[Football] Alex Scott

Sussex Nomad said:

At least Kylie is a 50 something, more of a chance.

Click to expand...

Raleigh Chopper said:

When Kylie does pop round and starts to pull your trousers down, what are you going to do when she starts talking about male pop stars?

Click to expand...

Sussex Nomad said:

If a mod banned me for not liking them, they quite simply should not be a mod, or PAR (Post Asst Referee), which would be a fault on this whole NSC site. Guinness Boy is, to me, and I mean me, a complete and utter ahole. He has no right to comment on my posts since he took the piss out of mental health and I will forever hold him accountable for that, he never even apologised. The bloke is an arse and should not be a mod.

Other than that, I like threads like these, they're fun, they bring out the best/worse in people and it's interesting to see who is where and with what. Sadly I will forget, hence I never dislike people on here except GB and the other tosser that questions people health, HWT.

It's a fun place to come and read and post.

Click to expand...

SussexSeahawk said:

I understand what you are trying to claim: that pundits of premier league football should only be those who have direct experience playing in (or maybe managing). The problem is, that doesn't hold up to much scrutiny for several reasons.

Firstly, you don't need to be an ex-pro to be a good pundit: what matters is knowledge of the game and ability to provide good analysis. Do you genuinely listen to punditry and decide whether it's good or not based on who is saying it? Obviously not, if she is a better pundit than half of the lazy blokes who can't be bothered to do research I'd rather she was doing the punditry than them. I assume you never listen to Johnny Cantor's commentary? You'll be shocked to hear that he's not an ex-pro: presumably you don't turn off Radio Sussex in disgust when he's on.

Secondly even if you do claim that you need to be an ex-pro to be a pundit, the idea that men's and women's sport are two completely separate entities is rubbish. Do you get as annoyed if Tim Henman is commentating on the women's tennis at Wimbledon? Men's and women's football is fundamentally the same game and experience of what it takes to play at a high level is transferable from men's to women's football.

Thirdly if having direct experience is so important do you get as annoyed when Savage is commentating on the Champions League, or if Alan Shearer is a pundit for the World Cup final? It's the same: they haven't experienced it, so don't have the requisite background to be a good pundit.

Click to expand...

Sussex Nomad said:

You make the huge mistake of thinking for someone else. Usually I would stop reading right there.



I never watch women's tennis, except when I went to Wimbledon and had no choice, but no commentators or pundits. I would be irritated if I were to watch women's tennis and listening to Henman though, yes.



That's slightly extreme with a WC final, and you are trying very hard to win a nonsensical point.

Click to expand...

studio150 said:

She's on Strictly this season so will not be available for weekend live games while she is still in the show anyway

Click to expand...

Nixonator said:

The problem with threads like this is that if someone started one about Jamie Redknapp or Alan Shearer everyone would very quickly come to a consensus that they spew utter cack and it would die out.

One that is started about Alex Scott, who also spews uninsightful cack, is controversial simply because she is a woman and some people can't help themselves in attributing prejudice for the same label as nearly every other pundit gets.

I've had enough of her, you could extract more insight about the game from a garden pond. This is the only requisite for her position as a pundit, competance in providing insight to viewers and she provides none

This is why Fan TVs have become popular, it's more interesting (and often funny) to listen to what fans thought about a game than people with 'experience' who are paid to analyse it.

Click to expand...

Nixonator said:

This is why Fan TVs have become popular, it's more interesting (and often funny) to listen to what fans thought about a game than people with 'experience' who are paid to analyse it.

Click to expand...

Nixonator said:

The problem with threads like this is that if someone started one about Jamie Redknapp or Alan Shearer everyone would very quickly come to a consensus that they spew utter cack and it would die out.

One that is started about Alex Scott, who also spews uninsightful cack, is controversial simply because she is a woman and some people can't help themselves in attributing prejudice for the same label as nearly every other pundit gets.

Click to expand...

I've had enough of her

Click to expand...

This is why Fan TVs have become popular, it's more interesting (and often funny) to listen to what fans thought about a game than people with 'experience' who are paid to analyse it.

Click to expand...

sydney said:

just watched the EFL highlights of which 3 games were commentated on by women ...........i'm sorry but to me it's like gravy on beetroot , custard on sirloin , mustard on sticky date pudding , it just doesn't work......god knows they are flogging womens cricket , football and rugby atm why not let the ladies commentate on that and leave the mens game to the blokes , when the gender fluid league springs up in 3 or 4 years they can have their own commentators too .......having said that the standard of commentating has taken a nose dive over the last 2 years or so....imho....

Click to expand...

SussexSeahawk said:

I understand what you are trying to claim: that pundits of premier league football should only be those who have direct experience playing in (or maybe managing). The problem is, that doesn't hold up to much scrutiny for several reasons.

