Token women commentators in men’rt

The Phantom Jipper wrote: »

I actually don't mind it at all. Rarely do I watch Match of the Day or a Champions League match and find that I'm being giving unique insights by the likes of Alan Shearer or Jim Beglin etc, so why not hear some other voices every once in a while. If you go in thinking these people are "token" women, I suspect that probably colours how you perceive what they're saying from the start.

It's not a gender thing though...if you are into the punditry you will want to hear from people who have lived at the highest level of the game....women aren't anywhere near that.....

If they included an amateur or a 15 year bloke it would be the same....but because it's a woman we aren't supposed to question it.

That is of course, if you are into punditry!!!

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

I like women’s sport I watch their golf and occasionally football, but the game is different in both cases due to strength and durability, women’s pundits for women’s sport and men’s for men’s makes more sense imo

You're silly. 'rt

Silentcorner wrote: »

It's not a gender thing though...if you are into the punditry you will want to hear from people who have lived at the highest level of the game....women aren't anywhere near that.....

If they included an amateur or a 15 year bloke it would be the same....but because it's a woman we aren't supposed to question it.

That is of course, if you are into punditry!!!

What does it matter the difference in sports, most sports journalists don't even play the sport they write about, certainly not at the top level, most film critics don't make films. The "token" females pundits are way more qualified to talk about these sports than 99% of the lads watching them.

Silentcorner wrote: »

It's not a gender thing though...if you are into the punditry you will want to hear from people who have lived at the highest level of the game....women aren't anywhere near that.....

If they included an amateur or a 15 year bloke it would be the same....but because it's a woman we aren't supposed to question it.

That is of course, if you are into punditry!!!

But that isn't borne out by reality. I can mainly only speak to soccer punditry but generally it tends to revolve around "what a goal that was" level of insights. Playing the game at a high level has helped very few of these people to provide interesting, cogent analysis. I want to learn things about the game, I don't care if that comes from a Champions League winner or some woman I've never heard of who played for Arsenal ladies.

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

100% tokens

I disagree. If they weren't better than the alternative then yes I could see how it would be a token gesture but they're far better at what they do and.are there on merit.

If they have played the sport then them being pundits etc is fine with me. Theres plenty of ex men players that do punditry that shouldn't be allowed near a studio

Leg End Reject wrote: »

I just made that up!

It probably is some some bull**** rubbish like that though.

Silentcorner wrote: »

Why are they more qualified? Who are they more qualified than, professionals many of whom have spent over 30 years surviving in a highly competitive professional environment?

And this isn't about journalists, this is about punditry....and credibility!

I said who they were more qualified than. The lads watching, you and me, the ordinary Joe. They're not women they've plucked off the street. Of course it's completely pointless discussing qualifications because there's no such thing for punditry (AFAIK) all that matters is whether they know what they're talking about and even that in itself is completely subjective. I've no doubt there's a level of tokenism to it but so long as they justify their place on the panel I don't see why not. Men's and women's football are not that different anyway.

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

My point is men’s physical sport and females physical sport is different, games like darts snooker and horse racing the exceptions, but even then there is no contest really it’s the natural law

The physical game might be on a different level. If the female pundits are watching a male game then they are seeing exactly what male pundits are seeing and giving their opinion which is exactly what the male pundits are doing

Silentcorner wrote: »

Would you expect a 15 year old boy or an Amateur to have the same knowledge of the game as a man who played over 20 years at the highest level of the game do you think....should there be more 15 year old's on the punditry couch?

I don't even understand why token presenters are included...wouldn't women in sport be much better served if we could actually watch women play and form a culture around a sport that we don't see every single week of every single year....I'd be all for that!!!

Are you really comparing the likes of Alex Scott to a 15 year old boy?

Watching the Sunday Game now and they have a woman as a pundit. The two other lads on the panel arent even looking at her whilst they talk to eachother about hurling