is fulent in 4 languages and english is his second language.

He does not have fluent english at all. It's atrocious. He was on for the confederations cup I think and it was so so bad. Worse than Ian wright

flahavaj

Michael Duignan and Ger Loughnane.

_blank_

flahavaj wrote: »

Michael Duignan and Ger Loughnane.

*shudder*

It's terrible when gah commentators get the smaller games on RTE during international tournaments.

Although, I reckon Dunphy and Spillane could go at each other to fairly hilarious consequences.

mayordenis

as long as Lou Macari is kept well away I couldn't give a ****.

eirebhoy

Gordon Strachan and Iain Dowie are both available. 2 of the best.

LuckyLloyd

eirebhoy wrote: »

Gordon Strachan and Iain Dowie are both available. 2 of the best.

Strachan was excellent on MOTD2 before the Celtic gig.

Mossy Monk

They should sign John Motson so I never have to hear him again. Give him a new role.

ITT-Pat

As a matter of interest, who do people think are good pundits? Not just the available ones.

Daemos

Mossy Monk wrote: »

They should sign John Motson so I never have to hear him again. Give him a new role.

Leave the Motsonator alone

Rekop dog

Big ron and rodney marsh could team up. The editer would have a tough time and they could never do any live scenes but they should make it happen. John hartson could do a live link from hospital- he was useful on setanta!

Charlie

Marsh>>>>>>>>>>>>>Dunphy

Rekop dog

Way better than dunphy IMO. Remember him on your on sky sports. I loved the way he dealt with female callers. Even if they where making a valid point he'd say something like 'shouldn't you be making the dinner for your husband love' or his gong he used to hit which cut people off in mid sentence. Absolute legand!

raven136

Richardson,Marcotti,Desailly,Le Tissier,Danny Mills,Hislop,Rebecca Lowe

None of the usual redknapp is all thats really needed.Espn should make themselves different than sky.

Also does anyone know when ESPN launches,is there a dedicated premeir league/espn website etc

monkey9

Mental Mickey!!

tdv

Will we be able to get this new ESPN channel when it launches & will it be a subscription channel?

John Giles should be one of the pundits. Nobody messes with Giles.

Kirby

Giles is past it I'm afraid. He confuses names all the time and repeats himself endlessly. Its a shame really but he IS getting on in years.

yom 1

Wikipedia seems to claim that Rebecca Lowe is going to be part of the ESPN crew. Good stuff!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebecca_Lowe

After the demise of Setanta, it was announced in July 2009, that she had joined ESPN's new sports channel, to co-host their new Premier League football coverage, alongside Ray Stubbs, who has ESPN from the BBC.

OPENROAD

yom 1 wrote: »

Wikipedia seems to claim that Rebecca Lowe is going to be part of the ESPN crew. Good stuff!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebecca_Lowe

Brilliant stuff, hope Kelly Cates gets taken on also

Tomthepost

Adams, Gazza, McGrath and Whiteside would be great:D

Jayob10

I really think the RTE dream team of Dunphy, Bill and Giles are past it.

Giles was always usually spot on. He didn't need to know players, he would call a game as he saw it. It was good that way as he didn't tailor it to a players reputation.

I remember in one game he slaughtered Zidane saying he wasn't world class because he didn't track back!

But the straw that broke the camels back for me with Giles was when he claimed that tactics were irrelevant in the game. It shows how out of touch he is with the game today. Dunphy plays Giles up as some kind of genius but as a previous poster pointed out, Giles repeats himself time and time again. "its all about getting it down and playing" and "he wants to get on the ball" are a couple of his usual lines.

Granted we are always due a few moments of controversy or comedy with Bill and the boys but for the knowledgable fan the lads are not providing good intelligent analysis. They criticise for the sake of it, in an effort to appear unbiased. They are on the complete opposite end of the scale to sky and BBC but thats not necessarily a good thing. As bad as BBC are for not really sinking their teeth into it, RTE go overboard on doing so.

