BT Sport

Nah, it really is worse. It's very clear they all go in for this everyman down the pub angle and fancy themselves as fans where ‘not understanding’ is somehow deemed insight. You shouldn't need Peter Walton there to explain decisions, they should all know the laws, and you shouldn't need to be an ex player to talk about the game at the basic level they do. They're there because they should understand the game at a level we don’t. I’m genuinely starting to think managers might talk to their players about passion and desire and wanting it more, because the ex pros have feck all else to offer.

Compare it to any other sport‘s coverage and the banality of football coverage is really apparent.

Good post, and I completely agree. As an example, listening to Atherton, Hussein, Key etc on Sky's cricket coverage, you feel they are communicating genuine insights about the game which the average viewer (or even most keen fans), wouldn't have appreciated for themselves. The large majority of football pundits merely describe what you've just watched, and resort to tired cliches whilst doing so.
 
To be fair to BT, Moore is a lifelong Portsmouth fan who enjoys a dig at Southampton.
But he's spot on though. BBC did point to the challenge as being crucial and then the ruthlessness of the finishing instead of VAR
 
I haven't watched a after game analysis for atleast a decade.
Granted I hear SKY do a decent show of it but, in the main, I never feel like I'm missing out of anything amazingly insightful, especially when your pundits are Rio, Owen, Scholes and Sherwood.
 
While we're on the subject of pundits trying to fabricate controversy, it's long overdue that Sky replace Geoff Shreeves as their post-match interviewer. That cnut can suck the life out of any victory for a player or manager with some truly bizarre questions. Always trying to stir something up.
 
I haven't watched a after game analysis for atleast a decade.
Granted I hear SKY do a decent show of it but, in the main, I never feel like I'm missing out of anything amazingly insightful, especially when your pundits are Rio, Owen, Scholes and Sherwood.
True that. I like to stick around to get Ole's comments but I don't care too much for what anyone else has to say. I can form my own opinion.
 
City win 3-0 and all you hear is how they're the best team in Europe right now, no one plays better football, heir to the crown, all that bollocks. United win 9-0, let's talk for 15 minutes solid about VAR and red cards because that red card and penalty at 6-0 was a match-defining moment.
 
City win 3-0 and all you hear is how they're the best team in Europe right now, no one plays better football, heir to the crown, all that bollocks. United win 9-0, let's talk for 15 minutes solid about VAR and red cards because that red card and penalty at 6-0 was a match-defining moment.
It's infuriating. They deliberately try to take the joy out of any United win by looking for the slightest little reason the other team were badly done to. Last night they were really clutching at straws.
 
While we're on the subject of pundits trying to fabricate controversy, it's long overdue that Sky replace Geoff Shreeves as their post-match interviewer. That cnut can suck the life out of any victory for a player or manager with some truly bizarre questions. Always trying to stir something up.

Just ask Branislav Ivanovic
 
It's infuriating. They deliberately try to take the joy out of any United win by looking for the slightest little reason the other team were badly done to. Last night they were really clutching at straws.
I don't get it to be honest? I also feel like the general public mostly accepts VAR now for what it is, we know how it works even if we don't understand all the refereeing decisions still. It doesn't matter if someone is 1mm offside, guess what? They're offside.

But for some reason, the media, which is mostly ex-players and dinosaurs, think everything is a travesty and VAR is to blame so they keep pushing this narrative.

The ref calls a penalty because he thought there was contact, VAR says "you might want to take a look, it looks minimal". Ref checks, stands by his decision, penalty stands. Where is the fecking controversy in that?
 
Trouble with Jake Humphries is that he thinks he is one of the pundits. He keeps butting in with his opinion when it is the pundits opinion that people tune in to hear. I am actually impressed with Kelly Cates on Sky ( I know she is Kenny' daughter), she will put a question out there and let the pundits discuss it, then when that is done, moves onto the next point. That is professional.
 
Good post, and I completely agree. As an example, listening to Atherton, Hussein, Key etc on Sky's cricket coverage, you feel they are communicating genuine insights about the game which the average viewer (or even most keen fans), wouldn't have appreciated for themselves. The large majority of football pundits merely describe what you've just watched, and resort to tired cliches whilst doing so.

Yep, cricket (and those three actually!) is one sport that really highlights footballs failings, but the cricket broadcasters are helped by the nature of the game which gives them a lot more time to fill and to analysis and draw out less obvious things.

Still, you can tell Hussain and Atherton spot something about a batsman's technique within two or three deliveries. There's no comparitive football pundit who seems to be able to spot trends or patterns of play so quickly, hence the need to react with clichés and descriptive analysis.
 
I don't get it to be honest? I also feel like the general public mostly accepts VAR now for what it is, we know how it works even if we don't understand all the refereeing decisions still. It doesn't matter if someone is 1mm offside, guess what? They're offside.

But for some reason, the media, which is mostly ex-players and dinosaurs, think everything is a travesty and VAR is to blame so they keep pushing this narrative.

The ref calls a penalty because he thought there was contact, VAR says "you might want to take a look, it looks minimal". Ref checks, stands by his decision, penalty stands. Where is the fecking controversy in that?

Without VAR it would still have been a penalty and red card and they’d have still been complaining. Cavani would also have had a penalty, which I’m sure they’d have reviewed 40 times had it been given.
 
They will probably still mention that penalty decision last night amidst the post match reaction.
 
Great stuff from Joleon Lescott there. Liverpool are still in the title race, but Utd aren’t, apparently.
 
Great stuff from Joleon Lescott there. Liverpool are still in the title race, but Utd aren’t, apparently.

"not capable of going on a run"

Lost one EPL game in 16 matches, I don't mind. We will just carry on to the next game Everton - tough game
 
Congratulations to the co-commentator for the Leeds-Everton game. God knows who he was but he was a complete moron.
 
They will probably still mention that penalty decision last night amidst the post match reaction.

Weirdly they were getting onto every MAnutd VAR decision but no mention of the foul that should have been a pen on Cavani but was given outside the box. ... hmmm
 
They get a lot of stick but the Manager Mode function on the iOS app is fantastic. Real time player tracking and tactical overview in a non-obtrusive way. It’s like a football video game but for real life. Wonderful.

Their app is 10000x better than anything Sky Go can offer. Sky Go is the worst app ever written on PC.
 
They actually went back and revisited the Bednarek incident again, before going off air. :lol:
 
Welcome to the Europa League on their advert, you cheeky little feckers
 
Trouble with Jake Humphries is that he thinks he is one of the pundits. He keeps butting in with his opinion when it is the pundits opinion that people tune in to hear. I am actually impressed with Kelly Cates on Sky ( I know she is Kenny' daughter), she will put a question out there and let the pundits discuss it, then when that is done, moves onto the next point. That is professional.
Agreed on both points. Jake Humphries is a bit of a smarmy git anyway, but he definitely fancies himself as one of the lads rather than just the presenter. He's even included on the pre-match predictions along with the pundits. The CL coverage is a lot more tolerable, mainly because he's replaced by the much more likeable Gary Lineker, and the 'ladz' rhetoric makes way for some actual analysis. Rio is a good pundit, Hargreaves is decent, and less Robbie Savage is a bonus as well.
 
All programming has been cancelled and they will talk about VAR for the rest of the day despite it being correct.
 
Just said on BT this bad run should be taken into context Liverpool are playing without TEN, yes TEN first team players. What the duck is this nonsense I keep hearing.
 
Just said on BT this bad run should be taken into context Liverpool are playing without TEN, yes TEN first team players. What the duck is this nonsense I keep hearing.
Maybe they re counting Alison and Thiago too :))