Token women commentators in men’rt

mordeith · 09-03-2020 2:01pm

ThewhiteJesus wrote: »

It's just gender instinct a woman will pull out of the real tough aggressive challenge to avoid injury, where as a man will go in full pelt regardless of consequence. You could argue what's the smarter move but i much prefer watching a war on the pitch and then pundits explaining from experience what i've just seen

You couldn't say that at the last women's world cup. Lots of full blooded tackles and far less drama as opposed to Neymar and countless other players acting like they'd been shot and calling for yellow cards all day. The women's game is far more honest than their male counterparts.

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! · 09-03-2020 2:02pm

Raconteuse wrote: »

D'oh!

Anna Walker was another one.

It does look very whingey though.

There are comments like "100% tokens" - I've asked why. Not a word in response of course though. It really depends on the sport.

Someone even admitted Kelly Dalglish knows her stuff while at the same time going on about it being tokenism. There you go - knowing your stuff should surely be enough.

She does know her stuff... I never said she knows it any better than many male presenters or pundits though.

But yes, she probably is the most impressive woman in that capacity in the sport in terms of her depth of knowledge. (for me anyway)

She also happens to be easy on the eye too... and even more so when she was younger. So I would have my doubts, that she was hired solely for her knowledge! (Although who knows? I could be wrong!)

Most women in the sport - the vast majority - are tokens. Most men know this, many women even know this... most people are not willing to admit it though!

But why should there be any obligation to hire women in men's professional sport? It's not the same as other areas of society... it is a gender-specific work place... there is nothing sexist about only hiring men in a men only sport!

ohnonotgmail · 09-03-2020 2:08pm

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

She does know her stuff... I never said she knows it any better than many male presenters or pundits though.

But yes, she probably is the most impressive woman in that capacity in the sport in terms of her depth of knowledge. (for me anyway)

She also happens to be easy on the eye too... and even more so when she was younger. So I would have my doubts, that she was hired solely for her knowledge! (Although who knows? I could be wrong!)

Most women in the sport - the vast majority - are tokens. Most men know this, many women even know this... most people are not willing to admit it though!

But why should there be any obligation to hire women in men's professional sport? It's not the same as other areas of society... it is a gender-specific work place... there is nothing sexist about only hiring men in a men only sport!

They are not being hired for mens sport. they are being hired for TV. you seem unable to distinguish between the two.

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! · 09-03-2020 2:10pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

They are not being hired for mens sport. they are being hired for TV. you seem unable to distinguish between the two.

lol

:rolleyes:

razorblunt · 09-03-2020 2:10pm

Punditry itself is gone to the dogs anyway and that's across the board.
We've had Giles and Dunphy admitting they've not watched European football, Jamie 'triffic' Redknapp, Mark Lawrenson and Danny Murphy who look like they hate their jobs and so on.

If we're applying the criteria that "they should have played the game" then the professional sports world moves so quickly nowadays that players who retired 5/10/15 years ago become out of touch too.

Personally, I think there's starting to be more value in fan driven analysis rather than these professional "talking heads" spitting out cliché after cliché.

09-03-2020 2:11pm

Silentcorner wrote: »

Can an amateur play the game and enjoy, of course...will an amateur have the required level of football intelligence to be a capable pundit....that is very very unlikely.

Simply nonsense.

Mourinho, Klopp, Benitez, Wenger some of the greatest managers of all time hardly kicked a ball between them at the professional level much less the top level. Klopp was the best of the bunch and he even admits he was bog-standard.

You can have a great understanding of a game/sport without being particularly good at it yourself. Your mind and your body are just on different wavelengths. It's why top players don't always make top coaches. It's one thing doing something yourself but it's a whole other world trying to get someone else to do it.

Plenty of examples in all sports where ordinary players become top level coaches.

Raconteuse · 09-03-2020 2:11pm

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

She does know her stuff... I never said she knows it any better than many male presenters or pundits though.