I also love when dunphy tries to come accross all "im a student of the game from my sofa on a saturday night".
My personal fave was when he was incisively referring to the great Inter Milan striker before the United game- "Bill, they have this guy up front called Ivanisovic". That was comedy gold.

OPENROAD

Jayob10 wrote: »

I really think the RTE dream team of Dunphy, Bill and Giles are past it.

Giles was always usually spot on. He didn't need to know players, he would call a game as he saw it. It was good that way as he didn't tailor it to a players reputation.

I remember in one game he slaughtered Zidane saying he wasn't world class because he didn't track back!

But the straw that broke the camels back for me with Giles was when he claimed that tactics were irrelevant in the game. It shows how out of touch he is with the game today. Dunphy plays Giles up as some kind of genius but as a previous poster pointed out, Giles repeats himself time and time again. "its all about getting it down and playing" and "he wants to get on the ball" are a couple of his usual lines.

Granted we are always due a few moments of controversy or comedy with Bill and the boys but for the knowledgable fan the lads are not providing good intelligent analysis. They criticise for the sake of it, in an effort to appear unbiased. They are on the complete opposite end of the scale to sky and BBC but thats not necessarily a good thing. As bad as BBC are for not really sinking their teeth into it, RTE go overboard on doing so.

I also love when dunphy tries to come accross all "im a student of the game from my sofa on a saturday night".
My personal fave was when he was incisively referring to the great Inter Milan striker before the United game- "Bill, they have this guy up front called Ivanisovic". That was comedy gold.

To be honest I don't tune into RTE for the analysis it is purely for moments like this.

They really need to bring back Liam.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPgxJXRly5g&NR=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbsNn9qACOQ

UnitedIrishman

James Richardson, Gabriele Marcotti, Rodney Marsh, Gordon Strachan, Jim Beglin, Terry Butcher, Mark Bright would be a few good ones.

As long as Claridge, Cundy, Dixon, Cole and McManaman are nowhere near it.

Jayob10

McManaman isnt too bad in fairness.

Jason Cundy drives me mad. Seeing his smug head on sky sports in his flash suit spouting his opinion makes me chuckle.
Like anyone gives a crap, for christs sake "you're jason cundy mate"

tdv

Jayob10 wrote: »

I really think the RTE dream team of Dunphy, Bill and Giles are past it.

Giles was always usually spot on. He didn't need to know players, he would call a game as he saw it. It was good that way as he didn't tailor it to a players reputation.

I remember in one game he slaughtered Zidane saying he wasn't world class because he didn't track back!

But the straw that broke the camels back for me with Giles was when he claimed that tactics were irrelevant in the game. It shows how out of touch he is with the game today. Dunphy plays Giles up as some kind of genius but as a previous poster pointed out, Giles repeats himself time and time again. "its all about getting it down and playing" and "he wants to get on the ball" are a couple of his usual lines.

Granted we are always due a few moments of controversy or comedy with Bill and the boys but for the knowledgable fan the lads are not providing good intelligent analysis. They criticise for the sake of it, in an effort to appear unbiased. They are on the complete opposite end of the scale to sky and BBC but thats not necessarily a good thing. As bad as BBC are for not really sinking their teeth into it, RTE go overboard on doing so.

I also love when dunphy tries to come accross all "im a student of the game from my sofa on a saturday night".
My personal fave was when he was incisively referring to the great Inter Milan striker before the United game- "Bill, they have this guy up front called Ivanisovic". That was comedy gold.

Well thats what makes them so great. It dosent matter if the analysis is good or bad, aslong as its entertaining & I get a bit of a laugh out of it thats all that counts.

One pundit that I think is really good is Guillem Balague the guy that dose La Liga covergae on Sky. He seems to be very insightfull & actually dose some research before matches.

Jayob10

tdv wrote: »

Well thats what makes them so great. It dosent matter if the analysis is good or bad, aslong as its entertaining & I get a bit of a laugh out of it thats all that counts.

One pundit that I think is really good is Guillem Balague the guy that dose La Liga covergae on Sky. He seems to be very insightfull & actually dose some research before matches.

