By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Yes I am aware that it's controversial. Probably classed as sexist, but I dislike women commentators/pundits in football. Before anyone says I don't believe a woman's place is either in the kitchen or the bedroom. They have every right to be on a par with men in any aspect of life.
1
Controversial I know. on 16:36 - Jul 5 with 1065 views
Maybe the issue is football, perhaps reflected in the banal things that footballers say when interviewed at games.
As it is, I can't say I've been particularly impressed with any of the half-time pundits this time round who clearly don't have the time to come up with the sort of analysis that appears on Match of the Day.
Take as a contrast athletics, where Denise Lewis and Paul Ratcliffe, who comment on both men's and women's, are top notch.
[Post edited 5 Jul 16:43]
1
Controversial I know. on 16:56 - Jul 5 with 1006 views
Controversial I know. on 15:38 - Jul 5 by Whos_blue
"where 'one' was commentating".
In one phrase you've completely erased them as people.
Is that how you refer to your mum, sister, daughter or any female friends?
Completely classless and for the record, you don't speak for me or what I think.
Vile post.
Nothing vile about it at all. You have turned it on its head and made it out to be something it isn’t. They are sh!ite at commentating on the men’s game. Doesn’t mean I dislike women,far from it. But in this instance Men’s football and women do not mix. See the word “Men’s” it’s there for a reason.
-5
Controversial I know. on 16:57 - Jul 5 with 999 views
Controversial I know. on 16:56 - Jul 5 by blueoutlook
Nothing vile about it at all. You have turned it on its head and made it out to be something it isn’t. They are sh!ite at commentating on the men’s game. Doesn’t mean I dislike women,far from it. But in this instance Men’s football and women do not mix. See the word “Men’s” it’s there for a reason.
Are some of your best friends women?
0
Controversial I know. on 17:48 - Jul 5 with 949 views
I don't think it's sexist to be aware of the divergence of competitiveness in men's vs women's football. It's not like tennis where there are similar quantities of both genders playing. Far more men play and watch football than women, and it's not sexist to say this. The lower competitiveness and interest means there are far fewer women professional footballers than there are men, far less money, and lower stakes. There have been reams of column inches written today calling out that Uzbekistan is hardly a hotbed of football, and a referee with more experience in running top-level matches should have been chosen for yesterday's farcical France vs Paraguay match. It's not much of a stretch to say similar for commentators/pundits.
But, and it's a big but: we need a period of positive discrimination. It'll be good for the game if football can become more like tennis where there's more gender equality, and the sport becomes more popular with the "other" half of humanity. Hence I don't mind there being outsize representation of women in football media. But positive discrimination can't go on forever for the same principle people are citing in this thread: we shouldn't discriminate against people because of their gender - because it's sexist. Positive eventually becomes negative because there's prejudice in the other direction. Giving preferential selection to groups rather than by ability/experience/skill should be temporary, and reviewed periodically against aims.
[Post edited 5 Jul 18:51]
0
Controversial I know. on 17:55 - Jul 5 with 926 views
Controversial I know. on 13:44 - Jul 5 by eireblue
So what’s your experience of being coached by someone who’s has less pace and power?
How would you know an excellent coach or analyst can’t add value to an elite sportsman?
Most coaches have less pace and power than the people they coach.
Seems to me you are posting from the same perspective that you think a female has, hasn’t done it, so can’t understand it.
You are not an elite sportsperson that has been coached to be better, so you haven’t done it, so can’t understand it, surely that is a logically consistent position?
Or alternatively, let’s take this example, why would a female physio, not understand stress and strain on a human body that happens to be male.
Sorry, I’ve been out this afternoon.
Happy for you to PM me if you wish and I’ll try and explain what I’m on about a little better. Paragraph 4 is not what I’m saying at all.
0
Controversial I know. on 17:59 - Jul 5 with 906 views
Controversial I know. on 17:55 - Jul 5 by Churchman
Sorry, I’ve been out this afternoon.
Happy for you to PM me if you wish and I’ll try and explain what I’m on about a little better. Paragraph 4 is not what I’m saying at all.
Why PM, you said it is an interesting discussion. Why can’t everyone join in?
The most important skills of a coach are observation and communication, you may disagree.
The most important skills of a pundit, would seem to be observation and communication. Since the watch stuff, and the talk about it.
Your observation that the men’s game is different because of people running faster and being stronger, has not stopped men, who can’t run fast and are weaker, from being incredibly good coaches.
One of the lessons I have learnt from coaches is that skill can over come strength. Skill is not a function of pace and power. Sure if you have equally skilled contestants, the faster stronger would win.
So I don’t see why or how you need a male voice and coach to improve a male player or a team.
Your assertion that a female can’t understand a male game doesn’t hold for me. And the only objection you have so far, the physical attributes of coach/commentator, to the people being observed, also applies to men.
