I was at the game on Saturday so didn't hear it live, but have since watched the full game 'as live'. Like you, I couldn't believe what I was hearing at times. In the past, since Neville has been a pundit, I have been impressed with his analysis and impartiality as a pundit and his understanding of a game. Recently, I think he has started to slide away. His analysis of a team's strengths and weaknesses is probably still pretty sound but when you don't actually understand the laws of the game - and he clearly doesn't judging from his commentary - what the fuck are you doing spouting shite about irrelevant crap like 'he had no intent to slash Ederson's face often with his studs'? I can't take seriously the opinion of someone who doesn't know the rules when they spout about a rule-based issue.
I wasn't as disappointed with Tyler as some on here. Someone in the media thread said something like 'when the dippers all walked out a 3-0, multiply that by millions across the globe in terms of people turning off their TVs' and that is absolutely right. If you go on RAWK you will read a lot from people who turned off at 2 or 3-0. Tyler's job, however, is to stop that from happening. His job is to make sure the maximum number of people are watching at any one time. Allowing his Liverpool audience to wallow in their 'we wuz robbed' self pity was his way of doing that. It sticks in the throat when you are witching it live, but somehow when you (a) know why he's doing it, and (b) you already know the final score, it isn't so much of a problem :)