Greenlizard0 Premier League & FA Cup QF Football Thread ** spoilers ** [16th - 17th March 2024]

[C Kent]

I think this and other posts slating Gakpo are so harsh.

No they arent, yesterday summed up everything he is about, he's the antithesis of a Klopp forward. He doesn't score, he doesn't create (assists or big chances), he doesn't press, he doesnt run. Every single one of us knew the kind of performance he would give as soon as he was subbed on, man utd were shocking in that 2nd half, if ever their was a time to come on and show what he was about it that was it, instead we got a guy that sauntered around the pitch like he couldnt give a ****. I'd have preferred it if he gave his standard anonymous performance instead of what he churned out in the game.

Did he play well yesterday when he came on? No. Did Liverpool? Not really. We dont win the league cup without him this season and hes still got 13 goals and 5 assists across the comps. That isnt a bad return. At the end of the day he's the 5th choice forward and even then his return is impressive.

So he's this season Minamino? Except Takumi was arguably more important in us winning the LC a few seasons back - I'd expect you could have any of the kids take his place and we'd still have won it this season. Hell, when was his last really good game? the 7 nil over a year ago probably.

Is he *****? No, clearly not. He just isn't suited to this team or the Premier League, stick him in Serie A and he'd probably be a decent forward.

 

[Thekwango]

he put a shift in yesterday.

He’s not putting a shift in for the team when he stops to hold his eye after being muscled off the ball, allowing the opponent to stroll away with the ball.

 

[Tombstone]

I think this and other posts slating Gakpo are so harsh. Did he play well yesterday when he came on? No. Did Liverpool? Not really. We dont win the league cup without him this season and hes still got 13 goals and 5 assists across the comps. That isnt a bad return. At the end of the day he's the 5th choice forward and even then his return is impressive.

It didnt help really that he was the wrong sub for this game. Yesterdays game was about pacey breaks, rapid accurate passing and a need for clinical finishing. Unfortunately for the past few months Gakpos finishing has been the opposite of clinical, his passing has been sloppy, he's been dispossessed too easily and he doesnt have any pace. Just wasnt the right sub for the game being played on the pitch, if it had been me, I would have rolled the dice and put Danns on, he has pace, youth, energy and a good eye for goal, I think he would have suited the game better than Gakpo.

 

[dannyjo22]

Catching up with yesterday's match of the day. Who is the woman presenting and why? Another woman who really struggles to speak is offerering insight and its left to Glen Whelan of all people for some actual experience of the men's game. What is going on?!

None of them make me cringe as much as that Emma Jones woman who obviously has a massive chest but it's all about being a serious sports journalist apart from her awful dance clips like some tik tok ***** so we can pretend it's not all about her chest bouncing up and down. I don't mind Alex Scott but the rest I can easily pass on but. Just are there are plenty of male ones who are terrible but they are not taking instagram selfie backshots in the mirror and then complain they aren't taken seriously as a sports presenter/journalist.

 

[Robbo]

I think Eni Aluko has been unfairly targeted by the idiot Joey Barton, but she is a terrible pundit. Most male pundits aren't particularly great either, the general standard is pretty poor.

Personally I don't see the obvious comparisons between the men and women's games, so it doesn't really work if they're commenting from an ex-players perspective.

 

[CliffyG]

It just seems like they are forcing women analysts / presenters to box tick. Same as some Sky games now where we only have 1 man.

 

[scarps]

I think Eni Aluko has been unfairly targeted by the idiot Joey Barton, but she is a terrible pundit. Most male pundits aren't particularly great either, the general standard is pretty poor.

Personally I don't see the obvious comparisons between the men and women's games, so it doesn't really work if they're commenting from an ex-players perspective.

Most other sports have men and women commentating on each other sports, never been a problem in Tennis, Track and Field, winter sports, cycling etc. Eurosport/discovery have a great mix of male and female presenters and commentators on Tennis, cycling, skiing to name a few.
I don't really have a problem with who does the football stuff, most the men are dreadful too so doesn't really make much difference.
Plus no one really has a problem with the likes of Laura Woods, Kate Abdo doing men's football, I wonder why they get a pass....

 

[Robbo]

Plus no one really has a problem with the likes of Laura Woods, Kate Abdo doing men's football, I wonder why they get a pass....

They are presenters though and don't really give an opinion, so there is a difference there. Some of the female pundits are good - Izzy Christiansen on Sky comes across well.

 

[ArcticHeron]

It just seems like they are forcing women analysts / presenters to box tick. Same as some Sky games now where we only have 1 man.

Can't see why that's an issue. They're trying to grow the sport. There's no reason why women can't do observations/punditry. As @scarps said, most fans despise the majority of male pundits anyway.

 

[C Kent]

Plus no one really has a problem with the likes of Laura Woods, Kate Abdo doing men's football, I wonder why they get a pass....

Because they have personality?

 

[scarps]

Because they have personality?

They do and they are pretty good at what they do, well Kate Abdo is, Laura Woods just seem to laugh a lot recently.

I doubt that's the reason for most men's views though.

 

[scarps]

They are presenters though and don't really give an opinion, so there is a difference there. Some of the female pundits are good - Izzy Christiansen on Sky comes across well.

I guess so but Barton said he loves watching Tennis, this has male and female commentators so how come that is fine for him?
The one's that do the reporting from the stands on soccer Saturday generally seem good to me, I think one has got a promotion to do presenting now, can't remember the name, but the way Barton went about it he just gave all the women a bad name.

 

[Nate75]

No one ever used to moan about pundits "back in the day", nobody cared.

I think it's a cool kids thing these days really to moan about them.

