Carragher, Neville & MNF On Sky

26-04-2012 01:29PM

I'm sure he would say the same of any officials that aren't part of the FA.
Is that being racist?

Beefy78 · 26-04-2012 01:36PM

He's commentated on several games this season where the referee wasn't part of the FA without questioning their ability so I'm sure he wouldn't say that.

elefant · 26-04-2012 02:05PM

Soldie wrote: »

Neville was hilarious last night.

A few links doing the rounds today.

http://vimeo.com/40998935

That was absolutely fantastic!

Ganymede Glow · 26-04-2012 02:22PM

Dont know if this has been posted yet but came accross this

Adolf Hipster · 26-04-2012 02:25PM

Dubit10 wrote: »

Can't stand him myself. Crap pundit.

Care to explain why you think he's a crap pundit other than your absolute hatred for all things to do with Man Utd?

Also, who would you say is a good pundit on tv, if Neville is not?

Dempsey · 26-04-2012 02:40PM

Gary Neville is getting the football punditry equivalent of the "Lee Carsley Syndrome"

batistuta9 · 26-04-2012 02:42PM

Jimmy Iovine wrote: »

Bill doesn't need to know anything about football. That's not his job. His job is to ask the questions that facilitate the answers/discussion. By asking something that we'd perceive as stupid, like "is it safe to say that Barcelona are finished?", he's giving the panellists an opportunity to pick him apart and show the viewers why Barcelona aren't finished. I think he's one of the best in the business at it and RTE will suffer tremendously when he retires.

would you not expect the presenter of a type of program to know something about the subject? perhaps he could start presenting programs on a whole range of topics from super massive black holes to the colonisation of latin america

maybe it's a bit unfair to him saying he knows nothing about it but some of the questions he asks are stupid & even laughed at by the other people on screen. doesn't look great at all

and by stupid i don't mean the type of example you give above with "is it safe to say that Barcelona are finished?" - after a few defeats or bad run this could be said about any big club under their current management (wenger-arsenal, mancini-city, dalgleish-l'pool all this season) and it's usually an overreaction but now pep & barca may well be done.

he asks questions that are far worse than that at times, questions that really show him up. and i don't think the main presenter of a program is there to be picked apart either or to make the other panellists look intelligent on the subject by asking ridiculous questions

if he's the best RTE have to host a program then as they say in the country of the blind the one-eyed man is king

Jimmy Iovine wrote: »

Compare him to Lineker, who it can be assumed knows a lot about football having played at the highest level for years. He is pure thick. His contributions to the show consists of inane puns and little jokes that only Alan Hansen finds amusing. It's an insult to the viewers intelligence that he still has a job.

Alan Shearer is one of the greatest, if not the greatest, players to play in England in the last 20 years. That means absolutely nothing when he's put in front of the camera. He has severe problems articulating himself. He says "I seen" instead of "I saw". "I done" instead of "I did", and so on. He is speaking to 4/5 million each week, and a further 10 or so when England play, yet he is not able to string together a coherent sentence. Then there is the fact that he offers absolutely nothing in the shape of a half-decent opinion on the football. He is the single worst "pundit" on television at the moment. He makes Jamie "top, top, top" Redknapp look like a genius.

BBC is woeful for football coverage. It's essentially a way for former players to sit around and half a laugh and a few jokes in front of a couple of million people. This is where Bill is perfect. He would never allow Hansen or Shearer to become comfortable. Shearer would be humiliated if he went on RTE.

i think the puns are scripted to be fair, he seems to be reading from the autocue but that would be down to the production team on MOTD & so would the style of the BBC's football shows where linker or whoever don't press the pundits, just ask for their opinion and listen, ask another question & listen, and even if it was bill he'd have to do the same. it's probably not a case of lineker or whoever letting them be comfortable its the way the show is done

as for shearer, well maybe he should go for elocution lessons with clarke carlisle, how he becomes a better pundit; who knows

Jimmy Iovine wrote: »

Gary Neville is the polar opposite of the BBC panel. He is articulate and is not afraid to speak his mind. His jokes are self-deprecating and most importantly they are funny and rare. His party piece is not his humour but his analysis, and it's pretty brilliant at times.

