Best/Worst Pundit

[genome]

Danny Murphy is a happy wee soul isn't he?

I genuinely muted it and put some music on instead while I was watching the game. Can't stand him on commentary.

[stealthpapes]

Danny Murphy is a happy wee soul isn't he?

Think we can conclude Murphy was a big fan of Xhaka too

genuinely thought that was Lawro. Christ, did Xhaka piss on his flower pots?

[URZZZZ]

Danny Murphy is a happy wee soul isn't he?

Think we can conclude Murphy was a big fan of Xhaka too

genuinely thought that was Lawro. Christ, did Xhaka piss on his flower pots?

For some reason, a lot of pundits, football fans around the world etc give him bad press

Personally don’t think he’s as bad as people make him out to be. He’s not amazing for sure but he’s still a decent enough option for Arsenal

[Franchise FC]

Think we can conclude Murphy was a big fan of Xhaka too

genuinely thought that was Lawro. Christ, did Xhaka piss on his flower pots?

For some reason, a lot of pundits, football fans around the world etc give him bad press

Personally don’t think he’s as bad as people make him out to be. He’s not amazing for sure but he’s still a decent enough option for Arsenal

For an awful moment then I thought you were talking about Lawro

[sandman]

genuinely thought that was Lawro. Christ, did Xhaka piss on his flower pots?

For some reason, a lot of pundits, football fans around the world etc give him bad press

Personally don’t think he’s as bad as people make him out to be. He’s not amazing for sure but he’s still a decent enough option for Arsenal

For an awful moment then I thought you were talking about Lawro

He was talking about Lawro. Much better option than Luiz or Mustafi.

[Franchise FC]

For some reason, a lot of pundits, football fans around the world etc give him bad press

Personally don’t think he’s as bad as people make him out to be. He’s not amazing for sure but he’s still a decent enough option for Arsenal

For an awful moment then I thought you were talking about Lawro

He was talking about Lawro. Much better option than Luiz or Mustafi.

[stealthpapes]

lol

[Franchise FC]

Always thought Robbie Savage was OK (a bit controversial for the sake of it at times), but he's dropped a few points today with his comments about marks given to players for performances.

Apparently, Phil Jones was given an average score of just under 3 for his performance against City the other night. Savage is arguing that no player should ever be given a mark under 5. If that's right, then don't bother marking out of 10, just do it out of 6 because the first 4 obviously don't count. His rationale is that Phil Jones has worked hard, played for his country and, and, and …
My view is 'so what' - if the performance was that bad then 2 or 3 is perfectly acceptable as a mark given.

The problem is that it does seem to be fairly widespread that 4 or 5 represents a bad performance, 6 or 7 average and 8, 9 & 10 good or better. Strikes me as counter-intuitive as 5 should probably represent average.

Come on Robbie, don't let us down now.

[John Smith]

Martin Tyler simply has to go. Quite a few others saying it on Twitter now so I can't be the only one. His style now oozes arrogance: he refuses to get excited as if he knows the goal is coming and it's a formality.

Best: Ian Darke - makes the BT subscription almost value for money.

[URZZZZ]

Always thought Robbie Savage was OK (a bit controversial for the sake of it at times), but he's dropped a few points today with his comments about marks given to players for performances.

Apparently, Phil Jones was given an average score of just under 3 for his performance against City the other night. Savage is arguing that no player should ever be given a mark under 5. If that's right, then don't bother marking out of 10, just do it out of 6 because the first 4 obviously don't count. His rationale is that Phil Jones has worked hard, played for his country and, and, and …
My view is 'so what' - if the performance was that bad then 2 or 3 is perfectly acceptable as a mark given.

The problem is that it does seem to be fairly widespread that 4 or 5 represents a bad performance, 6 or 7 average and 8, 9 & 10 good or better. Strikes me as counter-intuitive as 5 should probably represent average.

Come on Robbie, don't let us down now.

I sort of see where he's coming from but don't necessarily agree

When rating players, people are often subjected to biases depending on the players they like/dislike so sometimes it can be a bit of a pointless exercise. People scoring below 4 should be a rare occurrence but in the real world it isn't

I'd put 5 as slightly below average, 6 as slightly above average and work from there.

[BR0B0T]

Always thought Robbie Savage was OK (a bit controversial for the sake of it at times), but he's dropped a few points today with his comments about marks given to players for performances.

Apparently, Phil Jones was given an average score of just under 3 for his performance against City the other night. Savage is arguing that no player should ever be given a mark under 5. If that's right, then don't bother marking out of 10, just do it out of 6 because the first 4 obviously don't count. His rationale is that Phil Jones has worked hard, played for his country and, and, and …
My view is 'so what' - if the performance was that bad then 2 or 3 is perfectly acceptable as a mark given.

The problem is that it does seem to be fairly widespread that 4 or 5 represents a bad performance, 6 or 7 average and 8, 9 & 10 good or better. Strikes me as counter-intuitive as 5 should probably represent average.

Come on Robbie, don't let us down now.

you can get marked 0 -10

10! = 55

55 / 11 = 5 = average mark (in my book)

[Silver Fox]

Martin Tyler simply has to go. Quite a few others saying it on Twitter now so I can't be the only one. His style now oozes arrogance: he refuses to get excited as if he knows the goal is coming and it's a formality.

Best: Ian Darke - makes the BT subscription almost value for money.

