Carragher, Neville & MNF On Sky

MD1990

MD1990 wrote: »

i think he is a very good analyst on the Premiership
but i find his commentry in European games very frustating
because he is so pro the English teams
Watching the Chelsea game tonight it was nearly like listening to someone on fanzone calling the game
he completly overated Chelsea's performance tonight too imo

i think his orgasism moment tonight proved my point

To Alcohol

Ah he's a good lad. He defo wet his kacks when Torres scored.

I nearly pissed myself when Torres scored, good lad.

awec

Gary Neville is a great studio pundit and does good analysis on MNS, but he is god awful as a commentator and has one of those voices that's really hard to listen to constantly.

Mr Alan

awec wrote: »

Gary Neville is a great studio pundit and does good analysis on MNS, but he is god awful as a commentator and has one of those voices that's really hard to listen to constantly.

Agreed.

smallerthanyou

awec wrote: »

Gary Neville is a great studio pundit and does good analysis on MNS, but he is god awful as a commentator and has one of those voices that's really hard to listen to constantly.

Spot on. I really tried to dislike him as a pundit but I just end up agreeing with everything he says. He's especially good at analysing where the defense went wrong where goals are scored as you would expect.

EDIT: and his reaction to Torres goal was hilarious!

Davidth88

kryogen wrote: »

Neville blowing his load was hilarious tonight!

Not sure if it's been posted , but you can listen to that here

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/champions-league/9224915/Chelsea-striker-Fernando-Torres-scores-against-Barcelona-to-send-Gary-Neville-into-orgasmic-raptures.html


At the first leg I watched it on RTE , they had Ronnie Whelan, now he was TOTALLY biased , everything Chelsea did was rubbish and cheating , everything Barca did was fantastic .... became rather comical in the end.

Will I Amnt

awec wrote: »

Gary Neville is a great studio pundit and does good analysis on MNS, but he is god awful as a commentator and has one of those voices that's really hard to listen to constantly.

If he just talked normally like he does in the studio he would be grand,
He commentates like the impression you do when you're a kid running with the ball and taking it by you're mates.

the realpigiron

Davidth88 wrote: »

Not sure if it's been posted , but you can listen to that here

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/champions-league/9224915/Chelsea-striker-Fernando-Torres-scores-against-Barcelona-to-send-Gary-Neville-into-orgasmic-raptures.html


At the first leg I watched it on RTE , they had Ronnie Whelan, now he was TOTALLY biased , everything Chelsea did was rubbish and cheating , everything Barca did was fantastic .... became rather comical in the end.

Any neutral soccer supporter would be naturally biased towards Barca, when they are at their best they play a great brand of football. I don't begrudge Chelsea their win, a great defensive performance from them. However as a neutral I'll have less interest in the CL Final now that Chelsea are there instead of Barca. When Ronnie Whelan is working for RTE he doesn't have to pretend to hope that English clubs in the competition succeed.

Soldie

Neville was hilarious last night.

A few links doing the rounds today.

http://vimeo.com/40998935

Dubit10

Can't stand him myself. Crap pundit.

Kylo Ren

Dubit10 wrote: »

Can't stand him myself. Crap pundit.

You'll find yourself in the minority so.

peterswellman

Dubit10 wrote: »

Can't stand him myself. Crap pundit.

So, so bitter.

Gbear

It's hard to say the Neville is genuinely a "good" pundit when he's good in comparison to so much utter ****e on TV. The standard of football punditry is so low that even being competent stands out a mile.

Really, punditry that actually gives some sort of insight is the least we should expect but unfortunately, most ex-footballers are too thick to be able to come up with anything useful.

Davidth88

Dubit10 wrote: »

Can't stand him myself. Crap pundit.

Don't agree, I want him to be crap but he isn't he is actually very good. ( IMO )

Will I Amnt

Gbear wrote: »

It's hard to say the Neville is genuinely a "good" pundit when he's good in comparison to so much utter ****e on TV.

It's not really,I and seemingly a lot of others are genuinely intrigued by what he has to say.
I actually look forward to his opinions on anything football related.
That to me makes him a good pundit regardless of who the alternative is.

ricero

as a lifelong pool fan could not stand the neville as a player i personally loathed the man.

but as a pundit he is genuinely very good and probaly in the top 3 in England. i myself personally think lee dixon is the best.

but hes terrible as a commentator although i nearly pissed myself laughing when neville creamed his pants last night on commentary

Beefy78

Gbear wrote: »

Really, punditry that actually gives some sort of insight is the least we should expect but unfortunately, most ex-footballers are too thick to be able to come up with anything useful.

