Is Match of the Day really any good?

[Alan Whittle]

Serious question for you guys as I am trying to get a different perspective. I haven't really been bothered until this season now that Palace are on it. I've seen six of our eight games live and the reflection on MOTD has not remotely warranted what I saw in in four of those.
Lineker is bland, bordering on smug as a presenter and the pundits have been varying degrees of pants this season with the honourable exception of the show when Martinez and Danny Murphy were on.
Saturday was the final straw.

(The next bit requires you to suspend your belief that Chamakh is pants because he has a shocking barnet.)

On Saturday Chamakh had a decent game, as he has done all season. He puts in a shift and plays a lot of the time with his back to goal, winning headers and trying to bring others into play. A lot of his passing was accurate but he does lack service for goal scoring opportunities. He always tracks back and has been a decent signing.
Savage (allegedly) went to the game and focussed on Chamakh. He then got the MOTD staff to edit four or five errors from the game, added his poor tackle from the Stoke game in August and absolutely slaughtered him for it. Overall it gave a completely inaccurate picture for those not at the game. Earlier on 606 he admitted that this was what he had intended and that it would be on MOTD later.
So, instead of going to the game, assessing what he saw and articulating it into a concise and informative summary we got a pre determined, lazy and paid for by the public hatchet job to which Hansen at least had the decency to be embarrassed about.
I'm only using Chamakh as an example, they could and probably do the same for a number of games each week.

MOTD is supposed to be the national broadcaster's flagship programme for the country's national game. I think that it has become a jaded parody of it's former self. Your views please.....(on MOTD, not Chamakh!)

 

[Del]

MOTD is god damn awful mate

Shearer,Owen,Savage and Lawrenson to name a few of the cock stains that grace the program

They need to gib the talking off and show more of the football, Nobody cares what those lot have to say

 

[bluejock]

It's sh*te

 

[wandyr79]

Awful programme but not living in the UK anymore means that I have watched it more this season than I did the last 5 combined.

Really need to start getting up and watching goals on Sunday for the highlights and analysis.

My favourite part was Savage and Hansen with their bumbling analysis of the best strike force in the Premiership, it was truly unbelievable how they turned a decent debate into nothing but a 'well I think this' back and forth with absolutely no content at all.

 

[Azzurri]

Terrible.

 

[Walken]

Serious question for you guys as I am trying to get a different perspective. I haven't really been bothered until this season now that Palace are on it. I've seen six of our eight games live and the reflection on MOTD has not remotely warranted what I saw in in four of those.
Lineker is bland, bordering on smug as a presenter and the pundits have been varying degrees of pants this season with the honourable exception of the show when Martinez and Danny Murphy were on.
Saturday was the final straw.

(The next bit requires you to suspend your belief that Chamakh is pants because he has a shocking barnet.)

On Saturday Chamakh had a decent game, as he has done all season. He puts in a shift and plays a lot of the time with his back to goal, winning headers and trying to bring others into play. A lot of his passing was accurate but he does lack service for goal scoring opportunities. He always tracks back and has been a decent signing.
Savage (allegedly) went to the game and focussed on Chamakh. He then got the MOTD staff to edit four or five errors from the game, added his poor tackle from the Stoke game in August and absolutely slaughtered him for it. Overall it gave a completely inaccurate picture for those not at the game. Earlier on 606 he admitted that this was what he had intended and that it would be on MOTD later.
So, instead of going to the game, assessing what he saw and articulating it into a concise and informative summary we got a pre determined, lazy and paid for by the public hatchet job to which Hansen at least had the decency to be embarrassed about.
I'm only using Chamakh as an example, they could and probably do the same for a number of games each week.

MOTD is supposed to be the national broadcaster's flagship programme for the country's national game. I think that it has become a jaded parody of it's former self. Your views please.....(on MOTD, not Chamakh!)

Its very one eyed, when they feel like doing a hatchet job on a player they criticise all sorts of things that arent relevant just to support their argument, they do the same if they want to big up a player, I remeber reading the 'secret footballer' saying that most players see punditry as a joke, trying to sum up a game tactically in 2 minutes and just easy money

 

[davek]

Savage analysing football. Do we need to go on?

 

[Alan Whittle]

Its very one eyed, when they feel like doing a hatchet job on a player they criticise all sorts of things that arent relevant just to support their argument, they do the same if they want to big up a player, I remeber reading the 'secret footballer' saying that most players see punditry as a joke, trying to sum up a game tactically in 2 minutes and just easy money

I think that they believe that as they have played the game at the highest level (something Savage often reverts to on 606 when he is losing an argument) that they can articulate detailed analysis accurately and concisely. I don't know why they don't have professional journo's doing it. I honestly believe that many fans could do better.

 

[roydo]

Savage has an image now, and he has to play to it. I quite liked his honesty at first, but he is becoming a parody now. Hanson has been over paid and over indulged for years. Glad he is off. Lauro adds nothing IMO.

Lee Dixon was good, and I honestly dont mind Linekar really, but unless they make it a 2 hour show, then every week some fans will think they have been short changed most weeks.

 

[davek]

I think that they believe that as they have played the game at the highest level (something Savage often reverts to on 606 when he is losing an argument) that they can articulate detailed analysis accurately and concisely. I don't know why they don't have professional journo's doing it. I honestly believe that many fans could do better.

I love it when someone rings in and says Savage was 'ex-Man U' himself and knows the club well etc...the little silence in the studio when he doesn't quite know if they're taking the piss.

 

[ijjysmith]

Goals On Sunday pisses all over it.

 

[Daveysgingerlovechild]

It has been poor for yonks, and I can't see it getting any better.

I mean, you'll never see anything like this on it [video=youtube;T9ByRANbXDs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T9ByRANbXDs[/video]. Ever. More is the pity.

 

[Alan Whittle]

Savage has an image now, and he has to play to it. I quite liked his honesty at first, but he is becoming a parody now.

I don't think that he cultivated that image, I think he just relies on controversial statements because of his lack of analytical ability. He ranted on for weeks last season about how Villa were certainties for the drop, and when challenged to give reasons he just repeated "It's my opinion" over and over.

 

[roydo]

I don't think that he cultivated that image, I think he just relies on controversial statements because of his lack of analytical ability. He ranted on for weeks last season about how Villa were certainties for the drop, and when challenged to give reasons he just repeated "It's my opinion" over and over.

He may not have started out to cultivate an image, but now he has this reputation, he plays to it. His agent will make damned sure he does, because that is all he has to offer as a "pundit/talkshow host".

 

[Azzurri]

Oh and Chamakh is crap (sorry Alan) but he was ok on Saturday, best he's played for you lot from what I've seen. I actually thought they were going to praise him when I heard his name mentioned.