Come on lads... the one about the Iti player married to the ballet dancer - "shes gone for a 2-2"
Comedy gold
His scriptwriters do a great job. Lawrenson is a 'proud' English Irishman, let him comment on Irish internationals only, the same for Alan Green and in Rugby, Eddie Butler. I want Englishmen commentating and commenting on England games not people like Lawrenson, a flag of convenience man.
Same with Townsend on the other channel,how many caps for Ireland has he got and you can tell hes an England fan.OK hes better than Lawrenson but that aint much to shout about.
Totally agree, absolute plonker. His sarcastic/caustic one liners are pathetic. He was a second rate international player playing in a third rate side! It's a disgrace that the BBC pay this idiot out of our licence fees.
find him a bit more entertaining than most of them. If you're going to the bother of writing a letter can you say something nasty about Peter Drury although i accept he is on the other side - he makes my skin crawl.
Sadly none of the modern day footballers (those that retire with millions in the bank) are going to fit the bill for the BBC. They don't need the money and they can't put a sentance together.
Can you imagine a retired Wayne Rooney being asked to give comment on a football match?
Hansen and Lawrenson played at the top level and are happy to be involved in these kind of things. They are also less likely to be 'incentivised' to join Sky.
This does make me wonder whether the broadcasters actually bother with customer feedback on this. Do they do surveys for example? If so, there can't be many feeding back with comments like: "Mark Lawrenson's cheeky demeanour and laugh out loud one-liners never fails to cheer me up!" Whereas such comments as: "Mark Lawrenson is a smug, unfunny, uninformed, unintelligent, miserable waste of a licence fee." must surely be more commonplace.
The trouble is, there seems to be this obsession in sports broadcasting with making the game more "interesting" by spraying stats, facts, jokes and tedious anecdotes all over it. Do people really want that? I know I don't and I don't think I'm in the minority. As things stand, I can't help but think that football commentators will generally be disliked and very few actively liked - I mean, ask yourself, are there really any commentators that make you think "Yes! I love the way he commentates! It really enriches my enjoyment of the game." ?
Personally, if there was an option of a 'minimalist' commentator who pretty much only says the names of the relevant players and basics like "Good diagonal ball there from Wiggins to Green" then I'd listen to that. Whoever it was.
All good points Lord R and we must not forget Mark Lawrenson is not the match commentator, he just chips in now and again, I like the guy and his comments however if he were the main match commentator I might feel a little different.
All good points Lord R and we must not forget Mark Lawrenson is not the match commentator, he just chips in now and again, I like the guy and his comments however if he were the main match commentator I might feel a little different.
Absolutely esm, but I think it applies to both commentators and co-commentators. Where I do disagree with you is on the "I like the guy"!
Awful - the worst bit last night was when De Rossi hit the post, "could have been worse, could have gone in". Really Mark? Never would have guessed that.
Never really had an opinion before, but he was terrible last night.
Totally agree, can't have gone unnoticed at the BBC how bad he was. Also why does Shearer every time he makes a comment do this weird head wobble and strange smirk like he's just uncovered some deep truth about England's failures. He is an absolutely useless TV pundit. Dixon and Hansen are decent.
There are far too many Scots, Irish and Welsh 'pundits' on the BBC, not only in sports but right across the entire broadcasting spectrum. There are also far too many 'foreigners' commenting on matters English The Scots especially have always talked a good sporting fight. Let them be kept on ice for games involving the Scots and lets have more Englishmen commenting. Last night on 5Live there was a Scots woman interviewing Italian fans in London at 1/2 time. I am not interested in the thoughts of a few Waiters, dossers and 'students' of Italian extraction, I wanted more comments from English people, the people who pay the high price which the BBC demands from its captive audience.
The modern globalised world must be very painful for you.
As soon as I heard him pipe up I flicked over to five live: this did have the disadvantage of Alan Green whining about having to stay up late, the travel arrangements and mexican waves but did have Chris Waddle who calls a game pretty well and has the most amusing speech impedement I've ever come across (pelanty).
he is one miserable git. I had to agree with him when at the start of extra time he said "its just gonna be a replay of the second half." it was an obvious statement but at least he said it. we had no threat. otherwise the guy bloody annoys me with his 'witty' comments. the only consolation is that at least we didn't have to see his scrunched up dog face.