I agree with your post but I don't think it's anything to do with their intelligence and is more to do with the low standards which people seem generally happy to accept from them.

We all know that come the Summer we'll be bombarded with pundits for BBC, ITV and RTE who have next to no knowledge of anyone playing outside of the Premier League.

batistuta9

Gbear wrote: »

It's hard to say the Neville is genuinely a "good" pundit when he's good in comparison to so much utter ****e on TV. The standard of football punditry is so low that even being competent stands out a mile.

martin keown's not bad

Beefy78 wrote: »

I agree with your post but I don't think it's anything to do with their intelligence and is more to do with the low standards which people seem generally happy to accept from them.

We all know that come the Summer we'll be bombarded with pundits for BBC, ITV and RTE who have next to no knowledge of anyone playing outside of the Premier League.

at least the BBC & ITV will have people who've played the game recently whereas the majority of RTE haven't played in years + bill knows nothing about football & the BBC usually get some new faces/foreigners in like desailly etc.

jens lehmann's doing a bit now wonder is he a mad doing it

Jimmy Iovine

batistuta9 wrote: »

at least the BBC & ITV will have people who've played the game recently whereas the majority of RTE haven't played in years + bill knows nothing about football & the BBC usually get some new faces/foreigners in like desailly etc.

Bill doesn't need to know anything about football. That's not his job. His job is to ask the questions that facilitate the answers/discussion. By asking something that we'd perceive as stupid, like "is it safe to say that Barcelona are finished?", he's giving the panellists an opportunity to pick him apart and show the viewers why Barcelona aren't finished. I think he's one of the best in the business at it and RTE will suffer tremendously when he retires.

Compare him to Lineker, who it can be assumed knows a lot about football having played at the highest level for years. He is pure thick. His contributions to the show consists of inane puns and little jokes that only Alan Hansen finds amusing. It's an insult to the viewers intelligence that he still has a job.

Alan Shearer is one of the greatest, if not the greatest, players to play in England in the last 20 years. That means absolutely nothing when he's put in front of the camera. He has severe problems articulating himself. He says "I seen" instead of "I saw". "I done" instead of "I did", and so on. He is speaking to 4/5 million each week, and a further 10 or so when England play, yet he is not able to string together a coherent sentence. Then there is the fact that he offers absolutely nothing in the shape of a half-decent opinion on the football. He is the single worst "pundit" on television at the moment. He makes Jamie "top, top, top" Redknapp look like a genius.

BBC is woeful for football coverage. It's essentially a way for former players to sit around and half a laugh and a few jokes in front of a couple of million people. This is where Bill is perfect. He would never allow Hansen or Shearer to become comfortable. Shearer would be humiliated if he went on RTE.

Gary Neville is the polar opposite of the BBC panel. He is articulate and is not afraid to speak his mind. His jokes are self-deprecating and most importantly they are funny and rare. His party piece is not his humour but his analysis, and it's pretty brilliant at times.

As for the foreigners point well RTE got in Hamann for the last World Cup and he was very, very good. I hope he's back for the Euros. The BBC got in Adebayor. His only contribution to the coverage was having his phone ring live on air. This provided a great opportunity for Shearer and Lineker to engage in some witty banter though so I suppose he wasn't all that bad.

Soups123

Never liked him as a player, but he's an excellent pundit I expect him to be biased but he not at all makes a lot of good points an improvement from the normal sky punditry.

I like himself, Keown, Haman & Souness

Beefy78

batistuta9 wrote: »

at least the BBC & ITV will have people who've played the game recently whereas the majority of RTE haven't played in years + bill knows nothing about football & the BBC usually get some new faces/foreigners in like desailly etc.

jens lehmann's doing a bit now wonder is he a mad doing it

The trouble with the guys on the BBC and ITV are (as well as all the issues Jimmy Iorvine brings up) that they're all either mates with the players or doing TV work but still planning on getting back into the game. So they're always unwilling to burn their bridges or criticise the guys who they'll be playing golf with in the week.

That's one thing I like about Paul Merson on Soccer Saturday. He can barely string a sentence together but he knows he's never getting another management job and he lives with his Mum and doesn't socialise with many players now so he just says what he wants.

The contrast between punditry in football and cricket is like night and day.

