Neville does quality tactical analysis but he combines it with a real sense of love for the game as well. He's the best pundit by far at the moment. Pleasantly surprised - I imagined I'd hate him. Also having played at the top level so recently gives him a bit more authority,
I also enjoy Souness cos he's not afraid to be contentious and Lee Dixon seems like he'd be a nice bloke.
Mark Bright is the worst - just continually pointing out mistakes
To be honest, his simple sounding voice makes listening to him all the more interesting. He was commentating on the game last night on five live and he wasn't pulling any punches about blackburns defending.
I dunno, he brings a refreshing dimension.
Martin Keown can fuck off though. As can mark bright.
Has no-one mentioned the sheer awfulness that is Dean Windass?! Sky use him as a reporter, rather than a pundit, but he's so mindbendingly awful at it. The guy has trouble speaking english.
The thing I've noticed with Gary Neville is that listening to him, you actually learn something, his analysis and tactical acumen are spot-on, and he has made Sky's coverage genuinely enjoyable for me.
I met him once (years ago, I worked for one of Man United's sponsors at the time) and then he came across as a likeable down to earth bloke, who jsy wanted to talk about football; perhaps his reputation as Man United's "Shop Steward" might have been a little bit "media enhanced"?
"Psycho is our leader!"
I think Sky have offered him a job because they feel sorry for him to be honest. Explains why Paul Merson is there too.
Why the hell do they have Niall Quinn commentating now, never have I heard a more biased commentator especially at the Manchester derby last Monday night.
I switched to the al jazeera coverage as it made more sense.
Neville is brilliant and for some reason I read your post as David James announcing Neville would be joining the beeb for the euros! Doh! He'd be great!Originally Posted by Tutts
David James might be ok can't say I've read his Observer Column but he can't be worse than some of the one off pundits they try out for these tournaments!
Ian Wright is a big England fan but he doesn't really offer any ground breaking analysis.
G. Nev is an excellent pundit. For me, Hansen is still the best on TV, but Neville's now running a close second. I think it goes to prove that whilst world class players don't often make great coaches, they tend to make excellent analysts; they know the game inside out at an elite level. As Rich said, if you can't learn the game from people like these two, you really can't learn it full stop.
Got to give a heads up to Lee Dixon, who I also think is fantastic, although he clearly doesn't fit into the above-mentioned world class player category...
Dixon just gets overshadowed on MOTD 2 he offers a few insights then whathisname just jumps in with a shitty quip.
A reason for him not liking Manure?
For the fans apparently.
Talk to me, Goose.
Cotts out Nev in
A pet hate of mine is when pundits say things like "great save" when a keeper saves a 30 yard shot that's right at his head. No, that is not a great save, now take your tactics truck and drive over a cliff.
Neville coaching is a bolt from the blue isn't it?
We're gonna blooming win the Euros!
Can you imagine the call? Bet Nev creamed his pants.
'Gary? It's Roy. How would you like to join my staff this summer?'
Haven't really seen Nev yet so can't comment.
I agree with those having a pop at the MOTD 'Boys Club' - it seems these cretins have a job for life stating the bleeding obvious. I really can't see why people rate Hansen, he just repeatedly uses the phrases "unbelievable" and "absolutely sensational" to describe play that is in fact completely believable and normally just what I would describe as "good".
I'm still very much siding with Cloughie in the whole Clough v Motson debate about game coverage v post-match analysis (BC: "I suggest you shut up, and show more football"). It's bloody ridiculous how much analysis they show on MOTD these days, I've timed it on my watch (yes I know that's tragic) and more often than not it actually goes on longer than the highlights and basically tells us stuff that any footy fan worth his salt knows anyway. And why does every incident in the highlights have to have 48 replays from different angles just to show, for example, how a Morten Gamst Pedersen shot went about 2 feet wide.
Sorry, this is starting to turn into a rant, I'd better stop now! Basically football coverage (MOTD highlights especially) is rubbish.
Great appointment by Hodgson.
Neville has been superb on Sky and it's reassuring to know that he'll actually know what he's talking about as a coach.
His punditry was very similar to the kind of Monday morning analysis he's probably received every week for the last 20 years. Every flaw pointed out in his own game has gone toward this.
Unsure about the coaching appointment, but hopefully he can be a success at it.