But yes, she probably is the most impressive woman in that capacity in the sport in terms of her depth of knowledge. (for me anyway)

She also happens to be easy on the eye too... and even more so when she was younger. So I would have my doubts, that she was hired solely for her knowledge! (Although who knows? I could be wrong!)

Most women in the sport - the vast majority - are tokens. Most men know this, many women even know this... most people are not willing to admit it though!

But why should there be any obligation to hire women in men's professional sport? It's not the same as other areas of society... it is a gender-specific work place... there is nothing sexist about only hiring men in a men only sport!

Well I said in the same post which you quoted, that I don't think people should be hired on the basis of their sex, but they should be hired on their ability, so if a woman is hired who is good at the job, what's the problem?

sbsquarepants · 09-03-2020 2:14pm

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

But why should there be any obligation to hire women in men's professional sport? It's not the same as other areas of society... it is a gender-specific work place... there is nothing sexist about only hiring men in a men only sport!

There's no obligation - it's just sensible for the TV station.

As has been pointed out they are not employed as footballers, they are employed as pundits / commentators / presenters etc. It's an entirely different discipline.

razorblunt · 09-03-2020 2:16pm

Raconteuse wrote: »

In the 90s there were numerous female - not pundits but presenters and reporters on Sky Sports football programmes. E.g. Gabby Logan, Gabby Yorath, Kirsty Gallacher... and nobody gave a sh1t.

I get the feeling that this is just part of the "Waaaah, women have it better" narrative everywhere these past few years.

Gabby Logan and Gabby Yorath are the same person.

sbsquarepants · 09-03-2020 2:17pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Plenty of examples in all sports where ordinary players become top level coaches.

And vice versa....Gary Neville anyone:D

Dr. Bre · 09-03-2020 2:17pm

razorblunt wrote: »

Gabby Logan and Gabby Yorath are the same person.

Haha !

Deebles McBeebles · 09-03-2020 2:22pm

Wheres the transgender pundits? Eh?

Jamie Redknapp would make a fine woman, lets get a petition going.

Raconteuse · 09-03-2020 2:22pm

razorblunt wrote: »

Gabby Logan and Gabby Yorath are the same person.

Dr. Bre wrote: »

Haha !

Yes, already covered thanks.

Stevieluvsye wrote: »

LOL

Same person

Raconteuse wrote: »

D'oh!

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! · 09-03-2020 2:23pm

Raconteuse wrote: »

Well I said in the same post which you quoted, that I don't think people should be hired in the basis of their sex, but they should be hired on their ability, so if a woman is hired who is good at the job, what's the problem?

The problem is there shouldn't be any obligation to hire women, in a sport that is only for men. But the PC culture is putting pressure on people, to give equal opportunities to women in a sector of society that is a gender-specific workplace!

Look, I'm not offended when I see a woman talking about men's football... and occasionally you do get someone like Daglish, who is worth her place based on her knowledge! But does she deserve to be there over a man? Not in this industry she doesn't...

Of course people will think I'm sexist for saying that... but I'm not. It's just people's pre-set mentality from how we operate in practically every other area of society!

And the token women being hired, who are clearly just eye-candy in most cases... that's irritating if you are a genuine fan of the sport. (I say that as someone who is very much a fan of women btw;))

ohnonotgmail · 09-03-2020 2:24pm

Raconteuse wrote: »

Yes, already covered thanks.

To be fair she is worth mentioning twice.

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! · 09-03-2020 2:33pm

sbsquarepants wrote: »

There's no obligation - it's just sensible for the TV station.

As has been pointed out they are not employed as footballers, they are employed as pundits / commentators / presenters etc. It's an entirely different discipline.

Presenters yes.

Pundits and commentators are not entirely different.

Women are being hired to fill a quota... Alex Scott does not have exceptional analysis on the sport. Just because some male pundits also do not have exceptional insight, this still doesn't validate hiring women just to pander to gender politics!

An average male pundit, has more right to a place on a studio panel than an average female pundit... because it is their sport. But they are denied that opportunity, because of gender quota politics BS!

razorblunt · 09-03-2020 2:42pm

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

Presenters yes.

Pundits and commentators are not entirely different.

Women are being hired to fill a quota... Alex Scott does not have exceptional analysis on the sport. Just because some male pundits also do not have exceptional insight, this still doesn't validate hiring women just to pander to gender politics!

An average male pundit, has more right to a place on a studio panel than an average female pundit... because it is their sport. But they are denied that opportunity, because of gender quota politics BS!

Alexa Scott is ok, she's better on BBC than on Sky, I found. She was brilliant during the World Cup. Sky tend to dim all pundits anyway.
Roy Keane was shouting about Pickford "he's not a good goalkeeper" which is brilliant for their clickbait twitter updates but how about you explain it, Roy.

For what it's worth he's right.

sbsquarepants · 09-03-2020 2:42pm

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

Presenters yes.

Pundits and commentators are not entirely different.

Women are being hired to fill a quota... Alex Scott does not have exceptional analysis on the sport. Just because some male pundits also do not have exceptional insight, this still doesn't validate hiring women just to pander to gender politics!

An average male pundit, has more right to a place on a studio panel than an average female pundit... because it is their sport. But they are denied that opportunity, because of gender quota politics BS!

She's not bad. I've seen many far worse blokes waffling away over the years.
Plus she's drop dead gorgeous which lets face it, never hurts when you are in front of a camera for a living.

An average male pundit has absolutely no more right than an average female pundit. Why would they?

It is not their sport - football is football, women play football, women watch football - why in the name of blessed Ronaldinho could they not talk about football?

Punditry is thinking and talking, not playing!

I can practically guarantee you that Alex Scott makes a better pundit than Wayne Rooney.

Silentcorner · 09-03-2020 2:46pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

and that is why the best players always make the best pundits, right?

Well at least they should have industry experience!!!!

ohnonotgmail · 09-03-2020 2:47pm

Silentcorner wrote: »

Well at least they should have industry experience!!!!

yes because top level footballers have long experience of speaking intelligently.

Silentcorner · 09-03-2020 2:48pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Simply nonsense.

Mourinho, Klopp, Benitez, Wenger some of the greatest managers of all time hardly kicked a ball between them at the professional level much less the top level. Klopp was the best of the bunch and he even admits he was bog-standard.

You can have a great understanding of a game/sport without being particularly good at it yourself. Your mind and your body are just on different wavelengths. It's why top players don't always make top coaches. It's one thing doing something yourself but it's a whole other world trying to get someone else to do it.

Plenty of examples in all sports where ordinary players become top level coaches.

They were all involved in the game at the highest level....why has this conversation moved into management....and entirely different profession.

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! · 09-03-2020 2:48pm

sbsquarepants wrote: »

An average male pundit has absolutely no more right than an average female pundit. Why would they?

Why would they?

That's obvious, I've already said it... it's their sport... MEN'S professional football.

Of course a male pundit has more right to be there than a female pundit.

This isn't the business world... it's not a fortune 500 company! There is no obligation to hire any women. Why would there be?

Silentcorner · 09-03-2020 2:53pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

yes because top level footballers have long experience of speaking intelligently.

Right cause they are all buffoons right...

You might have little respect for men who have achieved at the highest level of an extremely competitive global sport they have had to survive in since they were about 10 years old....but not everyone is like you!

ohnonotgmail · 09-03-2020 2:55pm

Silentcorner wrote: »

Right cause they are all buffoons right...

You might have little respect for men who have achieved at the highest level of an extremely competitive global sport they have had to survive in since they were about 10 years old....but not everyone is like you!

your comprehension is at the same level as your mates.

Silentcorner · 09-03-2020 2:56pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

your comprehension is at the same level as your mates.

Go away out of it you bluffer!!!

Pauliedragon · 09-03-2020 2:57pm

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

Why would they?

That's obvious, I've already said it... it's their sport... MEN'S professional football.

Of course a male pundit has more right to be there than a female pundit.