 

[CliffyG]

Can't see why that's an issue. They're trying to grow the sport. There's no reason why women can't do observations/punditry. As @scarps said, most fans despise the majority of male pundits anyway.

Trying to grow what sport?

Men's and woman's games are completely different, I think everyone agrees on that front. The experiences from the woman's game will not translate directly to the men's game. Its why I'd rather have men calling the game and not have programs with men as the minority.

 

[dannyjo22]

I think Eni Aluko has been unfairly targeted by the idiot Joey Barton, but she is a terrible pundit.

Unfairly treated how? When Phil Neville tried his hand at commentary he got murdered on social media and on here. No one batted an eyelid at the abuse he received because he was crap. Aluko is at least as crap as him.

 

[fez]

I guess so but Barton said he loves watching Tennis, this has male and female commentators so how come that is fine for him?

Because the man is an absolute pillock. He says about 20% reasonable opinions and then 80% of it is just complete garbage. I appreciate it when people speak their mind when it has a basis in reality and when its not just a bunch on misogynistic crap but unfortunately far too much of his stuff fits that bill.

Unfairly treated how? When Phil Neville tried his hand at commentary he got murdered on social media and on here. No one batted an eyelid at the abuse he received because he was crap. Aluko is at least as crap as him.

No one battered an eyelid because he is a straight white male. Its genuinely that simple. I have read articles from various straight white men where they will drop in that they received awful abuse for something. Death threats, threats to their family etc. Its just another sentence. The article might be about their struggle with whatever the issue was that caused it but that will almost never be the focus of the article.

As soon as that person is a woman or a minority the whole focus is on the abuse they received and how disgusting it was. How sexist and racist etc. Its all politicised. You cannot be seen to criticise anyone from certain groups without people suggesting you have ulterior motives. I get that there are racist, sexist ******** out there but there are also far more people who are just happy to call it as they see it. If you're crap at a job, you're crap at a job. That knows no skin colour or gender.

 

[ArcticHeron]

Trying to grow what sport?

Men's and woman's games are completely different, I think everyone agrees on that front. The experiences from the woman's game will not translate directly to the men's game. Its why I'd rather have men calling the game and not have programs with men as the minority.

You can cross pollinate to promote growth though. It'll benefit every club in the league and beyond if the women's side of the sport get's bigger. If you're argument is that you need to have played men's professional football to have any right to commentate on it then you have to call out the likes of Peter Drury and Martin Tyler, both of which never played professionally.

It's not that I think female commentators should be immune from criticism, but to discount them all together just because of their gender is bizarre to me. Every female pundit I've ever heard has still been more capable then the likes of Agbonlahor or Andy Goldstein...

 

[CliffyG]

It will mean the men's game stops subsidising the women's yes but I can't see any other benefit to the men's game.

Everyone can have an opinion yes but there is a reason nearly every pundit / co commentator has played the men's game. Not only for their opinion but for their experience of the game.

I'm not discounting them all together, I don't mind a few of them. It's just now it's a box ticking exercise to get as many on as possible and it's massively diluting the quality.

I will admit I'm not a fan of the womens game, not interested in watching it at all but that doesn't make me misogynistic and nor does my view on the female pundits / co commentators. It seems like that's just the go to argument for anyone that speaks out.

 

[ArcticHeron]

I will admit I'm not a fan of the womens game, not interested in watching it at all but that doesn't make me misogynistic and nor does my view on the female pundits / co commentators. It seems like that's just the go to argument for anyone that speaks out.

Not at all. You're allowed to disagree without it being a hard line issue. My point I suppose is that if we're going to pick and choose who has the requisite experience and knowledge enough to be allowed to make judgements on the sport, I'd get rid of half the drips on TalkSport before any of the female pundits I've seen.

It will mean the men's game stops subsidising the women's yes but I can't see any other benefit to the men's game.

If we could get women's football even half as popular you'd be pulling in more revenue from every existing source that's already available to the men's game ie. matchday money, TV revenue and just pure merch you're able to shift. I'm not saying all that revenue get's spent on the men's team, but more revenue for any club can only ever be a good thing.

 

[fez]

Everyone can have an opinion yes but there is a reason nearly every pundit / co commentator has played the men's game. Not only for their opinion but for their experience of the game.

This comes under the umbrella of "makes sense until you scratch the surface". Many of these commentators haven't been in the game for decades and its moved on. Some of them offer zero insight and struggle to rub their two braincells together. Many of them wheel out the same tired lines that the women being criticised do. There are much better pundits out there who either haven't played the game at an elite level or weren't household names.

To my mind, the main things that get you a job as a pundit are:

Wanting to be one and being an ex-pro
Being a well known ex-pro
Being able to string together some semblance of a sentence on TV.

I'm not discounting them all together, I don't mind a few of them. It's just now it's a box ticking exercise to get as many on as possible and it's massively diluting the quality.

I will admit I'm not a fan of the womens game, not interested in watching it at all but that doesn't make me misogynistic and nor does my view on the female pundits / co commentators. It seems like that's just the go to argument for anyone that speaks out.

It is indeed a box ticking exercise but I would care more if the previous system was even a vague meritocracy but I don't see "female and played football" as any worse than "male and played football". The men have just been doing it longer so some of the trash has been cleaned out. Theres still far too many crap male pundits and commentators.

And no, not being interested in the womens game is absolutely fine. I have almost no interest outside of major tournaments if the England women get to the quarters and beyond. Then I will happily support them. The standard is still getting better and its very watchable. I just don't have the time or inclination to watch it outside of special occasions. I don't have time to watch most United games these days. Anyway, who needs to watch games when you can just keep an eye on the xG.