| Joey Barton on 10:46 - Dec 12 with 2086 views | 100percent |
| Joey Barton on 10:18 - Dec 12 by SheffieldHoop |
"opportunities for everyone regardless of your sex, race or ability on the football pitch"
Do you mean opportunities to work as a pundit on live football? Is the credibility of the person doing it completely irrelevant to you? Really?
The definition of "pundit"
"an expert in a particular subject or field who is frequently called upon to give their opinions to the public."
I think we're allowing the groupthink to supersede the actual meaning of words now lads. On the most articulate and informed QPR message board in existence. It's sad to see.
Edit, I also don't think it's a case of people agreeing with Joey Barton but rather somebody with a profile in football finally having the balls to come out and say what the rest of us have been saying for a couple of years now, It's welcome no matter how poorly he words it or whether he's got a podcast to promote or whatever. [Post edited 12 Dec 2023 10:32]
|
Which would probably be accurate if we were staying with the true definition of a 'pundit'
But by associating Clinton Morrison, Jamie Mackie et al with the word 'expert' Sky are redefining the meaning of the word and IMO, probably dumbing down the definition in favour of popular characters, rather than experts in the field.
As most people have mentioned throughout the thread, there are very few experts of this subject, and the opinion really comes down to who the individual prefers.
I find 99% of the pundits commentary background noise... |  | |  |
| Joey Barton on 11:04 - Dec 12 with 2006 views | SheffieldHoop |
| Joey Barton on 10:46 - Dec 12 by 100percent |
Which would probably be accurate if we were staying with the true definition of a 'pundit'
But by associating Clinton Morrison, Jamie Mackie et al with the word 'expert' Sky are redefining the meaning of the word and IMO, probably dumbing down the definition in favour of popular characters, rather than experts in the field.
As most people have mentioned throughout the thread, there are very few experts of this subject, and the opinion really comes down to who the individual prefers.
I find 99% of the pundits commentary background noise... |
Clinton Morrison scored over 100 football league goals, played 500 odd games, won promotions and played at a world cup
Jamie Mackie played the thick end of 500 EFL games, scored a couple of very famous Premier League goals, won promotions
More or less their entire careers were also covered by Sky whether in EFL or PL. So there is also an association there.
You might not personally like the way these guys do their punditry but you can't deny that they've seen and done things in football that most people can only dream of. Including their female colleagues.
More I consider it, the more I like both Morrison and Mackie tbh. Mackie for the nostalgia and Morrison for the bants. Merson is still getting by on largely the same thing. Clinton Morrison (and his mum) are EFL Legends. So is Jamie Mackie. [Post edited 12 Dec 2023 11:09]
|  |
| "Someone despises me. That's their problem." Marcus Aurelius |
| |
| Joey Barton on 11:10 - Dec 12 with 2012 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| Joey Barton on 10:46 - Dec 12 by 100percent |
Which would probably be accurate if we were staying with the true definition of a 'pundit'
But by associating Clinton Morrison, Jamie Mackie et al with the word 'expert' Sky are redefining the meaning of the word and IMO, probably dumbing down the definition in favour of popular characters, rather than experts in the field.
As most people have mentioned throughout the thread, there are very few experts of this subject, and the opinion really comes down to who the individual prefers.
I find 99% of the pundits commentary background noise... |
‘I find 99% of the pundits commentary background noise’
Exactly where I am mate. Of all the issues to get me out of bed raging in the morning this is bottom.
Should be noted though, that two I always noticed and enjoyed, Jonathon Pierce and Jon Motson never kicked a football in anger their whole lives as far as I know.
They never have their credentials questioned.
Nonsense debate. |  | | |
| Joey Barton on 11:18 - Dec 12 with 1966 views | daveB |
| Joey Barton on 10:18 - Dec 12 by SheffieldHoop |
"opportunities for everyone regardless of your sex, race or ability on the football pitch"
Do you mean opportunities to work as a pundit on live football? Is the credibility of the person doing it completely irrelevant to you? Really?
The definition of "pundit"
"an expert in a particular subject or field who is frequently called upon to give their opinions to the public."
I think we're allowing the groupthink to supersede the actual meaning of words now lads. On the most articulate and informed QPR message board in existence. It's sad to see.