To me the only defining characteristic raised so far is then gender. Which is a prejudice or preference.
To try and justify that prejudice or preference by saying women can’t do coaching/commentating that does seem dismissive of the women that can do it.
I don't understand why people who don't like female pundits feel the need to tell the rest of us. No one is forcing you to listen. I mute the HT pundits when it's the likes of Rooney, Merson, Shearer and Joe Cole.
Like with the men, there are good and bad female pundits.
Sue Smith is the best Soccer Saturday pundit and it's not even close.
It's like the people who pop up during the women's World Cup or Euros and feel the need to tell everyone that they're not sexist but they can't get into watching the tournaments.
Previously used image of Principal Skinner applies.
0
Controversial I know. on 19:06 - Jul 5 with 835 views
Controversial I know. on 16:56 - Jul 5 by blueoutlook
Nothing vile about it at all. You have turned it on its head and made it out to be something it isn’t. They are sh!ite at commentating on the men’s game. Doesn’t mean I dislike women,far from it. But in this instance Men’s football and women do not mix. See the word “Men’s” it’s there for a reason.
Completely disagree. Robyn Cowan (I think it’s her) has been a superb commentator at these finals. Far better than the usual blokes who witter away inanely. Several of us the other night were talking about how much better she was and the relief of having a commentator who didn’t feel the need to fill every quiet moment just for the sake of it.
Gabby Logan’s been a top class presenter for years. I like Kelly Cates too, even though it seems many don’t; she’s genuine and humble imo.
The only female commentator who really grates with me is the one with a South African accent. There’s nothing wrong with what she says, I just find her voice jarring for some reason.
Controversial I know. on 19:06 - Jul 5 by Swansea_Blue
Completely disagree. Robyn Cowan (I think it’s her) has been a superb commentator at these finals. Far better than the usual blokes who witter away inanely. Several of us the other night were talking about how much better she was and the relief of having a commentator who didn’t feel the need to fill every quiet moment just for the sake of it.
Gabby Logan’s been a top class presenter for years. I like Kelly Cates too, even though it seems many don’t; she’s genuine and humble imo.
The only female commentator who really grates with me is the one with a South African accent. There’s nothing wrong with what she says, I just find her voice jarring for some reason.
I have no problem with Gabby Logan presenting. She does that job great. In fact I prefer her to the men in that respect. I’m just not a fan of women commentating.
0
Controversial I know. on 19:12 - Jul 5 with 825 views
You’re just not used to it OF. Female commentators and pundits used to sound strange to me, but over time it’s got to the point I don’t notice any more. There’s nothing wrong BBC deserves credit for giving them the opportunity and for generally pushing women’s football in general. One day people will look back incredulously at how male-focussed the game was. It won’t be long before female managers coaches become commonplace (there’s absolutely no reason why not given women’s position in other industries).
Controversial I know. on 16:24 - Jul 5 by BlueBoots
"Like with the men, there are good and bad female pundits."
That said, I've yet to see a female pundit worse than Wayne Rooney; bloke can hardly string a sentence together, and when he does, never has anything particularly insightful to say. Absolutely stealing a living at it, probably just as he was as a manager.
Yes, there are terrible male pundits e.g. Wayne Rooney, who surely only gets the job because he was an excellent, high profile footballer & terrible female pundits e.g. Eni Aluko who presumably got the job because she was a high profile female footballer. However, Rooney (deservedly) gets stick for being rubbish at his job, but Aluko seems to get it on the basis of being female.
Do you feel the same about male commentators who didn't play the game to a notable level? Quick examples off the top of my head would be Bruce-Ball, John Murray, Martin Tyler, Peter Drury, John Motson, Barry Davies, Kenneth Wolstenholme.. actually, off the top of my head I don't know of a male lead commentator who enjoyed a professional career prior to broadcasting.
And do you feel the same about male pundits who never played? R5L's regular contributors include Julien Laurens, Tim Vickery, Guilem Balague, "statman Dave".. I find the journalists and analysts often to be more insightful and engaging than your Rooney and Giroud, personally.
If you have issues with the above too then you're being consistent. Otherwise, it looks probable that your issue is simply women's voices and faces in the man cave rather than anything more substantial than that. Because women are equally capable of using their brains to study, watch and opine on the men's game obviously, much as they can't play elite men's football (something they share with 99.9% of men, including Mourinho and McKenna).
being a commentator is a totally different role from being a pundit, although that role changed when TV brought in the "co-commentator", usually an ex pro who was supposed to add value by spotting stuff that the match commentator couldn't. The role has now expanded so the second guy is now a so-called "colour commentator" whose job is to add stats, context etc, while the match commentator says who has the ball etc. You don't need to have played football at a high level to be a match commentator.
It's not interesting at all. It's plain old fashioned sexism which you are trying to give a veil of rationality and depth. It has neither. If you think some of the hackneyed old pros offering lazy uninformed views are better than Emma Hayes and Karen Carney, or the best journalists, then wow frankly.
