MOTD short format 11.03.2023

[Dr Wolfenstein]

View attachment 33516

And possibly deaf ones as well, with no access to subtitled or graphic information as well as commentary.

 

[Mutchy]

This has to stay totally on what would or wouldn't work as a format for Match of the Day. It cannot become another thread about politics or the rights and wrongs of the Lineker situation. Fair warning if you want it to stay open.

 

[Frank Lincoln]

One pundit? How would that work? If there is going to be talk, there has to be discussion, not just a soliloquy.

They only need one person to describe the action briefly, which in my opinion would be preferable to all the talking. And also they only describe incidents they want to. How often have Lineker and his studio experts decided not to discuss controversial moments in games. They are very selective about which incidents they discuss.

 

[hollo]

Switched it off after Leicester-Chelsea. Thumbs down from me. I like the analysis which is generally of high quality when Shearer and Wright are doing it. The BBC will live to regret this if it carries on.

It would have been better with commentary and extended highlights.However, I don't necessarily care for the analysis from pundits who show bias towards the top 6. Why didn't they play the MOTD theme?

 

[The Wolf In The North]

One pundit? How would that work? If there is going to be talk, there has to be discussion, not just a soliloquy.

Roy Keane could do it. And still manage to disagree.

 

[bigbluewolf]

Match of the Day set the format for football highlights shows. Every other show apes the format, they all have a presenter, they all have pundits, they all talk about the big teams more than the small teams.

And when it comes to big international matches which are shown on BBC and ITV - BBC always wins the viewing figures. They must be doing something right.

If you don't like, don't watch.

 

[reanswolf]

A real shame you included the blatant sexism.

Thing is I am not sure it is sexism, it is often just harder to hear, and its like children shouting. For instance, I just cannot make out what the girl who does half-time at Wolves says, I have to ask my lad. Higher pitched and screeching voices to many people is more annoying and much more difficult to hear, I don't find it annoying because it happens to be a woman.

Guess that still makes me sexist in saying that, by some modern interpretations.

 

[Mutchy]

This has to stay totally on what would or wouldn't work as a format for Match of the Day. It cannot become another thread about politics or the rights and wrongs of the Lineker situation. Fair warning if you want it to stay open.

And again, but this is the last time I try.
Not Lineker, not the BBC, not politics... purely the best format for a football highlights programme.

 

[bigbluewolf]

Thing is I am not sure it is sexism, it is just harder to hear, and its like children shouting. For instance, I just cannot make out what the girl who does half-time at Wolves says, I have to ask my lad. Higher pitched and screeching voices to many people is more annoying and much more difficult to hear, I don't find it annoying because it happens to be a woman.

Guess that still makes me sexist in saying that, by some modern interpretations.

I would say not hearing Gemma Frith doing the half time entertainment at Molineux is down to the terrible PA system.

 

[Frank Lincoln]

I would give the new format a thumbs up. It showed we don’t need endless talking, just show the football.

 

[Sussex Wolf]

The format last night, as it stands, could not replace MOTD permanently. No commentary and no team sheets is frankly ridiculous and smacks me of BBC Sport doing their best to make the show as poor as they could to try to show people what they’re missing. Remember that it was the BBC Sport team which didn’t want to suspend Lineker.

Now, given a week to prepare, and perhaps relieving a few BBC Sport managers of their duties, they could easily replace the missing commentary, add team sheets, add a short introduction and an end with tables. I’d still like to see some post match analysis, but if the pundits wish to continue their walk out, then even without them, it could still work for as long as needed until pundits sign up to provide insight and analysis.

 

[reanswolf]

I would say not hearing the half time entertainment at Molineux is down to the terrible PA system.

You are right, but I can hear men, or some women with lower pitched voices.
Just natural deterioration of hearing as you get older.

 

[jrpb-3]

View attachment 33516

I did wonder about that when I watched it. OK for most but with no comms useless for anyone with visual impairment

 

[Stourport wolf]

If there is no after match analysis, why can't they extend the highlights and put more football on? Maybe we could watch more of the Wolves matches then..