Edit, I also don't think it's a case of people agreeing with Joey Barton but rather somebody with a profile in football finally having the balls to come out and say what the rest of us have been saying for a couple of years now, It's welcome no matter how poorly he words it or whether he's got a podcast to promote or whatever. [Post edited 12 Dec 2023 10:32]
|
I'm not suggesting they get people in off the street but I don't think you need to have been a great player to be a decent pundit and I'm not really bothered if that's male or female. Someone like Jamie Mackie his footballing CV doesn't stand up to someone like Joe Cole but he got an opportunity to be a pundit and has taken it.
Ultimately the credibility you earn as a pundit is in what you say rather than what you did as a player.
I do think the standard of pundits has gone down in recent years but that's a lot more to do with tv companies wanting clips for social media rather than an in depth look at football. Someone saying something stupid or having banter gets clicks on social media and earns money but thats probably a separate issue |  | | |
| Joey Barton on 11:20 - Dec 12 with 1933 views | SheffieldHoop |
| Joey Barton on 11:10 - Dec 12 by BazzaInTheLoft |
‘I find 99% of the pundits commentary background noise’
Exactly where I am mate. Of all the issues to get me out of bed raging in the morning this is bottom.
Should be noted though, that two I always noticed and enjoyed, Jonathon Pierce and Jon Motson never kicked a football in anger their whole lives as far as I know.
They never have their credentials questioned.
Nonsense debate. |
1) They're commentators, not pundits.
And 2) That's not even true. Motson when lead commentator on the BBC for England & FA Cup (Say between 2002 and 2016) got loads of stick. Pretty sure there were even threads on older versions of this website slagging off Motty. Won't see it now tho granted. | |
| "Someone despises me. That's their problem." Marcus Aurelius |
| |
| Joey Barton on 11:21 - Dec 12 with 1955 views | 100percent |
| Joey Barton on 11:04 - Dec 12 by SheffieldHoop |
Clinton Morrison scored over 100 football league goals, played 500 odd games, won promotions and played at a world cup
Jamie Mackie played the thick end of 500 EFL games, scored a couple of very famous Premier League goals, won promotions
More or less their entire careers were also covered by Sky whether in EFL or PL. So there is also an association there.
You might not personally like the way these guys do their punditry but you can't deny that they've seen and done things in football that most people can only dream of. Including their female colleagues.
More I consider it, the more I like both Morrison and Mackie tbh. Mackie for the nostalgia and Morrison for the bants. Merson is still getting by on largely the same thing. Clinton Morrison (and his mum) are EFL Legends. So is Jamie Mackie. [Post edited 12 Dec 2023 11:09]
|
Appreciate what you are saying - however I believe it does really come down to personal preference and popularity rather than true definition of punditry, with which you made your point.
I have bar staff that work in my venues and have done in some instances for over 15 years, it doesn't make them experts in the field of hospitality though. They have invaluable experience but not necessarily complete expertise.
Personally I think it's too simplistic to just suggest punditry should be governed by ex-players, (I'm not suggesting you do btw), I think good punditry like good journalism should challenge stereotypes rather than be just public relations. | | | |
| Joey Barton on 11:30 - Dec 12 with 1884 views | SheffieldHoop |
| Joey Barton on 11:18 - Dec 12 by daveB |
I'm not suggesting they get people in off the street but I don't think you need to have been a great player to be a decent pundit and I'm not really bothered if that's male or female. Someone like Jamie Mackie his footballing CV doesn't stand up to someone like Joe Cole but he got an opportunity to be a pundit and has taken it.
Ultimately the credibility you earn as a pundit is in what you say rather than what you did as a player.
I do think the standard of pundits has gone down in recent years but that's a lot more to do with tv companies wanting clips for social media rather than an in depth look at football. Someone saying something stupid or having banter gets clicks on social media and earns money but thats probably a separate issue |
No, but it sure helps your credibility. Say England get to the next world cup final. Who do you expect on? Lineker, Shearer, Ferdinand, Owen, maybe even Becks as it's the final?