[Post edited 5 Jul 12:59]
You’ve missed the point…. Again.
Sigh.
RIP Sir Bobby
1
Controversial I know. on 20:46 - Jul 5 with 679 views
Controversial I know. on 10:26 - Jul 5 by Churchman
Actually I feel the same. I wondered if it’s sexism. Don’t do isms so no. Is it because it’s a relatively recent phenomena. Maybe, but I don’t think so. Is it because they are no good. No, there’s just as many dreadful male commentators and pundits including the abysmal Shearer and whine merchant Dixon.
I think it’s because women’s football, like cricket and some other sports, is fundamentally different. How can they truly understand it from an expert perspective any more than a male understand women’s football?
The contradiction is that I have no problem with it with things like athletics, gymnastics, winter sports so maybe it comes down to familiarity.
I have no problem with women like Scott, Logan and Cates (all excellent) chairing panels but somehow that’s different.
Just for balance, Mrs C feels the same way. The one that drives her nuts is the cricket commentator Lydia Greenway, or Lydia Dustbin, as she likes to call her.
An interesting thread/question.
Don’t do isms? What fcking nonsense is this.
I wonder how many you’ve been impacted by.
I’m not reading this thread it’s a car crash from the outset.
Controversial I know. on 17:48 - Jul 5 by grow_our_own
I don't think it's sexist to be aware of the divergence of competitiveness in men's vs women's football. It's not like tennis where there are similar quantities of both genders playing. Far more men play and watch football than women, and it's not sexist to say this. The lower competitiveness and interest means there are far fewer women professional footballers than there are men, far less money, and lower stakes. There have been reams of column inches written today calling out that Uzbekistan is hardly a hotbed of football, and a referee with more experience in running top-level matches should have been chosen for yesterday's farcical France vs Paraguay match. It's not much of a stretch to say similar for commentators/pundits.
But, and it's a big but: we need a period of positive discrimination. It'll be good for the game if football can become more like tennis where there's more gender equality, and the sport becomes more popular with the "other" half of humanity. Hence I don't mind there being outsize representation of women in football media. But positive discrimination can't go on forever for the same principle people are citing in this thread: we shouldn't discriminate against people because of their gender - because it's sexist. Positive eventually becomes negative because there's prejudice in the other direction. Giving preferential selection to groups rather than by ability/experience/skill should be temporary, and reviewed periodically against aims.
[Post edited 5 Jul 18:51]
"Far more men play and watch football than women, and it's not sexist to say this. The lower competitiveness and interest means there are far fewer women professional footballers than there are men, far less money, and lower stakes."
Lower competitiveness and interest? You've completely overlooked the fact that women were actively hindered in their efforts to play this sport, by the FA, for about 50 years. Is it any wonder the women's game is so far behind, and why so many men feel football is 'their domain'? It's this sort of intimidating behavior over the years which has discouraged many women from getting involved in the men's game as supporters or staff, and even some feeling uncomfortable giving their opinion on the game, in any setting, but particularly online. .
Controversial I know. on 21:02 - Jul 5 by vapour_trail
Don’t do isms? What fcking nonsense is this.
I wonder how many you’ve been impacted by.
I’m not reading this thread it’s a car crash from the outset.
If you don’t want to read the thread, fine. Yet you choose to comment and use the f word. A view is a view. You view it as nonsense. Up to you, given you’ve not read the thread.
How many what have I been impacted by? Here’s an idea. If you wish to ask a question, do so.
-2
Controversial I know. on 22:11 - Jul 5 with 537 views
"Far more men play and watch football than women, and it's not sexist to say this. The lower competitiveness and interest means there are far fewer women professional footballers than there are men, far less money, and lower stakes."
Lower competitiveness and interest? You've completely overlooked the fact that women were actively hindered in their efforts to play this sport, by the FA, for about 50 years. Is it any wonder the women's game is so far behind, and why so many men feel football is 'their domain'? It's this sort of intimidating behavior over the years which has discouraged many women from getting involved in the men's game as supporters or staff, and even some feeling uncomfortable giving their opinion on the game, in any setting, but particularly online. .
[Post edited 5 Jul 21:49]
"women were actively hindered" - agreed. Hence positive discrimination needed. But positive discrimination should be seen as what it is: a necessary evil.
0
Controversial I know. on 22:16 - Jul 5 with 529 views
Controversial I know. on 16:56 - Jul 5 by blueoutlook
Nothing vile about it at all. You have turned it on its head and made it out to be something it isn’t. They are sh!ite at commentating on the men’s game. Doesn’t mean I dislike women,far from it. But in this instance Men’s football and women do not mix. See the word “Men’s” it’s there for a reason.
"Doesn’t mean I dislike women,far from it."
"They break our legs and tell us to be grateful when they offer us crutches."
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
