[Football] Joey Barton

[Van Cleef]

Always worth a watch.

 

[herecomesaregular]

I’m happy to take it on a case by case basis. Screechy commentators ARE a difficult listen - but not every female commentator falls into this. Vicky Sparks’ voice is awful IMO, but Pien Meulensteen is one of the best currently out there

I cannot stand how Vicki Sparks enuniciates /phrases her commentary and the emphasis she puts on certain words ... but it must be her training because I've noticed Murray does the same recently, and it's equally annoying - so it's not a female thing. It's so bad it drives me to the mute button.

 

[peterward]

“Fart parcel”

 

[Milano]

I cannot stand how Vicki Sparks enuniciates /phrases her commentary and the emphasis she puts on certain words ... but it must be her training because I've noticed Murray does the same recently, and it's equally annoying - so it's not a female thing. It's so bad it drives me to the mute button.

She is an appalling commentator, not because she’s female, but because she’s an appalling commentator. Her voice grates. That Clive Tyldsley is just as bad.

 

[Greg Bobkin]

I know the men's and women's games are classed as 'different', but it's still football, regardless of who is playing and who is talking about it. The fundamentals, tactics, skills and everything else are not exactly poles apart, so why is this stroker frothing about it?

Michael Johnson is an excellent pundit on women's athletics. Steve Bunce calls women's boxing matches just as well as men's ones. And Ian Wright talks with passion and knowledge when covering women's football. I bet Bellend Barton doesn't have an issue with any of them...

 

[Pevenseagull]

I like Alison Mitchell's cricket commentary

I saw her play in a charity game a few years ago and she was absolutely hopeless.

I don't know how relevant this is.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Many years ago I watched my first game of women's football on the telly, and posted a disparaging comment on NSC. I was defenestrated. Rightly so. I have subsequently recalibrated my prejudices. Because that was all it was. Prejudice.

My favourite DJ was John Peel. But what did he play? f***ing nothing. Not even the mandolin on Maggie May. Burn him. BURN him. Burn.

Or perhaps not. After all.

 

[slimes]

Mute button..

Whilst female commentators are on..
I've also noticed that half of the male commentators (ex footballers) are dreadfull too..

 

[schmunk]

on the other side on the more prestigious game you had Steve McMannaman who had referred to Benjamin Mendy as 'Mondy' for an entire champions league campaign,

That's how it's correctly pronounced.

 

[Lethargic]

I don't really see any issue women commentators are just as bad as men, seems fair to me.

 

[Horses Arse]

Many years ago I watched my first game of women's football on the telly, and posted a disparaging comment on NSC. I was defenestrated. Rightly so. I have subsequently recalibrated my prejudices. Because that was all it was. Prejudice.

My favourite DJ was John Peel. But what did he play? f***ing nothing. Not even the mandolin on Maggie May. Burn him. BURN him. Burn.

Or perhaps not. After all.

Were your windows returned.

 

[Hotchilidog]

There are good commentators and bad commentators. Some are men some are women. Barton is specifically ripping into those he doesn't like because they are women, he is a complete and utter bellend. Just cheap headline grabbing nonsense from a complete no-mark.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

There are good commentators and bad commentators. Some are men some are women. Barton is specifically ripping into those he doesn't like because they are women, he is a complete and utter bellend. Just cheap headline grabbing nonsense from a complete no-mark.

Is the correct answer.

 

[Milano]

I pine for the old commentators like Barry Davies, a wordsmith who could string a sentence together and could cope with words of more than two syllables.
The only one even close today is Sam Materface IMO, he seems to actually research all teams not just the big 6 and actually has a vocabulary higher than 50 words.

 

[Happy Exile]

I pine for the old commentators like Barry Davies, a wordsmith who could string a sentence together and could cope with words of more than two syllables.
The only one even close today is Sam Materface IMO, he seems to actually research all teams not just the big 6 and actually has a vocabulary higher than 50 words.