Instead, we'll get pretend lesbian Alex Scott giving some contrived moral lecture about diversity to people she deems "Pale, Male & Stale" | |
| "Someone despises me. That's their problem." Marcus Aurelius |
| |
| Joey Barton on 11:42 - Dec 12 with 1871 views | Orthodox_Hoop |
Let me preface this by saying I don't have any issue with pundits regardless of their sex, as long as they're GOOD and have earned their position based on MERIT. What I do have a problem with is a corporation shoeing in female pundits simply to hit their diversity quotas - I work for one, and have been privy to start-up meetings in which this has been hammered home as a requisite.
Sky is owned by the US company Comcast, and like all companies Comcast is a machine - a machine designed to turn resources into money. It has no morals, it has a massive legal department to make sure it doesn't break any laws while making that money, a PR department to make make sure they have the most profitable public image towards their designated target audience and their publicity department which sells their products.
Think about an industrial wood chipper: it doesn't care if you throw in a log, a dining table or a person - it will turn it all into pulp, it just depends on the person feeding it stuff to make sure you only toss logs in there. The same is true about companies like Comcast/Sky. In the larger scheme of things, companies are amoral entities which are kept in line by laws, public image and profits; breaking the law would mean fines and seizures which would lower said profits, a bad public image would mean less people willing to buy from them, and bad publicity means that their products would be less visible in the market.
If you think Sky, or indeed any other broadcaster, truly cares about more female representation in football punditry you are mistaken. They would happily stick with ex-players (some of whom are truly awful pundits) if they could, but in the wake of the metoo movement (and BLM also) public image dictated that the most profitable path at this moment according to their PR department is to inject as much female pundits as quickly as possible to hit those DEI quotas.
Joey Barton, however, is still a massive cnt. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Joey Barton on 11:47 - Dec 12 with 1839 views | Wilkinswatercarrier |
Can't believe we are into 7 pages discussing something Joey Barton said. Really!
Commentators or pundits, who cares if they are male, female, white, black or fu**ing green. |  | | |
| Joey Barton on 11:50 - Dec 12 with 1802 views | SheffieldHoop |
| Joey Barton on 11:42 - Dec 12 by Orthodox_Hoop |
Let me preface this by saying I don't have any issue with pundits regardless of their sex, as long as they're GOOD and have earned their position based on MERIT. What I do have a problem with is a corporation shoeing in female pundits simply to hit their diversity quotas - I work for one, and have been privy to start-up meetings in which this has been hammered home as a requisite.
Sky is owned by the US company Comcast, and like all companies Comcast is a machine - a machine designed to turn resources into money. It has no morals, it has a massive legal department to make sure it doesn't break any laws while making that money, a PR department to make make sure they have the most profitable public image towards their designated target audience and their publicity department which sells their products.
Think about an industrial wood chipper: it doesn't care if you throw in a log, a dining table or a person - it will turn it all into pulp, it just depends on the person feeding it stuff to make sure you only toss logs in there. The same is true about companies like Comcast/Sky. In the larger scheme of things, companies are amoral entities which are kept in line by laws, public image and profits; breaking the law would mean fines and seizures which would lower said profits, a bad public image would mean less people willing to buy from them, and bad publicity means that their products would be less visible in the market.
If you think Sky, or indeed any other broadcaster, truly cares about more female representation in football punditry you are mistaken. They would happily stick with ex-players (some of whom are truly awful pundits) if they could, but in the wake of the metoo movement (and BLM also) public image dictated that the most profitable path at this moment according to their PR department is to inject as much female pundits as quickly as possible to hit those DEI quotas.
Joey Barton, however, is still a massive cnt. |
Not going to lie, I do believe it to be a little more sinister than this
But yeah, pretty much spot on. | |
| "Someone despises me. That's their problem." Marcus Aurelius |
| |
| Joey Barton on 12:02 - Dec 12 with 1757 views | joe90 |
| Joey Barton on 11:50 - Dec 12 by SheffieldHoop |
Not going to lie, I do believe it to be a little more sinister than this
But yeah, pretty much spot on. |
I'm curious, what's behind the 'curtain'? What is the sinister motive? |  | | |
| Joey Barton on 12:08 - Dec 12 with 1697 views | SheffieldHoop |
| Joey Barton on 12:02 - Dec 12 by joe90 |
I'm curious, what's behind the 'curtain'? What is the sinister motive? |
I've got no idea. You tell me. But something is going on that feels very sinister and whether you notice it, don't notice it, notice it but think that it's actually a good thing......I notice it and I feel it's sinister. | |
| "Someone despises me. That's their problem." Marcus Aurelius |
| |
| Joey Barton on 12:13 - Dec 12 with 1698 views | Hunterhoop |
| Joey Barton on 12:08 - Dec 12 by SheffieldHoop |
I've got no idea. You tell me. But something is going on that feels very sinister and whether you notice it, don't notice it, notice it but think that it's actually a good thing......I notice it and I feel it's sinister. |
So don’t know what it is, but it feels sinister? Why? What makes it feel sinister?
