• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Joey Barton

Forums New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
StevieM said:
@Dee & @Modo

Question for you - are the female pundits any good - like so said, don’t get the same commentators over here.

My guess is that’s the crux of the matter - the claim being that they’re shit and being given the gig not because of ability - so what’s the feeling?

I get the “idea” that a make that’s played at the top has a lot more “experience “ in the game… but I just can’t shift an image of a pundit panel consisting of Harry Kane, Jack Grealish & John Terry (in full kit) and that fills me with great sadness.
Click to expand...
My comments on the matter mainly concerns female pundits on Swedish TV. Like in the 2023 world cup, they not only had female commentators but at times even the presenter and experts were female.
So I thought they were taking it to a new extreme, basically overcompensating to reach some kind of equality.
In Sweden it's common to hear the phrase "it's time for a female..." be it prime minister or the next presenter for some program. Merit just doesn't factor in at times.
A few years ago some in the media were pushing for the coach of the female team to take over the men's team. Obviously the Swedish FA just ignored it.
They (the Swedish FA) were actually reported to the Equality Ombudsman, a government agency that works on behalf of the Swedish parliament and government to promote equal rights, because they believed that the women's national team were being discriminated since they weren't getting the same compensation the men were. Well, the results of the report was actually quite embarrassing, but that's a different story.

Back to your question, I honestly don't have a lot of complaints about female English pundits, definitely not the presenters. I really like Kelly Dalglish and what's her name on the show with Carra, Henry and Richards.
Sue Smith, Karen Carney and Laura Woods are quite good. Especially the latter who I listened to on Talksport. But some, I'm not sure of their names, Eni Aluko being one, are just horrible to say the least and I'm not the biggest fan of Alex Scott either but she's OK, I guess.
I mainly watch the Swedish broadcast, but I do watch clips from SKY, BBC, ITV etc from time to time, it's just a bit tedious to find the whole pre/post match segments. So, maybe I'm not the best person to judge their punditry.
 
Modo said:
My comments on the matter mainly concerns female pundits on Swedish TV. Like in the 2023 world cup, they not only had female commentators but at times even the presenter and experts were female.
So I thought they were taking it to a new extreme, basically overcompensating to reach some kind of equality.
In Sweden it's common to hear the phrase "it's time for a female..." be it prime minister or the next presenter for some program. Merit just doesn't factor in at times.
A few years ago some in the media were pushing for the coach of the female team to take over the men's team. Obviously the Swedish FA just ignored it.
They (the Swedish FA) were actually reported to the Equality Ombudsman, a government agency that works on behalf of the Swedish parliament and government to promote equal rights, because they believed that the women's national team were being discriminated since they weren't getting the same compensation the men were. Well, the results of the report was actually quite embarrassing, but that's a different story.

Back to your question, I honestly don't have a lot of complaints about female English pundits, definitely not the presenters. I really like Kelly Dalglish and what's her name on the show with Carra, Henry and Richards.
Sue Smith, Karen Carney and Laura Woods are quite good. Especially the latter who I listened to on Talksport. But some, I'm not sure of their names, Eni Aluko being one, are just horrible to say the least and I'm not the biggest fan of Alex Scott either but she's OK, I guess.
I mainly watch the Swedish broadcast, but I do watch clips from SKY, BBC, ITV etc from time to time, it's just a bit tedious to find the whole pre/post match segments. So, maybe I'm not the best person to judge their punditry.
Click to expand...

I’ve watched a couple of those Gary Neville podcasts with him, Carra, Ian Wright, Roy Keane & Jill Scott and she doesn’t look out of place in that company - I have a lot of time for Ian Wright too.

I mean, Jill Scot pretty much has more England Caps that Neville, Carragher & Wright combined - which is something I suppose

That’s about it other than presenters who I barely notice other than than I’m thankful I’m not having to look at Richard Keys.
 
Last edited:
I'm too busy watching the footy to regard commentary as anything other than background noise.

As for the half time and full time punditry - half time is for a brew, full time and the channel is switched. I've just watched it, why do I need someone (male or female) to tell me what I've just seen?

Unsure where Barton come in this...
 
jexykrodic said:
I'm too busy watching the footy to regard commentary as anything other than background noise.

As for the half time and full time punditry - half time is for a brew, full time and the channel is switched. I've just watched it, why do I need someone (male or female) to tell me what I've just seen?

