World Cup Punditry Gold.

mike65

I think this World Cup is revealed the core RTE pundits to be knaves and fools to be honest. A steady stream of groundless bias, cliches and lazy sterotypes.

Krusader

SuperInfinity wrote: »

Liam Brady shows once again what a complete fool he really is.

He says they didn't win it on football, of course they won it on football. They were running circles around Brazil and all Brazil could do was foul. All of the tackles were clear fouls. The stuff the Brazilians were doing at times was almost criminal assault.

If Brazil were going down they were going that way anyway. A single goal doesn't change the physical conditions on the field. The Brazilians were running around in the heat and humidity in the first half like a 100m race, of course they were going to run out of steam at the end especially with a man sent off.

Brady was spot on, both Hollands goals came from set plays and when they went 2-1 up they could of kept the ball better, the way Spain did against Portugal the other night
Against 10 men they should of passed them to dead

Jimmy Iovine

SuperInfinity wrote: »

Liam Brady shows once again what a complete fool he really is.

He says they didn't win it on football, of course they won it on football. They were running circles around Brazil and all Brazil could do was foul. All of the tackles were clear fouls. The stuff the Brazilians were doing at times was almost criminal assault.

If Brazil were going down they were going that way anyway. A single goal doesn't change the physical conditions on the field. The Brazilians were running around in the heat and humidity in the first half like a 100m race, of course they were going to run out of steam at the end especially with a man sent off.

Complete and utter bullshit right there. Brazil were by far the better team. Created all the clear cut chances. The only time the Dutch began to run rings was when Melo was sent off and the Brazilians were pushing for it leaving space at the back.

Both teams were fouling throughout the match. Van Bommel is one of those players that you have to admire for being so sneaky and well able to sweet talk the ref that he can get away with almost ****ing anything on a pitch. Never seen a player carry on like he did and not even get a yellow.

Kevin Keegan said that Melo's tackle was the worst of the tournament so far. Don't know if he's spent the time watching Wimbledon cause there have been way worse ones.

The point Brady was making, and it was correct, was that the first goal affected their mental state. They went from a state of sheer control, dictating everything in the first half. The Dutch didn't produce anything meaningful up until the goal. It was a pure fluke Cesar should have cleaned up. From that the Dutch grew in confidence and the Brazilians wilted under the pressure and expectation.

No need to hop on the backs of Liam and Ronny when they're speaking the truth.

TouchingVirus

Liam Brady's cynical comments annoy the crap out of me. They're so cynical it's unbelieva-cynical...

SuperInfinity

Jimmy Iovine wrote: »

Complete and utter bullshit right there. Brazil were by far the better team. Created all the clear cut chances. The only time the Dutch began to run rings was when Melo was sent off and the Brazilians were pushing for it leaving space at the back.

Both teams were fouling throughout the match. Van Bommel is one of those players that you have to admire for being so sneaky and well able to sweet talk the ref that he can get away with almost ****ing anything on a pitch. Never seen a player carry on like he did and not even get a yellow.

Kevin Keegan said that Melo's tackle was the worst of the tournament so far. Don't know if he's spent the time watching Wimbledon cause there have been way worse ones.

The point Brady was making, and it was correct, was that the first goal affected their mental state. They went from a state of sheer control, dictating everything in the first half. The Dutch didn't produce anything meaningful up until the goal. It was a pure fluke Cesar should have cleaned up. From that the Dutch grew in confidence and the Brazilians wilted under the pressure and expectation.

No need to hop on the backs of Liam and Ronny when they're speaking the truth.

Brazil were the better team? How many pounds of crack were you smoking? Noone would say that who knows anything about soccer. Sure in the first half you can argue they were, but you're living in a dreamworld if you think Netherlands weren't by far the better team in the second half. Especially when Brazil went a man down, Netherlands should have put 2 or 3 more away. Get a grip, nobody would say Brazil were the better team!!!! Clearly you don't know anything about soccer.

Melo stamped down on his hamstring. That's one of the the most dangerous and malicious thing you can do to a player in soccer. I wouldn't be surprised if Melo faced further sanctions for doing that, do you not get that he intentionally stamped down on him when the ball was gone???

