Awful Football Opinions

[Aus Fox]

On 15/08/2020 at 22:53, HighPeakFox said:

Sorry, but that's just plain funny. 

At least they’d always get a good reception.

[Wizerud]

On 17/08/2020 at 11:27, honeybradger said:

Saying a player under the age of 23 has poor decision making because they dont have a 'footballing brain'.

I thought we already talked about Gray. 

[filthyfox]

On 13/08/2020 at 17:26, Jobyfox said:

For me Garth Crooks is the epitome of the awful, smug, pundit.

He's a great country singer, though !

[Raw Dykes]

4 hours ago, filthyfox said:

He's a great country singer, though !

He's a bona fide oddball. There's more where this came from...

 

 

[UniFox21]

 

These bloody posts acting like Gnabry was released or something, he chose to leave and went to Bremen who were a decent Bundesliga outfit at the time. And stayed there for a year, not anything like they're suggesting

[Dan LCFC]

If Gnabry stayed at Arsenal I highly doubt he'd be the player he is today. Very easily could've been another Iwobi.

 

Circumstances do matter. Always remember people saying the same about us and Max Gradel, I didn't think we were wrong to sell him, even if it looked it at one point.

[Facecloth]

Watching the champions league final last night, Rio Ferdinand came out with a good one. It wasn't a penalty because he didn't intend to foul him. Not sure it works like that Rio. Nobody intends to foul someone in the penalty area. I'm gonna stick my neck out and say most penalties are unintentionally given away.

 

In fact Rio is a terrible pundit. Talks up anything Man Utd, just can't seem to be neutral and be objective. Also he a lazy pundit, does little research and goes on player reputation and experience over talent, like when he claimed Pickford should be England number one because he's played at a tournament, not because he's the best English keeper.

Edited 24 August 2020 by Facecloth

[TJB-fox]

 Wait did Gnabry used to play for Arsenal and West Brom? Wish someone had said

[shailen]

2-0 up is the most dangerous scoreline in football. 

 

Why is that even true - surely a 1-0 lead is more dangerous. 

[Facecloth]

6 minutes ago, shailen said:

2-0 up is the most dangerous scoreline in football. 

 

Why is that even true - surely a 1-0 lead is more dangerous. 

Think the idea is that at 1-0 your aware you're only 1 goal from being brought level again. 2-0 you might start to relax, thinking it won. If a goals pulled back you lose momentum and hand it to the other team.

[shailen]

2 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

Think the idea is that at 1-0 your aware you're only 1 goal from being brought level again. 2-0 you might start to relax, thinking it won. If a goals pulled back you lose momentum and hand it to the other team.

I get that and it may be true on the odd occasion but generally, I'd argue at 1-0 you don't know whether to stick or twist, so it's far more dangerous. 2-0 and you most likely stick and try and manage the game through. The game plan becomes more clearer the more goals you're in front. That should see you home more times than if you're 1-0 up. 

 

[UniFox21]

25 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

Watching the champions league final last night, Rio Ferdinand came out with a good one. It wasn't a penalty because he didn't intend to foul him. Not sure it works like that Rio. Nobody intends to foul someone in the penalty area. I'm gonna stick my neck out and say most penalties are unintentionally given away.

 

In fact Rio is a terrible pundit. Talks up anything Man Utd, just can't seem to be neutral and be objective. Also he a lazy pundit, does little research and goes on player reputation and experience over talent, like when he claimed Pickford should be England number one because he's played at a tournament, not because he's the best English keeper.

The use of the word "intention" has crept in a lot this year for fouls. Unintentional handball is overused to hell, seems to clear any penalty shout even if their arms in a stupid position. 

[Facecloth]

Just now, shailen said:

I get that and it may be true on the odd occasion but generally, I'd argue at 1-0 you don't know whether to stick or twist, so it's far more dangerous. 2-0 and you most likely stick and try and manage the game through. The game plan becomes more clearer the more goals you're in front. That should see you home more times than if you're 1-0 up. 

 

I think it the subconscious of taking your foot off the gas. Like you say at 1-0 you're not sure what to do, and we've been guilty of messing up a 1-0 lead by sitting on, but it a conscious decision, but you're very unlikely to take your foot off the gas subconsciously. At 2-0 you also have to choice to push, or to back off, but also its much more likely you subconsciously take your foot off the gas and hand the momentum to the other side.