Unsure where Barton come in this...
Click to expand...

You may have missed the Tweet where Barton basically complains that his kids won’t get a job in football because they’re male & white.

The trajectory is downwards from there.
 
StevieM said:
You may have missed the Tweet where Barton basically complains that his kids won’t get a job in football because they’re male & white.

The trajectory is downwards from there.
Click to expand...
Aye, I'm sure it's just because they're male and white that they'll struggle to get a job in football. The most persecuted denomination; the white male
 
Incidentally, all punditry is fucking awful. Rarely is it tactical analysis; as the producers would rather the advertisement time rather than analysis.

Man, woman, white,black; couldn't care. Just get big Meeks and Roy Keane on to make me smile and I'm happy
 
He could be right. In UK we do know that at least one major insurer (Amanda Blanc CEO AVIVA) vets white male hires personally. Only white mind.

If she's doing this you can bet others in the industry are. Of course media companies engage in this discrimination (or progressive policy if you deem it suitable), even the feckin' RAF are (were?) using skin colour in recruiting until they couldn't get sufficient applications...
 
This explains my disappointing lack of wealth. The system is against me as I'm a straight white male. It's obviously not my dubious life choices!

Makes me feel good about myself.
 
StevieM said:
@Dee & @Modo

Question for you - are the female pundits any good - like so said, don’t get the same commentators over here.

My guess is that’s the crux of the matter - the claim being that they’re shit and being given the gig not because of ability - so what’s the feeling?

I get the “idea” that a make that’s played at the top has a lot more “experience “ in the game… but I just can’t shift an image of a pundit panel consisting of Harry Kane, Jack Grealish & John Terry (in full kit) and that fills me with great sadness.
Click to expand...

They seem fine to me, at least as good as the average male pundit, who are generally pretty terrible.

But that ability isn't WHY they're given the jobs. They're given the jobs because they're women, just like the male pundits are given the jobs because they're famous. The ability to talk semi-coherently about football is only the most trivial qualification.

If anyone actually doubts that just consider the sheer number of former lower league male players between say 35-55 who played at least as high a level as the women who are getting the jobs. It's got to be at least 10x the number. And yet basically none of them get the work - especially for the bigger games.

I'm not even getting into whether or not this discrimination is good or just or whatever, just plainly stating that it OBVIOUSLY exists. The jobs used to be allocated on fame plus a kind of old boys network, now it's some of that and some because they're women.
 
jexykrodic said:
In businesses infected with DEI.
Click to expand...
Not really, it's jolt for some systems which refuse to change. I have many discussions with South African Expats over here moaning about it.
I can understand reasons why it's been brought in by some areas where there is a huge lack of diversity. I can tell you now, in my sector I worked in for e.g. the lack of diversity was a huge issue when I first started as a grad and it introduced a very toxic set of team leads as an intern who acted in certain entitled and protective manner that contributed to this which was very different to make up of my university undergrad representation but due to various drives for diversity, the work experience definitely improved in general due to this.
Obviously in my view problem with representation as an example is the tory cabinet over the last 6yrs :)
 
peterhague said:
They seem fine to me, at least as good as the average male pundit, who are generally pretty terrible.

But that ability isn't WHY they're given the jobs. They're given the jobs because they're women, just like the male pundits are given the jobs because they're famous. The ability to talk semi-coherently about football is only the most trivial qualification.

If anyone actually doubts that just consider the sheer number of former lower league male players between say 35-55 who played at least as high a level as the women who are getting the jobs. It's got to be at least 10x the number. And yet basically none of them get the work - especially for the bigger games.

I'm not even getting into whether or not this discrimination is good or just or whatever, just plainly stating that it OBVIOUSLY exists. The jobs used to be allocated on fame plus a kind of old boys network, now it's some of that and some because they're women.
Click to expand...

That’s fine then I guess - although I guess if you watch or follow women’s football some of the women might be famous or inspiring as well.

It doesn’t appear that they’ve just randomly picked women up off the street and if, as you say, and I don’t disagree, they’re not being selected on ability, then being female, good at football and famous, is as good a reason as being male, good at football and famous. The only difference would appear to be the “old boys network” - which I suppose is kind of positive discrimination for men that no-one worries too much about.

I think the attitude of the average women to the game, based on my own experience, changes significantly when they see other women involved in it.
 