Ronny wasn't agreeing with Liam at all, he was just being the apologetic wanker he always is. He disagreed with him but mainly went along with it so as not to contradict his 'esteemed and distinguished professional colleague'.

A Primal Nut

SuperInfinity wrote: »

Brazil were the better team? How many pounds of crack were you smoking? Noone would say that who knows anything about soccer. Sure in the first half you can argue they were, but you're living in a dreamworld if you think Netherlands weren't by far the better team in the second half. Especially when Brazil went a man down, Netherlands should have put 2 or 3 more away. Get a grip, nobody would say Brazil were the better team!!!! Clearly you don't know anything about soccer.

Melo stamped down on his hamstring. That's one of the the most dangerous and malicious thing you can do to a player in soccer. I wouldn't be surprised if Melo faced further sanctions for doing that, do you not get that he intentionally stamped down on him when the ball was gone???

Ronny wasn't agreeing with Liam at all, he was just being the apologetic wanker he always is. He disagreed with him but mainly went along with it so as not to contradict his 'esteemed and distinguished professional colleague'.

For 53 minutes Brazil were by far the better team, Holland didn't get near the goal and they had enough chances to finish it off. Holland got a lucky goal from their point of view and then admittedly Brazil collapsed. But still, Holland mostly stopped them getting near the goal by fouling (such as Van Bommel's cynical foul on Dani Alves) and got a second from a set piece. Perhaps in the last 17 minutes after Melo was sent off, Holland played well. The other 73 minutes they didn't do much in an attacking sense (apart from set pieces) and their defence was caught out bad for the Brazil goal.

Jimmy Iovine

SuperInfinity wrote: »

Brazil were the better team? How many pounds of crack were you smoking? Noone would say that who knows anything about soccer. Sure in the first half you can argue they were, but you're living in a dreamworld if you think Netherlands weren't by far the better team in the second half. Especially when Brazil went a man down, Netherlands should have put 2 or 3 more away. Get a grip, nobody would say Brazil were the better team!!!! Clearly you don't know anything about soccer.

Melo stamped down on his hamstring. That's one of the the most dangerous and malicious thing you can do to a player in soccer. I wouldn't be surprised if Melo faced further sanctions for doing that, do you not get that he intentionally stamped down on him when the ball was gone???

Ronny wasn't agreeing with Liam at all, he was just being the apologetic wanker he always is. He disagreed with him but mainly went along with it so as not to contradict his 'esteemed and distinguished professional colleague'.

Not as much as you it seems. I wouldn't argue that Netherlands were not the better team in the second half but on the whole I felt Brazil were better because they created the better chances. The Dutch were lucky to get the first goal and bad marking was the cause of the second one. Of course they were likely to be the better team when Melo was sent off. Brazil had to chase the game leading to a host of chances for them. Van Persie isn't at the races and Huntelaar was shockingly complacent when he got the chance to kill the game off at the end.

Sure Melo stamped down but it wasn't even close to being as bad as you say so. By that premise then van Bommel should have gone too for the intention behind his elbow on Fabiano.

Think whatever you like of Ronnie and Liam but they have both played the game to a far higher level than anyone you'll meet in a pub or on any fora, so I'd tend value their opinion higher than others

_Bella_

"Uraguay are no strangers to partypooping!'

A Primal Nut

Loved Giles "Out-Toughed" comment.

Giles: Holland out-toughed Brazil
O'Herlihy: What do you think about that, did they out-tough brazil, to use John's expression.
Giles: Its not a very good expression.

SuperInfinity

A Primal Nut wrote: »

For 53 minutes Brazil were by far the better team, Holland didn't get near the goal and they had enough chances to finish it off. Holland got a lucky goal from their point of view and then admittedly Brazil collapsed. But still, Holland mostly stopped them getting near the goal by fouling (such as Van Bommel's cynical foul on Dani Alves) and got a second from a set piece. Perhaps in the last 17 minutes after Melo was sent off, Holland played well. The other 73 minutes they didn't do much in an attacking sense (apart from set pieces) and their defence was caught out bad for the Brazil goal.