Firstly, you don't need to be an ex-pro to be a good pundit: what matters is knowledge of the game and ability to provide good analysis. Do you genuinely listen to punditry and decide whether it's good or not based on who is saying it? Obviously not, if she is a better pundit than half of the lazy blokes who can't be bothered to do research I'd rather she was doing the punditry than them. I assume you never listen to Johnny Cantor's commentary? You'll be shocked to hear that he's not an ex-pro: presumably you don't turn off Radio Sussex in disgust when he's on.

Secondly even if you do claim that you need to be an ex-pro to be a pundit, the idea that men's and women's sport are two completely separate entities is rubbish. Do you get as annoyed if Tim Henman is commentating on the women's tennis at Wimbledon? Men's and women's football is fundamentally the same game and experience of what it takes to play at a high level is transferable from men's to women's football.

Thirdly if having direct experience is so important do you get as annoyed when Savage is commentating on the Champions League, or if Alan Shearer is a pundit for the World Cup final? It's the same: they haven't experienced it, so don't have the requisite background to be a good pundit.

Click to expand...

SussexSeahawk said:

I understand what you are trying to claim: that pundits of premier league football should only be those who have direct experience playing in (or maybe managing). The problem is, that doesn't hold up to much scrutiny for several reasons.

Firstly, you don't need to be an ex-pro to be a good pundit: what matters is knowledge of the game and ability to provide good analysis. Do you genuinely listen to punditry and decide whether it's good or not based on who is saying it? Obviously not, if she is a better pundit than half of the lazy blokes who can't be bothered to do research I'd rather she was doing the punditry than them. I assume you never listen to Johnny Cantor's commentary? You'll be shocked to hear that he's not an ex-pro: presumably you don't turn off Radio Sussex in disgust when he's on.

Secondly even if you do claim that you need to be an ex-pro to be a pundit, the idea that men's and women's sport are two completely separate entities is rubbish. Do you get as annoyed if Tim Henman is commentating on the women's tennis at Wimbledon? Men's and women's football is fundamentally the same game and experience of what it takes to play at a high level is transferable from men's to women's football.

Thirdly if having direct experience is so important do you get as annoyed when Savage is commentating on the Champions League, or if Alan Shearer is a pundit for the World Cup final? It's the same: they haven't experienced it, so don't have the requisite background to be a good pundit.

Click to expand...

Herr Tubthumper said:

Heston Blumenthal would beg to differ. He’s made a very successful career out of enlightened combinations like these.

Click to expand...

Not Andy Naylor said:

No, I think there are enough differences between men's and women's football at the top level to need at least one former player experienced at that level, or near enough, to make punditry interesting.

By all means let Alex Scott comment on tactical matters. Yes, she has 'knowledge of the game.' But not of serious men's football. I want some insight into tunnel mind games, what's really going on at set plays, gamesmanship etc from people who have marked a Lukaku or Henry or gone toe-to-toe with a Vieira or been battered by Shane Duffy. What it's like to play with or against some of football's prize shithouses. And I'd rather hear from a manager who has had to take decisions with his or her job depending on it than a player who has gone straight onto a sofa in a TV studio. Yes, some, or even most, male pundits give you none of the above and are stealing a living. Get rid of them. Actually, let's have fewer pundits and more football, especially on highlights shows.

Click to expand...

Nixonator said:

One that is started about Alex Scott, who also spews uninsightful cack, is controversial simply because she is a woman and some people can't help themselves in attributing prejudice for the same label as nearly every other pundit gets.

Click to expand...

Raleigh Chopper said:

When Kylie does pop round and starts to pull your trousers down, what are you going to do when she starts talking about male pop stars?

Click to expand...

Not Andy Naylor said:

No, I think there are enough differences between men's and women's football at the top level to need at least one former player experienced at that level, or near enough, to make punditry interesting.

By all means let Alex Scott comment on tactical matters. Yes, she has 'knowledge of the game.' But not of serious men's football. I want some insight into tunnel mind games, what's really going on at set plays, gamesmanship etc from people who have marked a Lukaku or Henry or gone toe-to-toe with a Vieira or been battered by Shane Duffy. What it's like to play with or against some of football's prize shithouses. And I'd rather hear from a manager who has had to take decisions with his or her job depending on it than a player who has gone straight onto a sofa in a TV studio. Yes, some, or even most, male pundits give you none of the above and are stealing a living. Get rid of them. Actually, let's have fewer pundits and more football, especially on highlights shows.

Click to expand...

SussexSeahawk said:

I think we're in agreement that punditry these days (albeit I think it's better now than a few years ago) is just s**t. I'm fine with saying that there should be at least one male pro on a panel if they are genuinely giving that kind of insight: but I think this is incredibly rare. Give me someone who can actually dissect a game of football like Michael Cox on a panel any day over someone with X premier league appearances. For some reason the latter has just been so ingrained in us that as soon as someone doesn't have X premier league appearances people start questioning what right they have to talk about football.

Click to expand...