I think you're both missing the point of what im saying. If its all good i dont want a big back and forth on this, ive done it before and it tends to attract a predictable range of posts (not from you both, but it seems to be a very triggering topic for people who just go 0 to 100).
Duffer, Jeff Stelling is a presenter, commentators are commentators. I am not talking about these, and there are good female presenters (though ive yet to hear a good female commentator.) I am specifically talking about the pundit in the studio who is there to offer the viewer an insight from a players point of view. Many of those currently arent very good at it - thats not what im arguing either - but take for example Daniel Sturridge, an abysmal pundit - he can still speak with more 'authority' on the mens game than a woman, or me. This leads on to KeanoMagicHat point - the existence of countless awful pundits who arre male ex players, doesnt disprove anything. Just that TV hires some terrible pundits. But where authority is concerned, Im going to listen to Nesta's opinion on how a PL defender might have prevented a goal, before I'll listen to the latest 'Lioness' that's hauled on. I'll listen to Shay Given talking about a goalkeeper stuggling for form one million times before I'll want Mary Earps opinion on it. I do not want to hear Alex Scott telling us how an international mens defender should be doing something better.
The thing that seems to muddy waters is that plenty of men, myself included, like to sit around in pubs and stadiums talking like we know what we're talking about - and some of them might well be insightful, articulate and engaging. But they still shouldnt be near a television screen above even, yes even, daniel sturridge. They shouldnt be there above a woman whos played professional womens football either, and she shouldnt be there above D Studge. Sturridge for example, shouldnt be on television in that capacity, but thats not really relevant to the point.