JoeA3

Beefy78 wrote: »

The trouble with the guys on the BBC and ITV are (as well as all the issues Jimmy Iorvine brings up) that they're all either mates with the players or doing TV work but still planning on getting back into the game. So they're always unwilling to burn their bridges or criticise the guys who they'll be playing golf with in the week.

This is why I expected Gary Neville to be terrible. He's only just retired, but even when he's analysing United games he stays relatively impartial! Maybe he has no real friends in the game? Maybe he has no interest in the management game.

Although it was funny the other day when he had to pick apart his own brother's performance (Look at Neville's positioning there!) in the lead up to one of United's goals :pac:

The only other pundit i enjoy listening to (for a valid opinion) is Ray Wilkins.
The 3 lads on RTE are great for a laugh and hyperbole.

Morzadec

RVP 11 wrote: »

The only other pundit i enjoy listening to (for a valid opinion) is Ray Wilkins.
The 3 lads on RTE are great for a laugh and hyperbole.

Lee Dixon does some great tactical analysis.

ANd while I agree that sometimes you have to take the RTE lads opinions with a pinch of salt, sometimes they do superb analysis of the game. Giles picked apart England's world Cup performance excellently in 2010 i remember

Morzadec

Morzadec wrote: »

Lee Dixon does some great tactical analysis.

ANd while I agree that sometimes you have to take the RTE lads opinions with a pinch of salt, sometimes they do superb analysis of the game. Giles picked apart England's world Cup performance excellently in 2010 i remember

I do enjoy the RTE lads but sometimes they go OTT just to be controversial.

Carlos_Ray

He's good, better than other sky news pundits, and better than many expected him to be, but as usual, people are losing the run of themselves. He's now being lauded as the best ever pundit in the history of the game.

Wow he says that players in the modern game look for penalties in and around the penalty area. What a revelation! Cue thousands of hits on YouTube as people are amazed that he said something that every football fan has been watching week in week out for ten years... Our standards are extremely low when it comes to football punditry.... *at the end of the day*

Morzadec

RVP 11 wrote: »

I do enjoy the RTE lads but sometimes they go OTT just to be controversial.

Oh of course, not arguing that at all.

Anyway back on topic, I'm a big fan of Neville's from what I've seen. His analysis on diving was excellent. And I like the fact that he let himself go and went over the top for Torres' goal

Frankie Lee

I thought he was a tiny bit racist the other night with his constant mentioning of the referee being Turkish and using that as a reason to be worried about his competency.

Beefy78

That isn't racism unless he thinks it's impossible for Turkish people to be good referees. It seems more likely that he's played in matches with Turkish officials before and has a low opinion of the standards of refereeing in that country.

Or he could be a massive racist, I suppose.

I'm sure he would say the same of any officials that aren't part of the FA.
Is that being racist?

Beefy78

He's commentated on several games this season where the referee wasn't part of the FA without questioning their ability so I'm sure he wouldn't say that.

elefant

Soldie wrote: »

Neville was hilarious last night.

A few links doing the rounds today.

http://vimeo.com/40998935

That was absolutely fantastic!

Ganymede Glow

Dont know if this has been posted yet but came accross this

Adolf Hipster

Dubit10 wrote: »

Can't stand him myself. Crap pundit.

Care to explain why you think he's a crap pundit other than your absolute hatred for all things to do with Man Utd?

Also, who would you say is a good pundit on tv, if Neville is not?

Dempsey

Gary Neville is getting the football punditry equivalent of the "Lee Carsley Syndrome"

batistuta9

Jimmy Iovine wrote: »

Bill doesn't need to know anything about football. That's not his job. His job is to ask the questions that facilitate the answers/discussion. By asking something that we'd perceive as stupid, like "is it safe to say that Barcelona are finished?", he's giving the panellists an opportunity to pick him apart and show the viewers why Barcelona aren't finished. I think he's one of the best in the business at it and RTE will suffer tremendously when he retires.

would you not expect the presenter of a type of program to know something about the subject? perhaps he could start presenting programs on a whole range of topics from super massive black holes to the colonisation of latin america

maybe it's a bit unfair to him saying he knows nothing about it but some of the questions he asks are stupid & even laughed at by the other people on screen. doesn't look great at all

and by stupid i don't mean the type of example you give above with "is it safe to say that Barcelona are finished?" - after a few defeats or bad run this could be said about any big club under their current management (wenger-arsenal, mancini-city, dalgleish-l'pool all this season) and it's usually an overreaction but now pep & barca may well be done.

he asks questions that are far worse than that at times, questions that really show him up. and i don't think the main presenter of a program is there to be picked apart either or to make the other panellists look intelligent on the subject by asking ridiculous questions

if he's the best RTE have to host a program then as they say in the country of the blind the one-eyed man is king

Jimmy Iovine wrote: »

Compare him to Lineker, who it can be assumed knows a lot about football having played at the highest level for years. He is pure thick. His contributions to the show consists of inane puns and little jokes that only Alan Hansen finds amusing. It's an insult to the viewers intelligence that he still has a job.