Agree. I've never been annoyed by him before, just found him bland, boring and anodyne with nothing worthwhile to say. But he was embarrasingly bad. He's only 55. But last night he was wittering and muttering like a senile old codger you'd meet in your local saloon bar - and take your drink somewhere else in order to avoid. Awful.
He was most dismissive of us when giving his 'expert' views on our Cup replay against Blackburn on the radio a few yeas ago, quite scathing in fact. By the end of the game he gave us some grudging praise but then again, he had no choice. Haven't bothered with him since.
Punditry has become a nice little earner for a large number of ex-sportsman in recent years, but you do wonder what they add to your knowledge of whatever sport it happens to be. For some of the less popular events, the ones you only watch at Olympics time for example, yes it can be useful, but for major sports such as football, do pundits really add anything to your knowledge or enjoyment?
I dont need to be told every 2 seconds we were kak.
I dont know why we have to have the UN on the panel when we are more than capable of slagging ourselves off! However i thought Roy keane was one of the better pundits.arsewipeKnacker tho he is. maybe even our pundits aint even World class?
The BBC are rubbish but then you flick over to ITV and Andy Townsend, Clive Tyldsley and J-me-me-me Caaarakkkkkher are making your ears bleed with their drivel, then paying your licence fee seems a great deal.
The BBC have good commentators in Guy Mowbray, Jonathan Pearce etc but their co-commentators are awful. Don't even get me started on the pundits in the studio though!
As for ITV, they have better pundits and Jim Beglin, but that's it. Their coverage is poor, too many adverts and Adrian Chiles.
Comments
he is pony tho
It's a disgrace that the BBC pay this idiot out of our licence fees.
Can you imagine a retired Wayne Rooney being asked to give comment on a football match?
Hansen and Lawrenson played at the top level and are happy to be involved in these kind of things. They are also less likely to be 'incentivised' to join Sky.
Do they do surveys for example? If so, there can't be many feeding back with comments like:
"Mark Lawrenson's cheeky demeanour and laugh out loud one-liners never fails to cheer me up!"
Whereas such comments as:
"Mark Lawrenson is a smug, unfunny, uninformed, unintelligent, miserable waste of a licence fee."
must surely be more commonplace.
The trouble is, there seems to be this obsession in sports broadcasting with making the game more "interesting" by spraying stats, facts, jokes and tedious anecdotes all over it. Do people really want that? I know I don't and I don't think I'm in the minority.
As things stand, I can't help but think that football commentators will generally be disliked and very few actively liked - I mean, ask yourself, are there really any commentators that make you think "Yes! I love the way he commentates! It really enriches my enjoyment of the game."
?
Personally, if there was an option of a 'minimalist' commentator who pretty much only says the names of the relevant players and basics like "Good diagonal ball there from Wiggins to Green" then I'd listen to that. Whoever it was.
but I think it applies to both commentators and co-commentators.
Where I do disagree with you is on the "I like the guy"!
:-)
Gerrard must have had a headache.
otherwise the guy bloody annoys me with his 'witty' comments.
the only consolation is that at least we didn't have to see his scrunched up dog face.
Punditry has become a nice little earner for a large number of ex-sportsman in recent years, but you do wonder what they add to your knowledge of whatever sport it happens to be. For some of the less popular events, the ones you only watch at Olympics time for example, yes it can be useful, but for major sports such as football, do pundits really add anything to your knowledge or enjoyment?
I dont need to be told every 2 seconds we were kak.
I dont know why we have to have the UN on the panel when we are more than capable of slagging ourselves off! However i thought Roy keane was one of the better pundits.arsewipeKnacker tho he is. maybe even our pundits aint even World class?
As for ITV, they have better pundits and Jim Beglin, but that's it. Their coverage is poor, too many adverts and Adrian Chiles.
Sky Sports and ESPN are far superior.