Last edited:
I think that some of the female pundits are shite, and some are good. Same as the guys. We best just get on with it. The dickheads who abuse these women relentlessly on social media (and they do) makes me want them on 24/7 just to wind up those utter cuntwallops.
 
StevieM said:
That’s fine then I guess - although I guess if you watch or follow women’s football some of the women might be famous or inspiring as well.

It doesn’t appear that they’ve just randomly picked women up off the street and if, as you say, and I don’t disagree, they’re not being selected on ability, then being female, good at football and famous, is as good a reason as being male, good at football and famous. The only difference would appear to be the “old boys network” - which I suppose is kind of positive discrimination for men that no-one worries too much about.

I think the attitude of the average women to the game, based on my own experience, changes significantly when they see other women involved in it.
Click to expand...

I'm being pedantic, but I don't think fame plays any part in the women getting work, simply because they're not famous. That's the reason I'm so sure it's positive discrimination. It's either that or to appeal to women viewers or something like that - I don't buy that but it does at least fit the facts. One way or another, it's because they're women.

But as much as I hate political correctness, when I see the absolutely disgusting abuse they get then it seems pathetic to complain about it.
 
Obvs Joey Barton is an obnoxious cocksucker. But that aside, for my own benefit, can someone tell me who the good female pundits are please so I can look out for them?
 
LarryHagman said:
Obvs Joey Barton is an obnoxious cocksucker. But that aside, for my own benefit, can someone tell me who the good female pundits are please so I can look out for them?
Click to expand...
I wish we could just jump this to another context (thread) because I worry everything I post has to go through a lens of "Is he a Barton supporter"

From my PoV the female non-pro host/commentators have had a big affect. Gabby Logan and Kelly (Daglish?) as the 'old guard' (sorry!) and Alex Scott and [edit] Laura Woods (she is the best IMO) have shown that it is a level playing field. WRT the pundits, as above it's not a great starting place but there's yet to be a single female pundit I've thought, "crikey you're right I hadn't spotted that". Unfortunately it seems that's not a blocker for male or female. So as it stands there's a small number of male ex-Pros that are worth listening to their expert analysis. A larger group of male & female ex-pros that do the standards quotes and tripe and some god awful ones you want to avoid.

Honestly if I had the gun to remove some other in match co-commentators I'd be going for some high profile male ex-pros first but I'd be really hoping for a much improved male AND female cohort to replace them.

Clearly, across the board, the broadcasters want equality in roles, which is laudable, it would be great if we could define want the role needs

... and if the decision is we need a middle aged white bloke with uncool glasses then we'll all be happy Stephen Warnock is gold for life :)
 
Last edited:
peterhague said:
I'm being pedantic, but I don't think fame plays any part in the women getting work, simply because they're not famous. That's the reason I'm so sure it's positive discrimination. It's either that or to appeal to women viewers or something like that - I don't buy that but it does at least fit the facts. One way or another, it's because they're women.

But as much as I hate political correctness, when I see the absolutely disgusting abuse they get then it seems pathetic to complain about it.
Click to expand...

Hard for me to say whether the commentators in England could be defined as famous or not - I neither see/hear their punditry and I don’t follow woman’s football.

What I will say is, if you were to pick the current most famous Australian footballer - then it would be a woman. I couldn’t tell you who plays upfront for the men’s team and I could barely name a player in the current team - and that’s despite then currently playing in a major international tournament - but most on here will have heard of or recognise Sam Kerr.

While I’d absolutely agree that, particularly in Europe, male footballers are clearly more “famous”, I think that’s changing and it’d be no surprise if young girls growing up were more inclined to have pictures of female footballers on their wall and in a few, I dunno, decades time, some female footballers are as famous as their male counterparts.

Absolutely agree with your last paragraph.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Whaddapie
Fears for the run-in...
2
Replies
44
Views
992
Dreambeliever
Dreambeliever
6TimesaRed
Boom bust cycle
2
Replies
54
Views
873
darkstarexodus
darkstarexodus
moron
    • Like
  • Locked
The Positive and Optimistic Life Without Klopp
Replies
14
Views
950
singlerider
singlerider
rurikbird
    • Like
Big game blues
2
Replies
53
Views
2K
King Binny
King Binny
localny
    • Like
    • Love
Pinch me 2024
Replies
15
Views
573
localny
localny
Back
Top Bottom