This might be the stupidest most back to front opinion I've ever seen

[John Smith]

Martin Tyler simply has to go. Quite a few others saying it on Twitter now so I can't be the only one. His style now oozes arrogance: he refuses to get excited as if he knows the goal is coming and it's a formality.

Best: Ian Darke - makes the BT subscription almost value for money.

This might be the stupidest most back to front opinion I've ever seen

Fair enough. Please provide your counter opinion then.

[Franchise FC]

Martin Tyler simply has to go. Quite a few others saying it on Twitter now so I can't be the only one. His style now oozes arrogance: he refuses to get excited as if he knows the goal is coming and it's a formality.

Best: Ian Darke - makes the BT subscription almost value for money.

This might be the stupidest most back to front opinion I've ever seen

Fair enough. Please provide your counter opinion then.

Can't comment on Ian Darke, but Tyler irritates the hell out of me. His 'And It's Live' at the adverts before a game is cringeworthy every time.
Yes, Martin, we know it's live, otherwise we wouldn't be watching it.

[sandman]

Always remember Ian Darke, in Commentary on a Spurs match, saying "Clive Allen is off tomorrow to watch Young Boys".

[From Despair To Where?]

Always thought Robbie Savage was OK (a bit controversial for the sake of it at times), but he's dropped a few points today with his comments about marks given to players for performances.

Apparently, Phil Jones was given an average score of just under 3 for his performance against City the other night. Savage is arguing that no player should ever be given a mark under 5. If that's right, then don't bother marking out of 10, just do it out of 6 because the first 4 obviously don't count. His rationale is that Phil Jones has worked hard, played for his country and, and, and …
My view is 'so what' - if the performance was that bad then 2 or 3 is perfectly acceptable as a mark given.

The problem is that it does seem to be fairly widespread that 4 or 5 represents a bad performance, 6 or 7 average and 8, 9 & 10 good or better. Strikes me as counter-intuitive as 5 should probably represent average.

Come on Robbie, don't let us down now.

I sort of see where he's coming from but don't necessarily agree

When rating players, people are often subjected to biases depending on the players they like/dislike so sometimes it can be a bit of a pointless exercise. People scoring below 4 should be a rare occurrence but in the real world it isn't

I'd put 5 as slightly below average, 6 as slightly above average and work from there.

I'm just amazed anyone takes those ratings seriously.

[6ft Kerplunk]

Always thought Robbie Savage was OK (a bit controversial for the sake of it at times), but he's dropped a few points today with his comments about marks given to players for performances.

Apparently, Phil Jones was given an average score of just under 3 for his performance against City the other night. Savage is arguing that no player should ever be given a mark under 5. If that's right, then don't bother marking out of 10, just do it out of 6 because the first 4 obviously don't count. His rationale is that Phil Jones has worked hard, played for his country and, and, and …
My view is 'so what' - if the performance was that bad then 2 or 3 is perfectly acceptable as a mark given.

The problem is that it does seem to be fairly widespread that 4 or 5 represents a bad performance, 6 or 7 average and 8, 9 & 10 good or better. Strikes me as counter-intuitive as 5 should probably represent average.

Come on Robbie, don't let us down now.

I sort of see where he's coming from but don't necessarily agree

When rating players, people are often subjected to biases depending on the players they like/dislike so sometimes it can be a bit of a pointless exercise. People scoring below 4 should be a rare occurrence but in the real world it isn't

I'd put 5 as slightly below average, 6 as slightly above average and work from there.

I'm just amazed anyone takes Savage seriously.

Corrected for you.

[Stranded]

Always thought Robbie Savage was OK (a bit controversial for the sake of it at times), but he's dropped a few points today with his comments about marks given to players for performances.

Apparently, Phil Jones was given an average score of just under 3 for his performance against City the other night. Savage is arguing that no player should ever be given a mark under 5. If that's right, then don't bother marking out of 10, just do it out of 6 because the first 4 obviously don't count. His rationale is that Phil Jones has worked hard, played for his country and, and, and …
My view is 'so what' - if the performance was that bad then 2 or 3 is perfectly acceptable as a mark given.

The problem is that it does seem to be fairly widespread that 4 or 5 represents a bad performance, 6 or 7 average and 8, 9 & 10 good or better. Strikes me as counter-intuitive as 5 should probably represent average.

Come on Robbie, don't let us down now.

I sort of see where he's coming from but don't necessarily agree

When rating players, people are often subjected to biases depending on the players they like/dislike so sometimes it can be a bit of a pointless exercise. People scoring below 4 should be a rare occurrence but in the real world it isn't

I'd put 5 as slightly below average, 6 as slightly above average and work from there.

Not that they are important but always thought the accepted way of things for ratings was all players start on a 6 i.e. effective but nothing special and depending on how they play this shifts up or down. So a 6 is basically your base level i.e. you turned up, didn't screw up monumentally but didn't only anything particuarly well.

The footballers version of an Effective/Meets Standards on an annual appraisal.

[Zammo]

Clive Tyldesley been given the ITV elbow as main commentator and he aint happy about it.

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk ... v-18593689

Matterface to replace.

[South Coast Royal]

Clive Tyldesley been given the ITV elbow as main commentator and he aint happy about it.

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk ... v-18593689

Matterface to replace.

Great news-one of the worst commentators ever.
I know Foxy will be pleased as well.