I feel sorry for Souness at times...here he is, like him or loathe him, a legendary footballer sitting there with other legends such as Giles and Brady offering good constructive analysis and opinion when out of nowhere this skeletal like figure beside him starts roaring absolute muck. Souness was probably muttering under his breath "Who the hell let the janitor in here??"
You see Dumpy on occassion seeking acceptence from Souness for his comments, which does make me laugh.
pity isnt something Souness inspires in me to be honest joe, he's far more likely to have been muttering ''dont kill him, dont kill Dunphy on live tv Greame'' while his feet twitched uncontrollably off cameraOriginally Posted by joeSoap
Billo praising Cambiasso's goal: "That was some goal wasn't it John, 24 players involved..."
The obvious solution to improve RTE's coverage - get rid of Bill and bring in Pat Dolan as Anchorman! He knows the game, he's learnt the trade at Setanta and he won't be afraid to put the lads back in their box.
"Would it be fair to say, Eamon, that you're talking out of your arse?"
SIGNATURESCOPE
I find it funny that Bill gets blamed for the analysts take on a game. "Would it be fair........" Open ended question that leads to the pundit saying yes/no because yadda yadda... Hardly Bill's fault if they give an answer you don't like.
No way, Dolan's place is as a pundit not as the anchorman. He just can't do it.
Extratime.ie
Yo te quiero, mi querida. Sin tus besos, yo soy nada.
Abri o portão de ouro, da maquina do tempo.
Mi mamá me hizo guapo, listo y antimadridista.
I don't agree with that at all. Dunphy seems to be doing more research than any of the lads on RTE and has actually impressed me. For example, Souness said the German central defence is very young and Dunphy was able to tell him the ages of the 2 players. It was Dunphy who actually started the debate about England needing an Alonso type playmaker last week and Souness agreed.
I flicked over to ITV when RTE went for a break last night. Allardyce and Pearce were both pretty good, pointing out where Sweden had let space for Cole's goal, etc. Then it came to Venables. My God, the man never uses one sentence when 7 will do. It took him about 5 minutes to say that Gerrard obviously wanted to get on the pitch (a top class player wanting to play in the world cup?? Never!!) that his interception on the line was vital at the time (every interception on the line is vital) and that his goal was well taken. Flicking back over to RTE Brady disected the move, showed how Cole had taken a step back to give Gerrard and himself more time, how he timed the pass, and got it over the defence, but down for Gerrard to head. Made Venables look an amateur
I wasn't aware anyone wanted him as Ireland boss, there was outcry on the board when he was linked with the post
So....getting back to punditry. Wht would your ideal panel be. Mix up the channels.
Mine would be:
Host(s): Tim Lovejoy & Helen Chmberlain. Both know their footie, nd Helens easy on the eye.
Panellists: John Giles (when objective, he is the best round). Gordon Strachan(Humourous) and Alan Hansen.
Although, an alterntive to Tim & Helen would be Podge & Rodge
The panel was good last night without the presence of the malevolent influence. Enjoyed the chat about what constituted a "great player". Giles still couldn't resist though having a dig at the English game. For someone who makes his living out of it, it is strange. He said the Hol vs Arg game was the worst he's seen so far but still preferred it to the Eng vs Swe game
Pearce on ITV said the Dutch had gone full throttle to hold the Argies who were at half pace and the 4 bookings would support that theory. The RTE panel thought the Dutch were also at half pace. I am not so sure. Van Nettlesoup might have been - the rest were putting in the effort.
Forget about the performance or entertainment. It's only the result that matters.
So Owls fan are you saying that because he earns his money from commenting on the English game he is then obliged not to be critical of it. Surely he is there to express his informed opinion. Whether you or I agree with that is meaningless. I would hate if pundits started changing their view due to the fact of how and where they earn their money.
In Trap we trust
I thought Brady and Souness exposed Gile's Old-school views as being out-dated and not relevant to the Modern game, perhaps at 65 Giles is getting on a bit and his views of "things weren't like that in my day when i played for Leeds" can not be taken too seriously these days.. His view on Riqueleme were ridiculous.. The Argie No.10 is a class act a playmaker who is there to get the ball hold possession and make things happen which he does beautifully at time.. Mascherano is there to break up play and tackle do the dirty stuff not Riqueleme, Giles failed to see this as blatant as it was,, Brady and Souness were bang on in correcting this short-sighted view!
I thought Brady and Souness exposed Gile's Old-school views as being out-dated and not relevant to the Modern game, perhaps at 65 Giles is getting on a bit and his views of "things weren't like that in my day when i played for Leeds" can not be taken too seriously these days.. His view on Riqueleme were ridiculous.. The Argie No.10 is a class act a playmaker who is there to get the ball hold possession and make things happen which he does beautifully at time.. Mascherano is there to break up play and tackle do the dirty stuff not Riqueleme, Giles failed to see this as blatant as it was,, Brady and Souness were bang on in correcting this short-sighted view!
