Pundits focussing on penalty decisions

[Captain...]

It seems that after every match half the analysis is on the officials and their decision making.

Is it just me or is it so much worse this season, and am I the only one getting bored of seeing supposed experts on the game giving no insight and just talk about reffing decisions. I like the ssn feature with the ref as it is at least inside info, even if he is sometimes talking shit.

I just find over analysis of every 50/50 decision just so dull, I blame managers for bringing up these decisions constantly in post match interviews.

Is it just me?

[davieG]

It seems that after every match half the analysis is on the officials and their decision making.

Is it just me or is it so much worse this season, and am I the only one getting bored of seeing supposed experts on the game giving no insight and just talk about reffing decisions. I like the ssn feature with the ref as it is at least inside info, even if he is sometimes talking shit.

I just find over analysis of every 50/50 decision just so dull, I blame managers for bringing up these decisions constantly in post match interviews.

Is it just me?

I think it's  worse because some of the 'big' teams are under performing so unless it's  one of their big signings scoring they don't seem that interested in analysing the goals and play of the lesser teams.

[AyewJoking]

i thought a big reason the whole referee system isnt addressed (no matter how poor it gets) is because it provides talking points???

[Captain...]

i thought a big reason the whole referee system isnt addressed (no matter how poor it gets) is because it provides talking points???

That is a very cynical point of view, which if true would really question the integrity of football.

[AyewJoking]

That is a very cynical point of view, which if true would really question the integrity of football.

 

theres no question about it

[Strokes]

It seems that after every match half the analysis is on the officials and their decision making.

Is it just me or is it so much worse this season, and am I the only one getting bored of seeing supposed experts on the game giving no insight and just talk about reffing decisions. I like the ssn feature with the ref as it is at least inside info, even if he is sometimes talking shit.

I just find over analysis of every 50/50 decision just so dull, I blame managers for bringing up these decisions constantly in post match interviews.

Is it just me?

I switch off as soon as the final whistle has gone, I cant stand the analysis these days. I skip the punditry on motd too.

[Guest Electric Yetis]

I switch off as soon as the final whistle has gone, I cant stand the analysis these days. I skip the punditry on motd too.

Exactly the same. I don't need someone to tell me what I've just seen.

[Strokes]

Exactly the same. I don't need someone to tell me what I've just seen.

Its not like they don't replay any major incident during the game, its no wonder we all end up with dementia.

[Dan]

It's been going on years. I cannot believe there's another country who's footballing media is so unfocused on actual football.

[Guest ttfn]

It seems that after every match half the analysis is on the officials and their decision making.

Is it just me or is it so much worse this season, and am I the only one getting bored of seeing supposed experts on the game giving no insight and just talk about reffing decisions. I like the ssn feature with the ref as it is at least inside info, even if he is sometimes talking shit.

I just find over analysis of every 50/50 decision just so dull, I blame managers for bringing up these decisions constantly in post match interviews.

Is it just me?

Absolutely agree. Said the same thing last night on the Premier League or MOTD thread.

I reckon half the analysis is now on referees alone. It's madness and has got to stop.

[StanSP]

i wouldn't even call it analysis. it's just replays of the same highlights and someone else telling us what happened

 

'great ball in to the box'

'[name] heads it in'

 

'great pass through'

'[name] goes round the keeper and scores'

 

telling us nothing insightful or analytical or something ither than which we already know.

[Corky]

MOTD in particular just tend to focus on what the manager has said in his post match interview. Manager says something, Gary says "we'll see what he meant" and little of the actual football is discussed.

[Stadt]

the pundits don't even know the rules in detail, it;s just their opinion

[ScouseFox]

should probs blame the refs not the pundits 

[Strokes]

should probs blame the refs not the pundits

If the pundits take the same views as the commentators, I think I'm more likely to agree with the ref.

[fuchsntf]

i wouldn't even call it analysis. it's just replays of the same highlights and someone else telling us what happened

 

'great ball in to the box'

'[name] heads it in'

 

'great pass through'

'[name] goes round the keeper and scores'

 

telling us nothing insightful or analytical or something ither than which we already know.

Something that has really gone to the dogs over the years, as been all sports commentary a cross the board.

Quite often they ramble on with their co-commentators, and miss describing important incidents/Action that have just happened.

The old ken Wolstenholm, and the great cricket commentator, whos name I have forgotten, were speaking together over their

proffesion, and the younger wanna bes coming through.

They came out with a statement that, they said should never be forgotten...

Keep up with the flow, but take the point, that your audience Are blind, and are listening on the radio. Too many are busy trying to come up with factual banter, instead of commentating on the action.First give the facts you see then your opinion.

Another thing is, in the good ol days.. (sorry) I prefered to listen to the radio commentary, than the TV rumblings.

[Kitchandro]

You can't blame the managers alone when it's the interviewers who will ask them direct questions about the refereeing performance or a certain decision in every single post match interview without fail. Controversy is entertainment and they love to stir that up.

 

The analysis is a total waste of time anyway. I couldn't care less what Niall Quinn thinks of our performance because he's an idiot. Or anyone else's performance. If I've seen the game I can come to my own conclusions.

[StanSP]

Something that has really gone to the dogs over the years, as been all sports commentary a cross the board.

Quite often they ramble on with their co-commentators, and miss describing important incidents/Action that have just happened.

The old ken Wolstenholm, and the great cricket commentator, whos name I have forgotten, were speaking together over their

proffesion, and the younger wanna bes coming through.

They came out with a statement that, they said should never be forgotten...

Keep up with the flow, but take the point, that your audience Are blind, and are listening on the radio. Too many are busy trying to come up with factual banter, instead of commentating on the action.First give the facts you see then your opinion.

Another thing is, in the good ol days.. (sorry) I prefered to listen to the radio commentary, than the TV rumblings.

 

Richie Benaud by the sounds of it . Totally agree.

[Nod.E]

MOTD is missing Alan Hansen. Nowadays the likes of Alan Shearer and Danny Murphy state the obvious. 

The only pundits I have time for at the minute are Gary Neville, Jamie Carragher and Pat Nevin who actually analyse the dynamics of the football being played. Problem is, they'll never get the MOTD slot because their in-depth analysis doesn't appeal to the masses.

People would rather hear about fabricated controversies and hand bags. After all, this is the same population that is entertained by 'Made In Chelsea'!

[bovril]

Alan Shearer is atrocious. Jermaine Jenas can't speak English. Gullit is a classy bastard but makes little sense most of the time. Keown I quite like.