As for the foreigners point well RTE got in Hamann for the last World Cup and he was very, very good. I hope he's back for the Euros. The BBC got in Adebayor. His only contribution to the coverage was having his phone ring live on air. This provided a great opportunity for Shearer and Lineker to engage in some witty banter though so I suppose he wasn't all that bad.

yes g.neville is good but as for the jokes i don't think one of the most hated men in english football would suddenly start getting away with making jokes at other peoples expense, he's trying to build bridges/come across as likeable - sort of like the way some overweight people slag themselves off, if you know what i mean

RTE also got in ossie ardiles who should only be signed or bought back again if he comes with subtitles, BBC got adebayor, well the WC was in south africa and who would have though an african would have some insight into some of the african teams, they has various others as well as adeybayor but i can't remember too much about what it was like now tbh apart from some annoying video clips about S.A with dan walker on a bus

Jimmy Iovine · 26-04-2012 10:01PM

batistuta9 wrote: »

would you not expect the presenter of a type of program to know something about the subject? perhaps he could start presenting programs on a whole range of topics from super massive black holes to the colonisation of latin america

maybe it's a bit unfair to him saying he knows nothing about it but some of the questions he asks are stupid & even laughed at by the other people on screen. doesn't look great at all

and by stupid i don't mean the type of example you give above with "is it safe to say that Barcelona are finished?" - after a few defeats or bad run this could be said about any big club under their current management (wenger-arsenal, mancini-city, dalgleish-l'pool all this season) and it's usually an overreaction but now pep & barca may well be done.

he asks questions that are far worse than that at times, questions that really show him up. and i don't think the main presenter of a program is there to be picked apart either or to make the other panellists look intelligent on the subject by asking ridiculous questions

if he's the best RTE have to host a program then as they say in the country of the blind the one-eyed man is king

I think you're woefully underestimating Bill here. He knows exactly what he's doing. I'm pretty sure he knows more about football than a lot of people here. He has been reporting on it on a near weekly basis for 20+ years now.

He may very well ask stupid questions but that's his job. He has to ask the ridiculous questions so he can elicit a response from the panellists.

He is by far the best presenter RTE have, and he would be the best if he went to Sky, BBC or ITV. The others don't hold a candle to him. Richard Keys was the king for a few years. Everyone thought he was great but he was really rubbish. His style of presenting involved him looking at the camera while he asked a pretty basic question to Jamie of Andy.

He never pressed them on anything. If he did then it was for a mere second and then he'd move on. He was all flash and no substance. Jeff Stelling is a far better presenter in my opinion than him, but even still there is a lot of room for improvement. Jeff is more suited to Soccer Saturday.

batistuta9 wrote: »

i think the puns are scripted to be fair, he seems to be reading from the autocue but that would be down to the production team on MOTD & so would the style of the BBC's football shows where linker or whoever don't press the pundits, just ask for their opinion and listen, ask another question & listen, and even if it was bill he'd have to do the same. it's probably not a case of lineker or whoever letting them be comfortable its the way the show is done

as for shearer, well maybe he should go for elocution lessons with clarke carlisle, how he becomes a better pundit; who knows

Of course they are scripted. That doesn't mean that he has no part to play in them though. I'm pretty sure that he is involved with the production team and he definitely gets a look at the script so that he isn't saying something he doesn't want to.

I don't think it's a case of the BBC not allowing him to change the format, I'd say a lot of it has to do with him not being bothered to change. He has it very easy. Talk for 2 hours one night a week and pocket a few million. Add into it that you don't have to think up of any hard questions and that you are talking to your mates (who are pretty slow and wouldn't understand a hard question anyway) and you have the perfect job.

He doesn't want to go outside his comfort zone as much as he doesn't want to make either of the Alans go outside theirs. It's sad that the British public accept this kind of analysis as the best in the business. I haven't watched it in years. It's really bad. Shearer is the worst pundit but Hansen is the most annoying. He never tries, scoffs at people if they try to analyse the tactics and he just looks as smug as anything up on the screen.

batistuta9 wrote: »

yes g.neville is good but as for the jokes i don't think one of the most hated men in english football would suddenly start getting away with making jokes at other peoples expense, he's trying to build bridges/come across as likeable - sort of like the way some overweight people slag themselves off, if you know what i mean

Maybe he is. It's a huge improvement on the presenting style of Andy Gray though. I thought he was great when I was very young. Then I realised how much spray he spoke and how little incisive analysis he really did.

Him and Keys were almost as smug as Hansen. I'm delighted that they were cut down to size over the whole sexist remarks scandal. It was needed really. They had become too comfortable in Sky and the shows were becoming far too stale. A change was much needed.

am i bovvered · 30-04-2012 09:33PM

Never liked him as a player but have to say I think he is great on sky.

stealinhorses · 30-04-2012 10:56PM

Yeah, I enjoy listening to his opinions on MNF, has a great knowledge of the game not only on the pitch, but also in the dressing room.

Hank Scorpio · 30-04-2012 10:58PM

Best pundit, very unbiased tonight again

Mr Alan · 30-04-2012 11:04PM

Not criticising the team selection from Ferguson tonight & actually defending it was a rare blot against his record as a pundit IMO. Still an excellent pundit mind.

Oat23 · 30-04-2012 11:05PM

I hadn't watched him in studio before tonight (for longer than a few seconds anyway!) but I thought he was very good! Much better than Andy Gray and those other ones.

Mr Alan · 30-04-2012 11:10PM

He's a different league to those clowns tbf.

