City ladies do it better

[Eaststand]

No you dont.

However, while I respect the views of some on here about football, I would think it was a fucking joke if SKY was paying one of us to be a pundit on Premier League games.

[Basualdo]

Pundits are a Russian roulette in reverse of a thing at the best of times.
Stick five shit for brains piss dribbler ex pros in the barrel and one decent guy and pull the trigger and hope for the best.
Add women to the mix and you're lengthening the possibly retarded odds by a hell of a lot.
Saying that there is absolutely no reason why they shouldn't be presenters as much as men.
Who would you rather look at, Childs, Chapman, snide, arrogant, party wanker Lineker or Nat Sawyer?

[Eaststand]

No, presenters are different though.

Theyre not billed as "experts".

[Zambo]

No you dont.

However, while I respect the views of some on here about football, I would think it was a fucking joke if SKY was paying one of us to be a pundit on Premier League games.

At the end of the day, pundits give an opinion which you may or not agree with. I record MOD and ffwd through the drivel that the likes of Shearer and Lineker come out with. Does anyone really need to be told what they give just seen over and over again. Moreover, the ignorance that most ex players display about the laws of the game is embarrassing.

How much do these tossers get paid?

[Eaststand]

Thats not the point. If you're going to have experts, make sure they are experts at playing the game at the highest level.

Thats why you cant unironically call an ex woman player an expert on the premier league, because the highest level they played at was male under 14s.

[Zambo]

Thats not the point. If you're going to have experts, make sure they are experts at playing the game at the highest level.

Thats why you cant unironically call an ex woman player an expert on the premier league, because the highest level they played at was male under 14s.

My point is that playing the game at the highest level doesn't make you an expert, particularly if you are thick as shit like Shearer. I could quite easily talk anyone through all of the controversial incidents in today's Premier Leauge programme and give an opinion. I could also review all goals scored and comment on where the defences fucked up. I could then finish up by giving an assessment on all referee performances.

The highest level I played at was Midland Comb and Wessex League, but I could do a better job than the likes of Shearer, so the point stands. You don't have played at the top to know what's gone on.

[Eaststand]

Thats not the point. If you're going to have experts, make sure they are experts at playing the game at the highest level.

Thats why you cant unironically call an ex woman player an expert on the premier league, because the highest level they played at was male under 14s.

My point is that playing the game at the highest level doesn't make you an expert, particularly if you are thick as shit like Shearer. I could quite easily talk anyone through all of the controversial incidents in today's Premier Leauge programme and give an opinion. I could also review all goals scored and comment on where the defences fucked up. I could then finish up by giving an assessment on all referee performances.

The highest level I played at was Midland Comb and Wessex League, but I could do a better job than the likes of Shearer, so the point stands. You don't have played at the top to know what's gone on.

No, some guy who worked for IBM being classed as an expert on football by SKY would look stupid.

He might be thick as fuck, they all might, but they actually are experts on the premier league from a players perspective (the sole reason they are there to give an insight from that point of view) thats not something you and your armchair opinions can ever replicate.

Same with womens pundits. Playing to the standard of having a kick about in a car park doesnt make you an expert on playing in the premier league.

[Zambo]

It would only look stupid because it's a given that you have to have to have played at that level to have a respected opinion on it which is a load of cack. You can study a subject and have just s valid opinion on something as someone who has had the ability to perform at that level.

This subject has come up on several occasions referee society meetings over the years. Assessors can only assess referees up to the level that they themselves performed, which is another load of cobs. If you've been a mentor, instructor, examiner etc you can assess any ref at any level.

[Eaststand]

No, it looks stupid no matter what.

Binmen can't give expert analysis on F1 because they drive a truck around.

[Zambo]

No, it looks stupid no matter what.

Binmen can't give expert analysis on F1 because they drive a truck around.

It's only ridiculous because of closed minds. Anyone can be an expert on football, and a binman can be an expert on F1 if he studies it. He doesn't have to take part in a Grand Prix. Of course experience is valuable, but it's a mistake to say that is the only criteria for selection as a pundit.

[Eaststand]

It is one of the main criteria.

Thats why This Morning has a real doctor giving out medical advice instead of some guy whos read a bit of webMD.com, it looks bizarre people whove got no experience in something pretending to be an expert.

[Zambo]

It has been proven time after time that just selecting ex players, probably because they aren't good enough to be a manager, or don't fancy this hassle, leads to poor punditry. The greatest manager and the special one didn't make it as a player. Neither did Wenger. Neither did Ferguson.

You can't say that great footballers make good managers. You can't say footballers who don't make the top won't make good managers, and you can't say only players who have got to the top make good pundits.

What other reason was Shearer selected, other than he scored a lot of goals and he fancied being a pundit. He is being paid shedloads of licence payers money and he's no good at it.

[Eaststand]

What are you talking about? Theres loads of good pundits, and bad ones too.

And the thing Alex Scott makes you realise, is how much insight even the supposedly shit ones have. She knows nothing about playing football at a high level and it shows, the cliches, the ultra bland just read in the sun soundbites, next to a dimwit like her PRETENDING she knows what playing at a high level is all about, you notice a real footballers totally different perspective. She and redknapp were on together the other day, and he showed her up endlessly, and I dont like Redknapp, but when you put him next to someone who doesnt really know what theyre talking about, it looks moronic, because he wasnt trying to make her look stupid, he just did.

Look I know fucking shitloads about football. theres not much I dont know about, I love the game. But stuff Ive read and learned is nothing compared to stuff experienced.

[Zambo]

It's narrow minded to say that only ex players who have participated at the highest level make good pundits. I've just given you of examples why that restricted way of thinking doesn't stack up. What about recruiting a couple of top football journalists. They can't be any worse than the likes of Owen, Neville, Crooks and Lawrenson.

Experience playing the game quite obviously doesn't necessarily mean you are going to be a good pundit. Time they looked elsewhere.

[Eaststand]

I know, lets just let people whove read about stock and shares on the internet talk about it when the news needs a talking head for that subject as well.

And I dont know if you know, they do let journalists talk about football on SKY and talksport.


Darren Lewis is a fucking retard. John Cross more so. Way more clueless than a footballer, even Merson.