HA!!! Brazil's goal was much worse. Their goal was a silly, stupid, simple mistake. Neither goal was a fluke, but I would call their goal more of a fluke than Netherland's first goal, at least Netherlands were able to get it in the area and sooner or later that's going to happen. Melo plays the ball through from midfield, Robinho uses his pure PACE to run through and is suddenly 1 on 1 with the keeper and scores. GENIUS. </sarcasm> You got to love it how people say "oh this goal was only such and such so it doesn't count as much", when it was extremely well deserved and their own goal was even worse. Brazil today were a joke.

Brazil were a little better in the first half in terms of pure clear-cut chances on goal. They ran around in the heat and then ran out of steam. Netherlands obviously played far better in the second half and were the clear deserving victors overall.

A Primal Nut

Brazil's goal was no fluke. Two or three of the brazilian players went wide, dragging their markers with them, leaving a hole for Robinho to run into. Robben failed to track him and Felipe Melo played one of the passes of the tournament and an awesome finish. It was one of many great Brazilian moves in the first half.

Holland's first goal was a fluke and they would never have scored a normal goal from open play in a million years - they hadn't one decent chance in 53 minutes. After that, they played well, but nothing really amazing.

Jimmy Iovine

SuperInfinity wrote: »

HA!!! Brazil's goal was much worse. Their goal was a silly, stupid, simple mistake. Neither goal was a fluke, but I would call their goal more of a fluke than Netherland's first goal, at least Netherlands were able to get it in the area and sooner or later that's going to happen. Melo plays the ball through from midfield, Robinho uses his pure PACE to run through and is suddenly 1 on 1 with the keeper and scores. GENIUS. </sarcasm> You got to love it how people say "oh this goal was only such and such so it doesn't count as much", when it was extremely well deserved and their own goal was even worse. Brazil today were a joke.

Brazil were a little better in the first half in terms of pure clear-cut chances on goal. They ran around in the heat and then ran out of steam. Netherlands obviously played far better in the second half and were the clear deserving victors overall.

Not sure whether to think you are messing now or not cause you don't seem to have a clue at all. Brazils goal was as a result of very good movement by Fabiano and Alves and Bastos out on the wing. The right back was occupied and couldn't follow Robinho in who then wasn't noticed by the centre backs. How you could poo-poo that goal is beyond me.

Brazil were excellent in the first half and ripped Holland apart at times. At their best in the second half Holland didn't come close to doing anything of the same to Brazil even against 10 men. Thus, the Dutch were the disputed, undeserving winners.

noodler

Dutch deserved it.

All manner of reasons, going a goal down to Brazil and still maintaining their composure being the main one.

briany

Bill : "Nothing to suggest these goalkeepers are rocks of solid....solidarity, is there?"

missingtime

To be fair to George grass fertilization has come on leaps and bounds.

SuperInfinity

briany wrote: »

Bill : "Nothing to suggest these goalkeepers are rocks of solid....solidarity, is there?"

lol, I heard that.

mike65

Talking muck again now, worst game of the tournament? :eek:

Melion

Why are they talking about young players at City, Arsenal, United and Bayern?

A Primal Nut

mike65 wrote: »

Talking muck again now, worst game of the tournament? :eek:

I thought it was one of the best games of the tournament. It was wonderful knockout football - both teams really going for the win and lots and lots of shots and chances. The excitement at the end was the icing on the cake.

They are hard boys to please on rte.

dreamers75

Melion wrote: »

Why are they talking about young players at City, Arsenal, United and Bayern?

trying to highlight the defiencies in English football, i mean thats why we tune in.

Oddly never mentioned why Muller and Badstuber got their game for Bayern.

fryup

mike65 wrote: »

Talking muck again now, worst game of the tournament? :eek:

ya, what are they on about ...it was a good game, a compelling game

you know we sometimes accuse the brit channels of being over positive...but RTE can sure as hell be over nagative in their analysis:cool:

DB10

Dunphy was spouting bollocks tonight.

The way he went on about Bayern you would think they were producing several world class players every year.

Mueller was the only one I think. They didn't buy Ribery and Robben for pennies Eamo.

parasite

It is NOT punditry gold to have a dull spoofer's discussion on nurturing talent directly after one of the most dramatic WC matches ever

A Primal Nut

parasite wrote: »

It is NOT punditry gold to have a dull spoofer's discussion on nurturing talent directly after one of the most dramatic WC matches ever

After a victory by any team who RTE didn't expect to do well (Germany, Uruguay, etc) Bill inevitably starts a discussion about why Ireland can't produce the same quality of players. Giles argues its because we don't play football in the street, dunphy argues we do produce good players, and Brady reminds Bill that Germany have 80million people to Ireland's 4 million people. They have had this discussion four or five times already at this tournament.

I have a lot of time for the lads, but their attitude after this match was appaling; just because the two defences/goalkeepers made a few mistakes, it was "the worst match of the tournament." For me it was probably the best so far.

murpho999

Well I have defended the RTE panel numerous times on this forum, especially on the RTE v BBC thread, where I argued that the RTE panel were way ahead of the British channels for proper in-depth analysis.

However, I was really appalled by their attitudes tonight. To say that was the worst game of the tournament was ridiculous, have they forgotten the Brazil v Portugal game? England v Algeria etc. Tonight's Uruguay v Ghana game had me on the edge of my seat, and the end was the most dramatic I have seen in years.

Granted, the football may not have been of the highest purist standard but so what. It was entertaining, unpredictable and very exciting.
It seems that the the 3 lads, seem to think that they have a mission to prove that they know what the correct standard of football should be and mistakes should never be made. I do wish they would analyse goals as being caused by good attacking play sometimes rather than defensive errors. Defensive errors are usually caused by good pressure being applied by attacks and that is good football.
Also, Eamon's comments about Irish team could have gotten to semi-finals, is more something you'd expect from Alan Shearer about the England team and is totally unproveable as Ireland simply didn't qualify. Final discussion about young player system in English clubs was boring and totally irrelevant to what the audience had just witnessed in the game.

I hope RTE cop on and maybe have a word with them, but I'm sure this won't happen.

Mr.Nice Guy

Yeah I was very disappointed with them this evening. I thought that was the most entertaining game of the tournament, and felt both sides gave it a right good go, and then they cut back to the studio and they are all ripping on it, Giles saying the two teams were awful, and so on.

Since Ossie left, and with Irwin and Hamann not featuring, it has declined sharply imo.

I always regarded Dunphy, Brady and Giles as the best trio but I feel they have been below-par this tournament. Brady in particular has really disappointed me and just seems way too cynical and dour. Usually you could rely on him to provide some semblance of sanity to proceedings but with him now losing the plot, the 'senior analyst' Giles still set in his ways and Dunphy...well, being Dunphy, it's been very tough to enjoy of late.

gingelion

Weird. I must be the only one who didn't enjoy that game so. I honestly thought it was boring. Was really looking forward to the end. Maybe i should've been drinkin while watching it.

NeoKubrick

murpho999 wrote: »

I hope RTE cop on and maybe have a word with them, but I'm sure this won't happen.

Get your priorities right. RTE need to cop-on and have a word, if possible, with Maloney to shut-up talking and stop going on and on qualifying his questions with his calculated 'reasoning'. I hope this is his last game, today.

The schedule hasn't helped the analysis. I don't understand why they let Maloney, Brady and Ronnie cover the Brazil and Holland game, and the main lads the other game, and it'll probably be the same, today.

lordgoat

Sky sports news reporter to Argentinian Fan

"Now no use of the hand today ok?"

Argentinian Fan
"Ok. Oh where's Rooney?"

Sky Sports news guy
"..... eh...."

A Primal Nut

gingelion wrote: »

Weird. I must be the only one who didn't enjoy that game so. I honestly thought it was boring. Was really looking forward to the end. Maybe i should've been drinkin while watching it.

It was the first knockout game where both teams really went for it and tried to win the game.

Ush1

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

Yeah I was very disappointed with them this evening. I thought that was the most entertaining game of the tournament, and felt both sides gave it a right good go, and then they cut back to the studio and they are all ripping on it, Giles saying the two teams were awful, and so on.

Since Ossie left, and with Irwin and Hamann not featuring, it has declined sharply imo.