This isn't the business world... it's not a fortune 500 company! There is no obligation to hire any women. Why would there be?

Sport is business these days to be fair. I'm sure there is a theory having female pundit might attract more female viewers but the theory they're not qualified is a bit off to me. I'd listen to the likes of Dan Mcdonnell for example about soccer over most the retired professionals on sky for and he never played professional himself.

ohnonotgmail · 09-03-2020 2:57pm

Silentcorner wrote: »

Go away out of it you bluffer!!!

explain to me how playing football at the top level translates readily into being able to talk about it intelligently?

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! · 09-03-2020 2:57pm

razorblunt wrote: »

Alexa Scott is ok, she's better on BBC than on Sky, I found. She was brilliant during the World Cup. Sky tend to dim all pundits anyway.
Roy Keane was shouting about Pickford "he's not a good goalkeeper" which is brilliant for their clickbait twitter updates but how about you explain it, Roy.

For what it's worth he's right.

I've found her to be very average tbh.

I'm glad you mentioned Roy Keane... grumpy fecker as he is, still an outstanding pundit on the game nonetheless!

It's obvious Pickford is error prone. The only reason Keane was being questioned on his opinion, is because he's England No.1 and they have to stick up for him on the TV! Most people know Keane was correct!

Ironicname · 09-03-2020 3:02pm

ohnonotgmail wrote:

yes because top level footballers have long experience of speaking intelligently.

Not every one is. Of course not. But there are more than enough that can. And they should be considered before someone put there because of their vagina and some equality quota.

sbsquarepants · 09-03-2020 3:04pm

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

Why would they?

That's obvious, I've already said it... it's their sport... MEN'S professional football.

Of course a male pundit has more right to be there than a female pundit.

This isn't the business world... it's not a fortune 500 company! There is no obligation to hire any women. Why would there be?

So obvious in fact that it's hard to see!

So what is it then exactly, does oestrogen render them incapable of looking at other people playing a game and comprehending what's going on? Do they just get distracted by their own tits? What?

You do understand there is a difference between actually doing a thing and talking about other people doing it....don't you?

ohnonotgmail · 09-03-2020 3:05pm

Ironicname wrote: »

Not every one is. Of course not. But there are more than enough that can. And they should be considered before someone put there because of their vagina and some equality quota.

Here is a great idea. why dont the tv stations make their decision based on the merits of the individuals involved and not their genitalia? On that basis who is Alex scott keeping out of a job?

Ironicname · 09-03-2020 3:06pm

ohnonotgmail wrote:

explain to me how playing football at the top level translates readily into being able to talk about it intelligently?

Playing at the top level gives you a unique insight. Now, not every person who has played at the top level will be able to translate their experience into punditry, but a huge amount can.

Nobody has said that every person who has played in the premiership would automatically be a great pundit, you seem to be using that as your argument.

Silentcorner · 09-03-2020 3:06pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

explain to me how playing football at the top level translates readily into being able to talk about it intelligently?

It doesn't readily translate....they are much sought after gigs, most footballers who retire in their mid thirties would love an income stream like punditry, it is competitive to get those gigs, the barrier should be at least the fact that you have played at the highest level....

It's amazing that nobody has pointed out the fact that these token women are on those panels to raise awareness of womens sport, we all know it, they didn't work their way up through radio shows or podcasts...instead, it's about how poor/inarticulate/unintelligent ex professional football men are.

Ironicname · 09-03-2020 3:08pm

ohnonotgmail wrote:

Here is a great idea. why dont the tv stations make their decision based on the merits of the individuals involved and not their genitalia? On that basis who is Alex scott keeping out of a job?

I agree with that. Unfortunately television stations dont.

BBC have a diversity quota, ensuring that no panel shows can be all male.

Are you asking me to name every other person who would be better qualified than Alex Scott? That's a ridiculous question.

ohnonotgmail · 09-03-2020 3:08pm

Silentcorner wrote: »

It doesn't readily translate....they are much sought after gigs, most footballers who retire in their mid thirties would love an income stream like punditry, it is competitive to get those gigs, the barrier should be at least the fact that you have played at the highest level....