Ballague is decent but he tries to pass himself off as in the know. He always lets on he has the inside track on whats going on at liverpool but 9 times outta 10 he is wrong.

Apparently Shaka Hislop is gunna be on ESPN and from what I have heard he is superb and very unique in his analysis. Let wait and see on that though.

I always thought Glen Hoddle was very good at the technical analysis of the way teams are set up. Good tactical analysis. I always remember the England Croatia game at wembley when Croatia beat them. Hoddle was in the Studio with Shearer, Hansen and Lawro and the gulf in quality of actual game awareness between Hoddle and the rest was vast.

The others really looked at the game on the face of it, whereas hoddle pointed out little subtle movement of croatias players not playing in straight lines and their abilty to drop in between the lines of midfield and attack, that were killing england. And he said it as if it was plainly obvious to everyone on the panel and it took a second look to see he was spot on.

DS

Apparently Shaka Hislop is gunna be on ESPN and from what I have heard he is superb and very unique in his analysis. Let wait and see on that though.

He already works for ESPN, he's on the weekly soccer show with Tommy Smyth and did all the champs league coverage.

Kirby

RTE are streaks ahead of sky and BBC for actual post and pre match analysis though. I think Giles is past it, and Bill knows feck all about football, and Dunphy could exaggerate for Ireland..... But they do their jobs.

The Sky boys are so worried about upsetting people that they coat the truth and walk softly over everything.....just because they are afraid if they tell the truth they may not get an interview. It makes sense for them to keep everyone happy, but its not good punditry and its not good for viewers. They pander to Jamie "top, top player" Redknapp constantly just for his connections, which is just wrong.

Having said that, I think Sky have a decent set of commentators and think that a fair few of them are quite good, if a bit understandably biased towards their own lot.

Most people would agree though, footballers rarely make good analysts. They aren't articulate enough, and strangely don't understand the game as well as you would think. Ian wright, Joe Cole, Shearer, all footballers. Don't think they were very good personally. I'm hoping ESPN get some proper knowledgeable lads in.

Bubs101

Kirby wrote: »

RTE are streaks ahead of sky and BBC for actual post and pre match analysis though. I think Giles is past it, and Bill knows feck all about football, and Dunphy could exaggerate for Ireland..... But they do their jobs.

Dunphy should be banned from talking about anybody who doesn't play in the Premiership. His CL stuff is embarrasing

razorblunt

I would say anyone bar the Sky posse, but some of them could be decent when taken away from Sky, look at Souness he cuts loose on RTE yet has to go with the flow on Sky.

I always thought Stephen Alkin on RTE was excellent, he normally gets the smaller WC and European Championship games and comments on his own but I always found him to be the best commentator on RTE, think he's a producer of sports in RTE so thered be no way ESPN would rob him.

thomond2006

As long as they steer clear of Pat Dolan, I'll be happy.

Dr Bolouswki

I've always found Martin Keown fairly articulate and willing to call it as he sees it.

Dont even get me started on jamie redknapp

SK1979

If they do have some sort of show where proper journalists are invited in, I would love to have Tom Humphries there!!

Listening to his opinions would be gold! :pac::pac:

eirebhoy

The new host for Sky's SPL coverage:



Gordon Strachan and Neil McCann will be the pundits.

Ray Stubbs, Derek Rae and Craig Burley for ESPN's SPL coverage.

orourkeda

eirebhoy wrote: »

The new host for Sky's SPL coverage:



Gordon Strachan and Neil McCann will be the pundits.

Ray Stubbs, Derek Rae and Craig Burley for ESPN's SPL coverage.

I still wont watch scottish football

eirebhoy

orourkeda wrote: »

I still wont watch scottish football

I'll watch any match containing potential Irish internationals tbh. Can't say I'd watch Scottish football myself if I wasn't a Celtic fan but I'd certainly be watching McGeady (and hopefully O'Dea) in the big games and CL. I used to love watching Duff in the CL for his first couple of years. 6 pack on the way home from work every time. I'd say I watched more Chelsea games than I missed in his first 2 seasons there. Have hardly watched them since he left.