Is sinister the right word, even?
Intimidating? Uncomfortable? Disagreeable?
What is sinister about having some female pundits? |  | | |
| Joey Barton on 12:20 - Dec 12 with 1649 views | SheffieldHoop |
| Joey Barton on 12:13 - Dec 12 by Hunterhoop |
So don’t know what it is, but it feels sinister? Why? What makes it feel sinister?
Is sinister the right word, even?
Intimidating? Uncomfortable? Disagreeable?
What is sinister about having some female pundits? |
One thing that does make it feel quite sinister is the way that, if you raise matters such as this, you immediately get pounced upon by people wanting to interrogate you. Their end goal is always to try and tempt you into saying something that they can then say "See, look, told you he was a racist/sexist/whateverist"
It's really quite frustrating and I believe is a big reason why people have been/are scared to voice their opinion on this matter, and on other matters such as this where there's an opportunity for people to brand you with -isms for holding perfectly reasonable opinions but maybe not wording it correctly.
It's really fcking sinister IMO. | |
| "Someone despises me. That's their problem." Marcus Aurelius |
| |
| Joey Barton on 12:28 - Dec 12 with 1643 views | Orthodox_Hoop |
| Joey Barton on 12:20 - Dec 12 by SheffieldHoop |
One thing that does make it feel quite sinister is the way that, if you raise matters such as this, you immediately get pounced upon by people wanting to interrogate you. Their end goal is always to try and tempt you into saying something that they can then say "See, look, told you he was a racist/sexist/whateverist"
It's really quite frustrating and I believe is a big reason why people have been/are scared to voice their opinion on this matter, and on other matters such as this where there's an opportunity for people to brand you with -isms for holding perfectly reasonable opinions but maybe not wording it correctly.
It's really fcking sinister IMO. |
I don't think it's sinister - it's all motivated by profit imho.
That's why companies like Disney for example will preach diversity and inclusivity in western markets, as it's the current day thing to do - while simultaneously editing and censoring their OWN material for the Middle Eastern and Chinese markets that are far less tolerant. They chase profits. If that means removing a homosexual kiss for the Saudi market, or covering up a black person's face on a poster for the Chinese market they'll do it without hesitation because that is what will lead to the biggest profits in those regions. Nothing sinister, just corporate greed and hypocrisy. | | | |
| Joey Barton on 12:37 - Dec 12 with 1581 views | SheffieldHoop |
| Joey Barton on 12:28 - Dec 12 by Orthodox_Hoop |
I don't think it's sinister - it's all motivated by profit imho.
That's why companies like Disney for example will preach diversity and inclusivity in western markets, as it's the current day thing to do - while simultaneously editing and censoring their OWN material for the Middle Eastern and Chinese markets that are far less tolerant. They chase profits. If that means removing a homosexual kiss for the Saudi market, or covering up a black person's face on a poster for the Chinese market they'll do it without hesitation because that is what will lead to the biggest profits in those regions. Nothing sinister, just corporate greed and hypocrisy. |
I'm open to that being possibly true.
What I can't understand is why they think this. I struggle to think of many examples (Nike maybe the first and only?) where a company has successfully pulled off a "woke" stunt and come out the other side with a bigger turnover.
It's the opposite - BudLight has cut its own throat over this crap. Victoria's Secret has just announced they're going back to having fit models. It doesn't work.
Edit - And as I say, the sinister thing is not having the women on the TV. It's the reception you get if you dare say anything critical of it. That's what feels sinister. [Post edited 12 Dec 2023 12:44]
| |
| "Someone despises me. That's their problem." Marcus Aurelius |
| |
| Joey Barton on 12:38 - Dec 12 with 1601 views | ted_hendrix |
You still have the right to meet and speak freely in Hyde Park.