It's amazing that nobody has pointed out the fact that these token women are on those panels to raise awareness of womens sport, we all know it, they didn't work their way up through radio shows or podcasts...instead, it's about how poor/inarticulate/unintelligent ex professional football men are.

should the barrier not be who is the best at doing the job?

Deebles McBeebles · 09-03-2020 3:09pm

sbsquarepants wrote: »

I can practically guarantee you that Alex Scott makes a better pundit than Wayne Rooney.

While true, its a bit like saying she would make a better footballer than Stephen Hawking.

Ironicname · 09-03-2020 3:10pm

ohnonotgmail wrote:

should the barrier not be who is the best at doing the job?

Absolutely. But nobody should be given an advantage due to "positive" discrimination or quota filling.

That is racist and sexist.

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! · 09-03-2020 3:12pm

sbsquarepants wrote: »

So obvious in fact that it's hard to see!

So what is it then exactly, does oestrogen render them incapable of looking at other people playing a game and comprehending what's going on? Do they just get distracted by their own tits? What?

You do understand there is a difference between actually doing a thing and talking about other people doing it....don't you?

That's why they have their own sport - it's called women's professional football!

I've no problem with Alex Scott being a pundit on women's football... if she was any good at it, I might even tune in to listen to her opinions on the game!

If you're trying to drag me into somehow denigrating women, you'll be waiting next to that fishing rod all day without a bite... I have no intrinsic issue with women. Just women being hired instead of men in MEN'S professional football.

Raconteuse · 09-03-2020 3:13pm

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

The problem is there shouldn't be any obligation to hire women, in a sport that is only for men. But the PC culture is putting pressure on people, to give equal opportunities to women in a sector of society that is a gender-specific workplace!

Look, I'm not offended when I see a woman talking about men's football... and occasionally you do get someone like Daglish, who is worth her place based on her knowledge! But does she deserve to be there over a man? Not in this industry she doesn't...

Of course people will think I'm sexist for saying that... but I'm not. It's just people's pre-set mentality from how we operate in practically every other area of society!

And the token women being hired, who are clearly just eye-candy in most cases... that's irritating if you are a genuine fan of the sport. (I say that as someone who is very much a fan of women btw;))

Women were hired in the 90s. Nobody gave a sh1t and nobody went on about tokenism.

I couldn't care less if no woman ever gets hired for Sky Sports football again, and I don't think they should feel obliged to hire them, but I'm asking what's wrong with it being done when they know their stuff and deliver well?

There are women who do broadcast training in college and volunteer in every community station they can find, and take minimum wage crappy jobs making tea in local radio and so on until they make it (which is not all of them) and their sole interest is sport. They certainly don't just want to be hired because of their sex. But if they apply for a sports journalism job and get it due to their experience, hard work and qualification, isn't that how it should work?

ohnonotgmail · 09-03-2020 3:19pm

Ironicname wrote: »

Absolutely. But nobody should be given an advantage due to "positive" discrimination or quota filling.

That is racist and sexist.

you have not show that to be the case.

sbsquarepants · 09-03-2020 3:22pm

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

If you're trying to drag me into somehow denigrating women, you'll be waiting next to that fishing rod all day without a bite... I have no intrinsic issue with women. Just women being hired instead of men in MEN'S professional football.

If i'm trying to drag you into denigrating women?:D

No, i'm just asking you why you are denigrating women?

Is it just football you have an issue with or is it all sports?

Do you think Katie Taylor could somehow manage to discuss mens boxing even though Tyson Fury could kick her ass?

Raconteuse · 09-03-2020 3:22pm

If you disagree with people being hired based on their sex (I think most people do) then staying consistent would mean disagreeing with people NOT being hired based on their sex.

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! · 09-03-2020 3:25pm

Raconteuse wrote: »

Women were hired in the 90s. Nobody gave a sh1t and nobody went on about tokenism.