Paul Tergat · 30-04-2012 11:11PM

You could tell he was really hurting tonight but stayed professional again

missingtime · 30-04-2012 11:15PM

The whole fergie would hate to lose on goal difference is very interesting.

Rekop dog · 30-04-2012 11:37PM

Paul Tergat wrote: »

You could tell he was really hurting tonight but stayed professional again

Calling QPR a non-entity was far from professional. The sole purpose he did that was to rile them up in their game against City on the last day. Obv picked up a few amatuer psychology tricks down the years from Fergie.

Mr Alan · 30-04-2012 11:39PM

Rekop dog wrote: »

Calling QPR a non-entity was far from professional. The sole purpose he did that was to rile them up in their game against City on the last day. Obv picked up a few amatuer psychology tricks down the years from Fergie.

I think you're reading into it a little too much.

He said it shouldn't be a major hurdle for City after seeing them at Stamford Bridge where they were a non entity.

Fair comment.

Rekop dog · 30-04-2012 11:47PM

Mr Alan wrote: »

Rekop dog wrote: »

Calling QPR a non-entity was far from professional. The sole purpose he did that was to rile them up in their game against City on the last day. Obv picked up a few amatuer psychology tricks down the years from Fergie.

I think you're reading into it a little too much.

He said it shouldn't be a major hurdle for City after seeing them at Stamford Bridge where they were a non entity.

Fair comment.

No he was talking about City's remaining games saying they're favourites, Newcastle next week and then play QPR on the last day who are a non entity. He then went on to talk about their performance against Chelsea.

Mr Alan · 30-04-2012 11:50PM

Pretty sure he tied the non entity comment directly into their performance against Chelsea & how poor they were.

Rekop dog · 30-04-2012 11:58PM

Mr Alan wrote: »

Pretty sure he tied the non entity comment directly into their performance against Chelsea & how poor they were.

The performance against Chelsea was the example he gave as to why they're a non entity. I think the subtlety of his comment was lost on you. His exact quote was 'With respect to QPR, they're a non entity.

01-05-2012 09:13AM

But With respect to QPR, they ARE a non-entity.....

PeterTwo · 01-05-2012 09:21AM

Rekop dog wrote: »

Paul Tergat wrote: »

You could tell he was really hurting tonight but stayed professional again

Calling QPR a non-entity was far from professional. The sole purpose he did that was to rile them up in their game against City on the last day. Obv picked up a few amatuer psychology tricks down the years from Fergie.

QPR's performance against Chelsea was the worst I've seen in the PL all season, to say that they were poor would be a huge understatement. Chelsea could have fielded any team and they would have won.

bucketybuck · 01-05-2012 09:26AM

Rekop dog wrote: »

No he was talking about City's remaining games saying they're favourites, Newcastle next week and then play QPR on the last day who are a non entity. He then went on to talk about their performance against Chelsea.

Somebody obviously didn't see the QPR - Chelsea match...

Non-entity was being too kind.

v3ttel · 01-05-2012 09:29AM

Rekop dog wrote: »

I think the subtlety of his comment was lost on you.

Subtly? It's amazing the sh!t that people read into a simple comment. There was no subtly involved. He is being realistic, no more, no less.

If you think that City won't steamroll QPR on the last day, if the title depends on it, you are incredibly naive. He isn't expecting QPR to go there and get a result. Nobody is.

If QPRs survival is on the line on the last day, Gary Neville would think that his comments would be more motivation than that?

Brain Stroking · 01-05-2012 09:37AM

Rekop dog wrote: »

Calling QPR a non-entity was far from professional. The sole purpose he did that was to rile them up in their game against City on the last day. Obv picked up a few amatuer psychology tricks down the years from Fergie.

I see you prefer pundits who dont give an opinion

The Radiator · 01-05-2012 09:37AM

Yeah, I don't think Neville is quite that clever

Rekop dog · 01-05-2012 10:18AM

I beginning to feel like the crazy kid here, "there there son, you've such an overactive imagination"

If people actually rewatch Nevilles comment they'd know what i'm talking about. Also the way some people are going on you'd swear there's never upsets in football ever!

Nuri Sahin · 07-05-2012 09:55PM

Quite obvious but simple, excellent breakdown on England's problems with their seemingly default 442 formation and how to resolve those problems by Neville there.

Wonder if he'll be doing any analysis coverage of the Euros in some other form of the media.

kryogen · 07-05-2012 09:59PM

-Ade- wrote: »

Quite obvious but simple, excellent breakdown on England's problems with their seemingly default 442 formation and how to resolve those problems by Neville there.

Wonder if he'll be doing any analysis coverage of the Euros in some other form of the media.

Missed it, any legal links to it would be helpful, I always enjoy watching Nev school fools

Great analyst

Carragher, Neville & MNF On Sky

Comments