""Television is an invention that permits you to be entertained in your living room by people you wouldn't have in your home.""
Courtesy of David Frost. |  |
| My Father had a profound influence on me, he was a lunatic. |
| |
| Joey Barton on 12:38 - Dec 12 with 1599 views | dmm |
This are many things going on around the world that feel extremely sinister but I've never found female football commentators to be one of them. |  | | |
| Joey Barton on 12:42 - Dec 12 with 1544 views | SheffieldHoop |
| Joey Barton on 12:38 - Dec 12 by ted_hendrix |
You still have the right to meet and speak freely in Hyde Park.
""Television is an invention that permits you to be entertained in your living room by people you wouldn't have in your home.""
Courtesy of David Frost. |
You do until the next lockdown hits at least | |
| "Someone despises me. That's their problem." Marcus Aurelius |
| |
| Joey Barton on 12:43 - Dec 12 with 1563 views | 100percent |
| Joey Barton on 12:20 - Dec 12 by SheffieldHoop |
One thing that does make it feel quite sinister is the way that, if you raise matters such as this, you immediately get pounced upon by people wanting to interrogate you. Their end goal is always to try and tempt you into saying something that they can then say "See, look, told you he was a racist/sexist/whateverist"
It's really quite frustrating and I believe is a big reason why people have been/are scared to voice their opinion on this matter, and on other matters such as this where there's an opportunity for people to brand you with -isms for holding perfectly reasonable opinions but maybe not wording it correctly.
It's really fcking sinister IMO. |
I don't think its sinister... If you are going to make comments on controversial matters I think you need to expect to be challenged - reasoned debate never forces anyone to say points they don't really believe.
Seriously, do you think comments like -
'Instead, we'll get pretend lesbian Alex Scott giving some contrived moral lecture about diversity to people she deems "Pale, Male & Stale"'
Should not be challenged? It's provocative and divisive, but no one has questioned your ability to say it. | | | |
| Joey Barton on 12:50 - Dec 12 with 1480 views | SheffieldHoop |
| Joey Barton on 12:43 - Dec 12 by 100percent |
I don't think its sinister... If you are going to make comments on controversial matters I think you need to expect to be challenged - reasoned debate never forces anyone to say points they don't really believe.
Seriously, do you think comments like -
'Instead, we'll get pretend lesbian Alex Scott giving some contrived moral lecture about diversity to people she deems "Pale, Male & Stale"'
Should not be challenged? It's provocative and divisive, but no one has questioned your ability to say it. |
Why should it be challenged? It's demonstrably true. | |
| "Someone despises me. That's their problem." Marcus Aurelius |
| |
| Joey Barton on 13:12 - Dec 12 with 1397 views | QPRKirty |
| Joey Barton on 12:50 - Dec 12 by SheffieldHoop |
Why should it be challenged? It's demonstrably true. |
It certainly should be challenged. Your casual misogyny makes you comparable to bloody Joey Barton. Give us all a break and give it a rest. |  | | |
| Joey Barton on 13:13 - Dec 12 with 1387 views | easthertsr |
| Joey Barton on 12:50 - Dec 12 by SheffieldHoop |
Why should it be challenged? It's demonstrably true. |
Have you ever considered for one minute that she might be right? If not, she has a right to an opinion just as you have. There is always an option not to watch if you don't like it! | | | |
| Joey Barton on 13:15 - Dec 12 with 1363 views | SheffieldHoop |
| Joey Barton on 13:12 - Dec 12 by QPRKirty |
It certainly should be challenged. Your casual misogyny makes you comparable to bloody Joey Barton. Give us all a break and give it a rest. |
Ok. Sorry. Maybe I could have said "Lesbian tourist" instead.
Either way, these are terms that are commonly used by lesbians about lesbians. Not misogyny. Stop trying to label me. | |
| "Someone despises me. That's their problem." Marcus Aurelius |
| |
| Joey Barton on 13:16 - Dec 12 with 1373 views | GroveR |
| Joey Barton on 12:50 - Dec 12 by SheffieldHoop |
Why should it be challenged? It's demonstrably true. |
Oh go on, fùck it, I'm curious - what's a pretend lesbian? Do you only simulate flicking the bean? |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