Not so sure its as simple as that If you look at the Leeds team of the 60s and 70s you could argue that Bremner is there to break up the play and Giles to create. But Giles had a great work ethic also. If you bring it to more modern times Keane at Utd was there to break up the play and scholes to create. However Scholes had a great work ethic also. My understanding is that Giles was arguing that just because you are the flair player, does not mean you cannot put in the hard graft also. The 2 issues are not contradictory and in Giles view you can do both if you want to be a world class player. Maradone was a classic example of this. I think its rather simplistic to say one player takckles and works hard while the other creates and passess the ball but does not work to get it back.
In Trap we trust
Some of Dunphy's research is thorough but other is just crap. Anytime Bill asks him what such and such a league is like i.e. USA last week, he says "Ah it's terrible Bill." He gives no explanation. Also I'm thoroughly convinced he hasn't watch Serie A in a good few years because he always comes out with this "too defensive" drivel.
Extratime.ie
Yo te quiero, mi querida. Sin tus besos, yo soy nada.
Abri o portão de ouro, da maquina do tempo.
Mi mamá me hizo guapo, listo y antimadridista.
There is an old adage which says you don't bite the hand that feeds you. He never resists an opportunity to have a go at the Premiership. In fact he has a go even when no one else mentions it. I suspect he resents the huge amount of money which average players, far less talented than him, make in the game today. I don't expect him not to express his opinion - I just don't understand why in a game between Hol vs Arg, he feels he once again has to have a dig at the English game and make a contradictory statement that the "worst game in the tournament so far" was better than the English game the previous night.
It is interesting the way he explains things to Laughing Bill as if he was a schoolboy - probably necessary though.
Forget about the performance or entertainment. It's only the result that matters.
On the point of Riquelme, they are all about Ronaldinho who never tracks back, yet for Riquelme to do the same makes him less of a player.
Owls fan, again The EPL is Giles only frame of reference, its the only reason he is always drawing comparisons between WC and EPL matches.
Giles had a go at Ronaldinhio for not tracking back also so I think he is consistant there.
In relation to not biting the hand that feeds you. Well lets say a journalist goes to the Iraqi War and is kept safe by the American Army but while in Iraq sees the American Army comit some terrible crimes. Should they report it or not bite the hand that feeds them.
I think Giles job is to express his opinion, Whether you or I agree with it is not the point. As Roadend says the Premiership is his only frame of reference along with Champions League. Here he sees a failure by the Premiership player, esp the English one to keep a hold of the ball and retain posession. This will cost England the tournament in my view.
Also I have heard Giles speak about money and he is totally in support of the players on this one. In fact he spoke at length about this and how he despied a lot of Premiership Chairman and Old 1st Division Chairman and that the players are correct to get their value and worth. That does not mean they should not try and put the effort in for their clubs.
In Trap we trust
The point I made about biting the hand that feeds you, and your analogy with the war in Iraq is ridiculous, is why keep biting when no one else is mentioning the hand and the hand isn't even on the menuIt's like your journalist in Iraq reporting on the war in Afghanistan rather than what's going on in front of his eyes in Bagdad .
England vs Sweden is not the Premiership so why mention that game ? He said the Arg vs Hol game was the worst yet and still says it was better than the Eng vs Hol game. Contradictory nonsense and just another unnecessary slap at England.
Forget about the performance or entertainment. It's only the result that matters.
I was responding to your general point which you have made a few times in that Giles is been critical of the Premiership despite earning his money from it. I was disagreeing with you and I think thats a flawed ideology that one must be in support of something that funds you financially. I think the journalists inbedded in the American invasion of Iraq is a good analogy but on a different level and much more serious.
Of Course Giles makes mistakes the guy is on the TV every day. I am sure you and I go through are whole day making mistakes when talking. But we dont have millions of people watching our every word. THe point I was argue is that the general points that Giles makes are pretty good. He does make the odd gaff like calling Costa Rica, Costa Rico and Puerto Rico and so on. This happens and no big deal. It could be worse, he coudl do a Kelly Daglish and say that Ghana are about to become the 1st African team to qualify for the 2nd Round in the World Cup.
I do think its a bub bear with Giles of the lack of passing qualify in the Premiership, he does harp on about it too much I would agree. However I dont agree that he should not bite the hand that feeds you. In fact I think life is far more interesting if you do bite the hand that feeds you. That is how unions are formed it is how dissent is formed and it is how a true democracy works.
In Trap we trust
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks