The Lovely Mark Lawrenson

[paul_e]

The strange thing is Cricket has a similar model whereby most pundits are ex-players but the level of knowledge they bring is just so much higher.

The worst thing is there are so many good analyst around who could do an excellent job with the football but yet no one is willing to replace the big name ex-player with the guy who can actually do the job.  It's not just england with this problem though, football pundits are pretty poor everywhere you go.

[Matt Collins]

Gary Neville, and then Graeme Souness, are so far ahead of other pundits its embarassing. Hansen knows what he's talking about, but can't really be bothered. I don't think the others even really have much to add. I'm a massive advocate of the BBC generally, but their football coverage - like their cricket coverage used to be - is a good example of how a lack of genuine competition can lead to laziness.

[Percy McCarthy]

I used to like MOTD when it was Lynam, Hansen and Brooking.

I think it helped that we were quite good too as I recall.

[lovejoy]

Gary Neville, and then Graeme Souness, are so far ahead of other pundits its embarassing. Hansen knows what he's talking about, but can't really be bothered. I don't think the others even really have much to add. I'm a massive advocate of the BBC generally, but their football coverage - like their cricket coverage used to be - is a good example of how a lack of genuine competition can lead to laziness.

Yes, agreed. You don't often hear people praising Souness but he's one of the best as he says it as he sees it rather than being too afraid to criticise for fear of upsetting people or because the TV network want to maintain the match was "great".

[Toronto Villa]

The one thing that Souness can never be accused is being afraid to upset anyone. Sometimes like in punditry it is refreshing though I'm sure he might have measured it better during his managerial career.

[E I Adio]

The one thing that Souness can never be accused is being afraid to upset anyone. Sometimes like in punditry it is refreshing though I'm sure he might have measured it better during his managerial career.

At least he's consistent. He didn't mind upsetting opposing teams with less than fair tackles in his playing career.

[johnny from donny]

i remember Stan Collymore criticising motd a couple of years back, views pretty much the same as many on here, lazy pundits, lack of research etc. Say what you want about him (and many have) but when Stan covers a match you can tell he's done his research

[tomd2103]

I agree with Somniloqism. Long overdue for a total clear out and rethink.

The current style is tired, insipid, lacking in any insight and in Lawrenson's case also lazy, and in Shearer's case lacking in anything worth listening to. In fact, I've got into the habit of either switching the sound off or flicking channels between games.

Hanson I still have a bit of time for, but it's really not good enough to rely just on animated computer wizardry to keep us interested during the punditry. (Which it doesn't anyway)

It's not just the case with football at the BBC.  The rugby punditry is just the same and is way behind the level of analysis on Sky.

[Californian Villain]

The strange thing is Cricket has a similar model whereby most pundits are ex-players but the level of knowledge they bring is just so much higher.

The worst thing is there are so many good analyst around who could do an excellent job with the football but yet no one is willing to replace the big name ex-player with the guy who can actually do the job.  It's not just england with this problem though, football pundits are pretty poor everywhere you go.

Too right; until recently FSC's main pundit was 60s relic Tommy Smith !!

[Toronto Villa]

The strange thing is Cricket has a similar model whereby most pundits are ex-players but the level of knowledge they bring is just so much higher.

The worst thing is there are so many good analyst around who could do an excellent job with the football but yet no one is willing to replace the big name ex-player with the guy who can actually do the job.  It's not just england with this problem though, football pundits are pretty poor everywhere you go.

Too right; until recently FSC's main pundit was 60s relic Tommy Smith !!

One massively annoying wanker and only topped by the Geordie twat Ray Hudson on Gol TV making watching Spanish games impossible.

[Kingthing]

Years ago there was a thread here entitled " two bullets, who do you shoot?"  I put forward Mark Lawrenson for the first and the second one to make sure.

He is one of 4 reasons I record MOTD and don't watch it live.

[Sexual Ealing]

I agree that the level of punditry on the BBC is terrible. I remember listening to the Football Ramble podcast during the South Africa World Cup and they were talking about one of them (let's say it was Shearer, but I don't know for sure) having said "well, we don't know much about (say) Togo" and the FR contributor screamed "why not?! What have you been doing all day?! This is your job!", which kind of sums up the problem with them.

On another note, there is no anti-Villa agenda in the media, or anywhere else outside the Midlands. Nobody cares, that's all.

[JD]

I don't give a shit what he thinks. We're Aston Villa.

Totally agree Leeg. Who is he again??

[eamonn]

I thought he was nice about us and informed too last Sat after the Liverpool game but I'm quite surprised at that lazy sentence. We have little quality? I would argue that we have a lot of potentially very good quality - which the second goal last week proved and Lawrensen actually analysed. While Vlaar, Dunne, N'Zogbia, Agbonlahor and the two Benters have all pretty much proven quality. I doubt he thinks Norwich or West Brom or even Swansea have much more quality either but they all seem to be doing well. He goes for the easy/lazy one-liner to try and sum-up a club. It's usually that we're a selling club - like Arsenal then, so it's good of him to vary the critique.

[tomd2103]

I thought he was nice about us and informed too last Sat after the Liverpool game but I'm quite surprised at that lazy sentence. We have little quality? I would argue that we have a lot of potentially very good quality - which the second goal last week proved and Lawrensen actually analysed. While Vlaar, Dunne, N'Zogbia, Agbonlahor and the two Benters have all pretty much proven quality. I doubt he thinks Norwich or West Brom or even Swansea have much more quality either but they all seem to be doing well. He goes for the easy/lazy one-liner to try and sum-up a club. It's usually that we're a selling club - like Arsenal then, so it's good of him to vary the critique.

Up until last weekend it was "they struggle to score goals".   He Nice to see he has come out with a different one now.