I've no strong opinion on commentary and would love the option to turn it off and just have crowd noise, but I agree Sam Matterface is good. I heard him recently hosting a sports radio show rather than doing commentary, which I don't know if he does frequently or not, but he was better than 99% of presenters at doing that too.

 

[trueblue]

I haven't really read what Barton said as the little bit I did seemed unnecessarily disrespectful, but there is a more mature conversation to be had. Not about whether women should be involved in covering men's football (of course they should) but in which roles. A lot of people don't draw the distinction.

Presenters and reporters have never been required to have played the game at the highest level as the role is - or should be - journalistic. They're the viewers' representative in the whole thing. The key requirement is to ask good questions of those who've been there and done it, on behalf of the fans. You could argue that NOT being a former footballer is actually a good thing in these roles but, of course, some ex-pros (male and female) are strong on the journalism side of things too.

Pundits are entirely different. Their role is meant to be offering insight, which can only be gained from their personal experience. Historically, a male lower league footballer would not get a sniff of working as a pundit on a Premier League or European game in that role as they hadn't played at that level. Personally I don't think that on a men's international, for instance, someone who played for England Women's team offers the same insight as someone who played for England's men. And FWIW vice-versa. They may well have a lot of knowledge but they simply cannot tell you what it's like to have been there and done it in that standard of football.

Ultimately, I suppose the viewers will decide as the defining factor is "Do I care what these 3 people think?". With so much football on TV now, the talent pool is inevitably watered down. I reach for the 'off' button more often than not but each to their own.

 

[trueblue]

The problem with Barton's critique is that it relies upon an assumption that, before female ex footballers got involved, the male pundits were providing worthwhile insight, instead of just moaning that referees have never played the game and gently ribbing each other about their own playing careers like sad old drunks in a golf club bar.

The problem is not the gender of the ex pros, it's that they're all ex pros and being good at football doesn't make you good at communicating.

You can trace a lot of that to having ex-pros as reporters and presenters though. A good journalist like Des Lynam or Jim Rosenthal would not allow it to descend too far into banter. They'd keep asking pertinent questions. As somebody else mentioned, this is why Mark Chapman makes MOTD2 very watchable - even if he still gets a bit bantery from time to time.

 

[BBassic]

Pundits are entirely different. Their role is meant to be offering insight, which can only be gained from their personal experience.

Agree on the role of the pundit but not that their experience is the only place to garner insight.

I'd rather have someone like Jonathan Wilson, who's entire career has been devoted to analysing and dissecting football, acting as a pundit than someone like Michael Owen. I can guarantee Wilson has more to say about tactics than Steve McManaman.

 

[Deportivo Seagull]

if Barton says he doesn’t rate female pundits then clearly they must be doing a great job.

He thinks he some intellectual genius but in reality he’s the shouty twat in the pub.

 

[trueblue]

Agree on the role of the pundit but not that their experience is the only place to garner insight.

I'd rather have someone like Jonathan Wilson, who's entire career has been devoted to analysing and dissecting football, acting as a pundit than someone like Michael Owen. I can guarantee Wilson has more to say about tactics than Steve McManaman.

I’ve watched and been around football for about 4 decades. I wouldn’t for a second think I have an iota of the knowledge of a Premier League manager, but would happily ask them questions about coaching/tactics etc for hours. I’d also find it more fascinatin to learn from someone who’s been to the very top and played for Real Madrid and Liverpool than an author, no matter how much they’ve studied it. It’s like Michael Cox the other day in the Athletic criticising RDZ’s approach at Chelsea, taking no account of the circumstances. All sounds great and it’s dead easy in theory.

I’m sure Jonathan Wilson with his track record is way ahead of the wealth of self-appointed ‘experts’ now doing the rounds. I also think he’d be very interesting in a piece talking broadly about tactics across different clubs and eras. Talking on a specific, single match having to consider tactics as they unfold on the fly and the fact 11 different human beings are involved and need to be managed… wouldn’t be that interested in his assessment.