I couldn't care less if no woman ever gets hired for Sky Sports football again, and I don't think they should feel obliged to hire them, but I'm asking what's wrong with it being done when they know their stuff and deliver well?

There are women who do broadcast training in college and volunteer in every community station they can find, and take minimum wage crappy jobs making tea in local radio and so on until they make it (which is not all of them) and their sole interest is sport. They certainly don't just want to be hired because of their sex. But if they apply for a sports journalism job and get it due to their experience, hard work and qualification, isn't that how it should work?

And why not go into a women's sport, and help to build that sport up and give it exposure?

If they're great at their job, then they would surely be an incredible asset for women's sport?

Again, I don't see why men's professional sport should be under any obligation or pressure to hire women - no matter how qualified you think they are, or how knowledgeable they are!

I would feel the same about women's sport. I would give opportunities to women, over men every time if possible. (Obviously women's sport is still in the growth phase in most cases - so unfortunately it is still necessary for men to help run it right now)

Ironicname · 09-03-2020 3:31pm

ohnonotgmail wrote:

you have not show that to be the case.

Probably not to your satisfaction but do you agree that some women in television are given positions based on their sex and quotas that need to be filled rather than their ability?

ohnonotgmail · 09-03-2020 3:34pm

Ironicname wrote: »

Probably not to your satisfaction but do you agree that some women in television are given positions based on their sex and quotas that need to be filled rather than their ability?

for the women being discussed here i dont think it is the case. They are well able to do the job to the same standard as the men who do it.

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! · 09-03-2020 3:34pm

sbsquarepants wrote: »

If i'm trying to drag you into denigrating women?:D

No, i'm just asking you why you are denigrating women?

Is it just football you have an issue with or is it all sports?

Do you think Katie Taylor could somehow manage to discuss mens boxing even though Tyson Fury could kick her ass?

Where did I denigrate women?

By saying they don't belong in a male only sport? If this was a mixed gender sport, I would have no issue with women being involved in any aspect of the sport... but it's not!

Raconteuse wrote: »

If you disagree with people being hired based on their sex (I think most people do) then staying consistent would mean disagreeing with people NOT being hired based on their sex.

It's different in a gender-specific sport/work-place...

There is nothing wrong with favouring men over women in men's sport. It's not the same as most other areas of life - it's quite a unique scenario.

ohnonotgmail · 09-03-2020 3:40pm

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! wrote: »

Where did I denigrate women?

By saying they don't belong in a male only sport? If this was a mixed gender sport, I would have no issue with women being involved in any aspect of the sport... but it's not!

It's different in a gender-specific sport/work-place...

There is nothing wrong with favouring men over women in men's sport. It's not the same as most other areas of life - it's quite a unique scenario.

so it is ok to be sexist in favour of men but not ok to be sexist in favour of women?

Gretas Gonna Get Ya! · 09-03-2020 3:43pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

so it is ok to be sexist in favour of men but not ok to be sexist in favour of women?

How is favouring men in men's sport sexist?

Ironicname · 09-03-2020 3:47pm

Raconteuse wrote:

If you disagree with people being hired based on their sex (I think most people do) then staying consistent would mean disagreeing with people NOT being hired based on their sex.

Absolutely.

ohnonotgmail wrote:

so it is ok to be sexist in favour of men but not ok to be sexist in favour of women?

No. It's about suitability. Men who have played the sport at the highest level and who are good talkers are vastly more suitable to be a pundit on television programmes regarding their aport than a woman who hasn't played at that level.

FunLover18 · 09-03-2020 3:48pm

Ironicname wrote: »

Absolutely. But nobody should be given an advantage due to "positive" discrimination or quota filling.

That is racist and sexist.

Instead they should be at a disadvantage because of their gender? No one has yet identified this mythical insight that only men who have played at the top level have? What about either on the premier league games yesterday would Alex Scott have not been able to analyse properly because she hasn't played at a high enough standard in her career?

Token women commentators in men’rt

Comments