so this agenda thing.

[johnmc]

Phil Neville is a sinfully dull bore who wouldn't get three minutes of my time if he wanted to engage in conversation with me in my local.

Rio Ferdinand is inarticulate to the point of parody. It is painful to watch the slow death of the English language when he opens his camel-like mouth.

If anyone cannot see that they have both been promoted significantly beyond their broadcasting abilities merely because they played for united then they are completely beyond help.

Yes but it's not proof of an agenda. It happened with ex Liverpool players after they were successful. Now after the rags period of domination it's their turn. Are you telling me in 10 years it impossible that the likes of Hart and Kompany could be anchors on motd?

No mate. It's far from impossible and in actual fact, it's highly probable that we'll have a much more prominent presence in the media well before then. Moreover I don't think there's an agenda per se.

However, if we ever have (ex) players as dull or inarticulate as those two, I certainly hope we never hold sufficient power over the media that these characteristics will be ignored and those (ex) players, in spite of their unsuitability for the job, become national TV pundits.

That would annoy me too, although not as much, obviously.

The bbc seem to favour the dour pundits though. They prefer the clean cut image and charisma is not in their thinking. Their main man is linekar who was never booked, Hansen was dull, they probably think Lawrenson is near the knuckle with his witty quips, and Shearer is as dull as dishwater. So Phil Neville is a perfect fit really isn't he. You might even surprised if he wasn't a bbc pundit after retirement. Then they have the likes of Jason Roberts and Kevin Kilbane on their edgier motd2 programme.

All fucking monotone but say what the beeb want to hear. Of those mentioned only Phil Neville played for the rags and was at Everton for half his career. It isn't evidence of anything other than the beeb "safe" punditry choices.

 

[Blue Is the Opposite of Blue]

The BBC received hundreds of complaints about P. Neville's dry World Cup punditry and still they hire him when there are probably much more entertaining ex-footballers out there. An era of biased scousers on BBC is set to be replaced by an era of biased and bitter reds who can barely bring themselves to name our club (in Rio's case at least).

And don't forget Scholes is on BT now too. All that's left is to find Nicky Butt and Chris Casper roles somewhere.

FFS! Why can't you people grasp a simple concept. Phil is the brother of the best pundit on TV.

The BBC to Sky is like Phil to Gary: we'll just get the next best thing.

While that may be true, who could they get in to do his job? He's just mates with a few of the big players like Lineker and whoever and they'll constantly talk about Gary with him. Easy.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Yes but it's not proof of an agenda. It happened with ex Liverpool players after they were successful. Now after the rags period of domination it's their turn. Are you telling me in 10 years it impossible that the likes of Hart and Kompany could be anchors on motd?

No mate. It's far from impossible and in actual fact, it's highly probable that we'll have a much more prominent presence in the media well before then. Moreover I don't think there's an agenda per se.

However, if we ever have (ex) players as dull or inarticulate as those two, I certainly hope we never hold sufficient power over the media that these characteristics will be ignored and those (ex) players, in spite of their unsuitability for the job, become national TV pundits.

That would annoy me too, although not as much, obviously.

The bbc seem to favour the dour pundits though. They prefer the clean cut image and charisma is not in their thinking. Their main man is linekar who was never booked, Hansen was dull, they probably think Lawrenson is near the knuckle with his witty quips, and Shearer is as dull as dishwater. So Phil Neville is a perfect fit really isn't he. You might even surprised if he wasn't a bbc pundit after retirement. Then they have the likes of Jason Roberts and Kevin Kilbane on their edgier motd2 programme.

All fucking monotone but say what the beeb want to hear. Of those mentioned only Phil Neville played for the rags and was at Everton for half his career. It isn't evidence of anything other than the beeb "safe" punditry choices.

Rio isn't "safe", although I'm sure he likes to say the word when he's Tweeting.

You comments otherwise are fair game, although I reckon Lineker is good value on a night out.

 

[George Hannah]

I see they've changed the picture if not the message

 

[johnmc]

Rio isn't "safe", although he likes to say the word when he's Tweeting.

You comments otherwise are fair game, although I reckon Lineker is good value on a night out.

Well yes Rio was used, hopefully just for the World Cup based on him just coming out of the England set up and his insight would prove invaluable.

Safe

 

[cibaman]

No mate. It's far from impossible and in actual fact, it's highly probable that we'll have a much more prominent presence in the media well before then. Moreover I don't think there's an agenda per se.

However, if we ever have (ex) players as dull or inarticulate as those two, I certainly hope we never hold sufficient power over the media that these characteristics will be ignored and those (ex) players, in spite of their unsuitability for the job, become national TV pundits.

That would annoy me too, although not as much, obviously.

The bbc seem to favour the dour pundits though. They prefer the clean cut image and charisma is not in their thinking. Their main man is linekar who was never booked, Hansen was dull, they probably think Lawrenson is near the knuckle with his witty quips, and Shearer is as dull as dishwater. So Phil Neville is a perfect fit really isn't he. You might even surprised if he wasn't a bbc pundit after retirement. Then they have the likes of Jason Roberts and Kevin Kilbane on their edgier motd2 programme.

All fucking monotone but say what the beeb want to hear. Of those mentioned only Phil Neville played for the rags and was at Everton for half his career. It isn't evidence of anything other than the beeb "safe" punditry choices.

Rio isn't "safe", although I'm sure he likes to say the word when he's Tweeting.

You comments otherwise are fair game, although I reckon Lineker is good value on a night out.

I don't mind Kilbane, think he's steadily improving

 

[George Hannah]

Moreover I don't think there's an agenda per se.

you tell Percy one thing and the rest of us something else!

 

[sir baconface]

Moreover I don't think there's an agenda per se.

you tell Percy one thing and the rest of us something else!

He's a perverse so-and-so. Earlier this week he was berating DD about mislaid gardening tools.

Non-secateurs or some such.

 

[George Hannah]

Moreover I don't think there's an agenda per se.

you tell Percy one thing and the rest of us something else!

He's a perverse so-and-so. Earlier this week he was berating DD about mislaid gardening tools.
Non-secateurs or some such.

he doesn't know his apogee from his perigee

 

[Eds]

Eds not gonna be happy!!!

Correct.

Once and for all there is a media bias towards and against clubs and there is an agenda to have football run in the way certain organisations want it. They are linked whether or not certain people on here like it or not. Interesting that people say the media have to arse lick scum as they have more fans than others i.e. it will sell more papers to cover them but there are more fans that despise them who could potentially not buy those papers / listen to the radio / buy into TV subs etc.

Now I have finally put to bed this thread can it be locked.

But you haven't "put it to bed". Where are the hard facts/examples to back up your OPINION ;-)

I don't have the time to list all the media bias etc out there but I will clarify that media outlets that rely on ad support and subscriptions for their income will pander to those they perceive will generate that money i.e. those clubs with the greatest number of plastics