Alan Shearer is one of the greatest, if not the greatest, players to play in England in the last 20 years. That means absolutely nothing when he's put in front of the camera. He has severe problems articulating himself. He says "I seen" instead of "I saw". "I done" instead of "I did", and so on. He is speaking to 4/5 million each week, and a further 10 or so when England play, yet he is not able to string together a coherent sentence. Then there is the fact that he offers absolutely nothing in the shape of a half-decent opinion on the football. He is the single worst "pundit" on television at the moment. He makes Jamie "top, top, top" Redknapp look like a genius.

BBC is woeful for football coverage. It's essentially a way for former players to sit around and half a laugh and a few jokes in front of a couple of million people. This is where Bill is perfect. He would never allow Hansen or Shearer to become comfortable. Shearer would be humiliated if he went on RTE.

i think the puns are scripted to be fair, he seems to be reading from the autocue but that would be down to the production team on MOTD & so would the style of the BBC's football shows where linker or whoever don't press the pundits, just ask for their opinion and listen, ask another question & listen, and even if it was bill he'd have to do the same. it's probably not a case of lineker or whoever letting them be comfortable its the way the show is done

as for shearer, well maybe he should go for elocution lessons with clarke carlisle, how he becomes a better pundit; who knows

Jimmy Iovine wrote: »

Gary Neville is the polar opposite of the BBC panel. He is articulate and is not afraid to speak his mind. His jokes are self-deprecating and most importantly they are funny and rare. His party piece is not his humour but his analysis, and it's pretty brilliant at times.

As for the foreigners point well RTE got in Hamann for the last World Cup and he was very, very good. I hope he's back for the Euros. The BBC got in Adebayor. His only contribution to the coverage was having his phone ring live on air. This provided a great opportunity for Shearer and Lineker to engage in some witty banter though so I suppose he wasn't all that bad.

yes g.neville is good but as for the jokes i don't think one of the most hated men in english football would suddenly start getting away with making jokes at other peoples expense, he's trying to build bridges/come across as likeable - sort of like the way some overweight people slag themselves off, if you know what i mean

RTE also got in ossie ardiles who should only be signed or bought back again if he comes with subtitles, BBC got adebayor, well the WC was in south africa and who would have though an african would have some insight into some of the african teams, they has various others as well as adeybayor but i can't remember too much about what it was like now tbh apart from some annoying video clips about S.A with dan walker on a bus

Jimmy Iovine

batistuta9 wrote: »

would you not expect the presenter of a type of program to know something about the subject? perhaps he could start presenting programs on a whole range of topics from super massive black holes to the colonisation of latin america

maybe it's a bit unfair to him saying he knows nothing about it but some of the questions he asks are stupid & even laughed at by the other people on screen. doesn't look great at all

and by stupid i don't mean the type of example you give above with "is it safe to say that Barcelona are finished?" - after a few defeats or bad run this could be said about any big club under their current management (wenger-arsenal, mancini-city, dalgleish-l'pool all this season) and it's usually an overreaction but now pep & barca may well be done.

he asks questions that are far worse than that at times, questions that really show him up. and i don't think the main presenter of a program is there to be picked apart either or to make the other panellists look intelligent on the subject by asking ridiculous questions

if he's the best RTE have to host a program then as they say in the country of the blind the one-eyed man is king

I think you're woefully underestimating Bill here. He knows exactly what he's doing. I'm pretty sure he knows more about football than a lot of people here. He has been reporting on it on a near weekly basis for 20+ years now.

He may very well ask stupid questions but that's his job. He has to ask the ridiculous questions so he can elicit a response from the panellists.

He is by far the best presenter RTE have, and he would be the best if he went to Sky, BBC or ITV. The others don't hold a candle to him. Richard Keys was the king for a few years. Everyone thought he was great but he was really rubbish. His style of presenting involved him looking at the camera while he asked a pretty basic question to Jamie of Andy.

He never pressed them on anything. If he did then it was for a mere second and then he'd move on. He was all flash and no substance. Jeff Stelling is a far better presenter in my opinion than him, but even still there is a lot of room for improvement. Jeff is more suited to Soccer Saturday.

batistuta9 wrote: »

i think the puns are scripted to be fair, he seems to be reading from the autocue but that would be down to the production team on MOTD & so would the style of the BBC's football shows where linker or whoever don't press the pundits, just ask for their opinion and listen, ask another question & listen, and even if it was bill he'd have to do the same. it's probably not a case of lineker or whoever letting them be comfortable its the way the show is done

as for shearer, well maybe he should go for elocution lessons with clarke carlisle, how he becomes a better pundit; who knows

Of course they are scripted. That doesn't mean that he has no part to play in them though. I'm pretty sure that he is involved with the production team and he definitely gets a look at the script so that he isn't saying something he doesn't want to.

I don't think it's a case of the BBC not allowing him to change the format, I'd say a lot of it has to do with him not being bothered to change. He has it very easy. Talk for 2 hours one night a week and pocket a few million. Add into it that you don't have to think up of any hard questions and that you are talking to your mates (who are pretty slow and wouldn't understand a hard question anyway) and you have the perfect job.

He doesn't want to go outside his comfort zone as much as he doesn't want to make either of the Alans go outside theirs. It's sad that the British public accept this kind of analysis as the best in the business. I haven't watched it in years. It's really bad. Shearer is the worst pundit but Hansen is the most annoying. He never tries, scoffs at people if they try to analyse the tactics and he just looks as smug as anything up on the screen.

batistuta9 wrote: »

yes g.neville is good but as for the jokes i don't think one of the most hated men in english football would suddenly start getting away with making jokes at other peoples expense, he's trying to build bridges/come across as likeable - sort of like the way some overweight people slag themselves off, if you know what i mean

Maybe he is. It's a huge improvement on the presenting style of Andy Gray though. I thought he was great when I was very young. Then I realised how much spray he spoke and how little incisive analysis he really did.

Him and Keys were almost as smug as Hansen. I'm delighted that they were cut down to size over the whole sexist remarks scandal. It was needed really. They had become too comfortable in Sky and the shows were becoming far too stale. A change was much needed.

am i bovvered

Never liked him as a player but have to say I think he is great on sky.

stealinhorses

Yeah, I enjoy listening to his opinions on MNF, has a great knowledge of the game not only on the pitch, but also in the dressing room.

Hank Scorpio

Best pundit, very unbiased tonight again

Mr Alan

Not criticising the team selection from Ferguson tonight & actually defending it was a rare blot against his record as a pundit IMO. Still an excellent pundit mind.

Oat23

I hadn't watched him in studio before tonight (for longer than a few seconds anyway!) but I thought he was very good! Much better than Andy Gray and those other ones.

Mr Alan

He's a different league to those clowns tbf.

Paul Tergat

You could tell he was really hurting tonight but stayed professional again

missingtime

The whole fergie would hate to lose on goal difference is very interesting.

Rekop dog

Paul Tergat wrote: »

You could tell he was really hurting tonight but stayed professional again

Calling QPR a non-entity was far from professional. The sole purpose he did that was to rile them up in their game against City on the last day. Obv picked up a few amatuer psychology tricks down the years from Fergie.

Mr Alan

Rekop dog wrote: »

Calling QPR a non-entity was far from professional. The sole purpose he did that was to rile them up in their game against City on the last day. Obv picked up a few amatuer psychology tricks down the years from Fergie.

I think you're reading into it a little too much.

He said it shouldn't be a major hurdle for City after seeing them at Stamford Bridge where they were a non entity.

Fair comment.

Rekop dog

Mr Alan wrote: »

Rekop dog wrote: »

Calling QPR a non-entity was far from professional. The sole purpose he did that was to rile them up in their game against City on the last day. Obv picked up a few amatuer psychology tricks down the years from Fergie.

I think you're reading into it a little too much.

He said it shouldn't be a major hurdle for City after seeing them at Stamford Bridge where they were a non entity.

Fair comment.

No he was talking about City's remaining games saying they're favourites, Newcastle next week and then play QPR on the last day who are a non entity. He then went on to talk about their performance against Chelsea.

Mr Alan

Pretty sure he tied the non entity comment directly into their performance against Chelsea & how poor they were.