[shailen]

31 minutes ago, UniFox21 said:

The use of the word "intention" has crept in a lot this year for fouls. Unintentional handball is overused to hell, seems to clear any penalty shout even if their arms in a stupid position. 

Another one similar to that, is its not his "character" to foul him there. Are we saying referees need to perform a full personality check when making a decision of whether a foul is a foul 😂

[UniFox21]

Just now, shailen said:

Another one similar to that, is its not his "character" to foul him there. Are we saying referees need to perform a full personality check when making a decision of whether a foul is a foul 😂

*Player X has a two footed challenge on Player Y*

 

*Ref doesn't send off Player X as it was an accidental challenge and he's a proper nice chap down the local boozer* 

[Miquel The Work Geordie]

2 hours ago, Facecloth said:

Watching the champions league final last night, Rio Ferdinand came out with a good one. It wasn't a penalty because he didn't intend to foul him. Not sure it works like that Rio. Nobody intends to foul someone in the penalty area. I'm gonna stick my neck out and say most penalties are unintentionally given away.

 

In fact Rio is a terrible pundit. Talks up anything Man Utd, just can't seem to be neutral and be objective. Also he a lazy pundit, does little research and goes on player reputation and experience over talent, like when he claimed Pickford should be England number one because he's played at a tournament, not because he's the best English keeper.

 

Rio is genuinely the most up and down pundit on the circuit atm. Often he'll say something actually half interesting, explain why things have happened rather than just narrating what has happened, but then he'll come out with something mind-bogglingly stupid, usually conversationally. 

Ferdinand is still better than the likes of Murphy, Jenas, Savage et al however because there is at least a few nuggets of decent contribution there.

On another note, been really impressed with BT's coverage of the Gazprom in the main but they don't half **** it having 'Macca' on co comms. The bloke offers sod all.

[UniFox21]

12 minutes ago, Miquel The Work Geordie said:

 

Rio is genuinely the most up and down pundit on the circuit atm. Often he'll say something actually half interesting, explain why things have happened rather than just narrating what has happened, but then he'll come out with something mind-bogglingly stupid, usually conversationally. 

Ferdinand is still better than the likes of Murphy, Jenas, Savage et al however because there is at least a few nuggets of decent contribution there.

On another note, been really impressed with BT's coverage of the Gazprom in the main but they don't half **** it having 'Macca' on co comms. The bloke offers sod all.

Pretty spot on there, Ferdinand can do great sections of decent analysis but follow it up with some absolutely embarrassing comments. Hargreaves is a decent pundit and has to deal with a decent amount of shit that comes out of other pundits mouths. 

 

Jake Humphrey swings between being a decent presenter to making some weird comments too. Don't start me on Macca, I've heard more sense from the local than him. 

[Miquel The Work Geordie]

13 minutes ago, UniFox21 said:

Pretty spot on there, Ferdinand can do great sections of decent analysis but follow it up with some absolutely embarrassing comments. Hargreaves is a decent pundit and has to deal with a decent amount of shit that comes out of other pundits mouths. 

 

Jake Humphrey swings between being a decent presenter to making some weird comments too. Don't start me on Macca, I've heard more sense from the local than him. 

 

Gonna have to disagree on Humphrey, amazed he can burrow out of his own arse to do the faux sentiment bits to camera, proper binlid. 

[UniFox21]

2 minutes ago, Miquel The Work Geordie said:

 

Gonna have to disagree on Humphrey, amazed he can burrow out of his own arse to do the faux sentiment bits to camera, proper binlid. 

He only gets a positive as i remember watching him present bloody bamzooki as a kid 

[shailen]

59 minutes ago, Miquel The Work Geordie said:

 

Rio is genuinely the most up and down pundit on the circuit atm. Often he'll say something actually half interesting, explain why things have happened rather than just narrating what has happened, but then he'll come out with something mind-bogglingly stupid, usually conversationally. 

Ferdinand is still better than the likes of Murphy, Jenas, Savage et al however because there is at least a few nuggets of decent contribution there.

On another note, been really impressed with BT's coverage of the Gazprom in the main but they don't half **** it having 'Macca' on co comms. The bloke offers sod all.

Couldn't sum up his punditry more than after they beat PSG in the champions league and Rio came out saying "United are back, Ole is at the wheel" and they proceeded to only win 2 games from the next eleven. 

 

Great player, terrible pundit imo.