I always regarded Dunphy, Brady and Giles as the best trio but I feel they have been below-par this tournament. Brady in particular has really disappointed me and just seems way too cynical and dour. Usually you could rely on him to provide some semblance of sanity to proceedings but with him now losing the plot, the 'senior analyst' Giles still set in his ways and Dunphy...well, being Dunphy, it's been very tough to enjoy of late.

I honestly think it has degenerated into Giles saying something some what obvious and then Dunphy just cupping his balls and saying "it's an important point Johns made".

_Bella_

I hope Hamanns back for today, he is usually there for the German games

A Primal Nut

Nah he's back to pre-season training with MK Dons - thats why he left in the first place.

_Bella_

Hamann is so harsh on the Germans though, he always predicts them to lose

Jayob10

did anyone just see the caption under Ronnie Whelan, "played in the 1990 and 1994 World Cup"

Four-Percent

Gilesy just created 2 new german defenders, Bertestuber and Bertesacker.

_blank_

Jayob10 wrote: »

did anyone just see the caption under Ronnie Whelan, "played in the 1990 and 1994 World Cup"

he did

Daemos

Commentator on BBC: "It's like a whos-who of free-kick takers down there. Plus Gabriel Heinze"

Jimmy Iovine

Haha great stuff from Ronnie there talking about what Mascherano does, calling it the barber: pass it short, back and to the sides

Paparazzo

Giles excuse on being wrong all the time is "we can only comment on what we see Bill"
Him and dunphy basically wrote off half the German team based on 1 game, the Champions League final! Going back on a lot of it now

noodler

Ronnie, Jesus.

Have you ever had an independent thought in your life?

Kold

DaPoolRulz wrote: »

Commentator on BBC: "It's like a whos-who of free-kick takers down there. Plus Gabriel Heinze"

Was only made funny by someone in the background pissing themselves laughing.

A Primal Nut

On BBC:

Alan Shearer: Pele said an African team would win the world cup by 2000. He is a bit optimistic, i think it might take a bit longer than that.

CorkMan

On the BBC Seedorf played a charity match in South Africa and Hudson, Shearer, Lineker and of course Seedorf were on the show.

After the BBC showed it Lineker said to see Seedorf in the studio "Did you enjoy yourself out there?" Bit of racism there IMO.

CorkMan

Plus did anyone see the "Argentina never lost in the finals when the mascot had his hat on" caption on RTE. It was the very first one.

namloc1980

CorkMan wrote: »

On the BBC Seedorf played a charity match in South Africa and Hudson, Shearer, Lineker and of course Seedorf were on the show.

After the BBC showed it Lineker said to see Seedorf in the studio "Did you enjoy yourself out there?" Bit of racism there IMO.

What are you on about?? Racism??

ziggy

This post has been deleted.

CorkMan

It was the way he Lineker said it, he didn't say it "trivially" or something, he said it like he meant it in a bad way, like in a very smart way not a light hearted way at all. Seedork was a bit reared up by it.

Hansen, my mistake, RTE is my main source of commentary. Only flick to BBC during the breaks.

inforfun

CorkMan wrote: »

It was the way he Lineker said it, he didn't say it "trivially" or something, he said it like he meant it in a bad way, like in a very smart way not a light hearted way at all. Seedork was a bit reared up by it.

Hansen, my mistake, RTE is my main source of commentary. Only flick to BBC during the breaks.

?
Ah ok.. so i guess it is one of those "you had to be there" moments?

Or are you just scanning all channels to see if there is anyhting someone says that could be, if you try hard enough, be qualified as racism?

Knowing Seedorf he would have given Lineker a piece of his mind if it had been even slightly racist.

CorkMan

inforfun wrote: »

?
Ah ok.. so i guess it is one of those "you had to be there" moments?

Or are you just scanning all channels to see if there is anyhting someone says that could be, if you try hard enough, be qualified as racism?

Knowing Seedorf he would have given Lineker a piece of his mind if it had been even slightly racist.

Just the body language involved. Seedork was in the middle of Hansen and Shearer, and Lineker passed the comment to him, it was in the studio and he said did you have a good time "out there". You could tell Lineker was being smart.

If ye can find it online ye would know better.