 

[Jawwfc]

I'm not sure MOTD has much longer left regardless of the Lineker situation. Its an expensive product in terms of license fees and highlights are available straight away on YouTube.

 

[Big Saft Kid]

It would have been better with commentary and extended highlights.However, I don't necessarily care for the analysis from pundits who show bias towards the top 6. Why didn't they play the MOTD theme?

I don't think the MoTD pundits are particularly biased towards the 'Top Six' -- not if you compare them to the complete **** show of Sky , where the Top Six are the only game in town. and some of the pundits are half-wits. To me, the BBC pundits come across as super-knowledgeable football fans and we all know what teams they support because they make no secret of it and it's generally who they played for and/or where they come from: Leicester (Lineker), Newcastle (Shearer), Arsenal & Palace (Wright), Spurs and Notts Forest (Jenas), City (Richards), Liverpool (Murphy), Arsenal (Keowne). It's a bloody good programme and one I have watched since it first became Match of the Day (and it was just one match) in the mid-60s.

 

[WolvTown]

You all know MoTD was created to talk about and discuss football. Big chin created the format, sitting down and discussing football. Agreeing with or not agreeing with a panel is part of sport, it creates discussion, at work, in the pub, at home etc.
Not liking MoTD hosts or people on there isn't a new thing and it would make no sense if Everybody liked or Everybody agreed with what was said.

 

[Big Saft Kid]

I'm not sure MOTD has much longer left regardless of the Lineker situation. Its an expensive product in terms of license fees and highlights are available straight away on YouTube.

But how old are you? There are millions of older people who don't know one end of an i-phone or a laptop from the other (and many who don't possess either)

 

[Big Saft Kid]

You all know MoTD was created to talk about and discuss football. Big chin created the format, sitting down and discussing football. Agreeing with or not agreeing with a panel is part of sport, it creates discussion, at work, in the pub, at home etc.
Not liking MoTD hosts or people on there isn't a new thing and it would make no sense if Everybody liked or Everybody agreed with what was said.

The forerunner of the programme you think was invented by Big Chin goes back a lot further than that. Saturday night highlights of football go back to the late 50s, with Kenneth Wolstenholme doing the commentating. It was just one match, initially, and that went on until at least the 70s.

 

[hollo]

They only need one person to describe the action briefly, which in my opinion would be preferable to all the talking. And also they only describe incidents they want to. How often have Lineker and his studio experts decided not to discuss controversial moments in games. They are very selective about which incidents they discuss.

Didn't they have one person in the studio in the 70s?

 

[NottsWolves]

I can’t say I watch it every week, as we are usually on at the end.

I do watch when there’s been controversy, as I actually find Shearer and Murphy have been very critical and seem to watch the game as fans and see what we see with regards to bias etc.

If you simply want highlights, go online. For those with sky, why would you want to watch just a couple of minutes when you can have 30 minutes of the game and no pundits.

MOTD ‘offers’ a different take, sky only provide analysis of the weekend games (or some of them) on monday night football or the build up to games. They got rid of goals on Sunday and show the highlights straight away. There is something for everyone.

 

[tonto]

I found it better without all the punditry but deffo does feel soulless and empty with the match commentary.

Funny I felt the opposite, don’t mind punditry even if it’s to disagree but much better without the banal I put from commentator

 

[Frank Lincoln]

Didn't they have one person in the studio in the 70s?

I watched it back then, but can only recall seeing firstly with David Coleman and then Jimmy Hill. I don’t recall their being expert analysis back then, but I may be wrong.

 

[Lobo de Ouro]

Why are so many people who don't care about/don't want to hear others opinions, registered on a football forum?

 

[tonto]

Time to put the expensive pundits to grass. The show was a bit rushed, and maybe need a happy medium with maybe just one pundit. But one thing that wasn’t missed was Lineker. He may be the presenter, but really he does nothing that adds to the show. Though when this blows over I presume it will be back to endless talk and very little action.

Agree about Lineker brilliant footballer crap presenter who thinks he is better than he is ,especially with the crap humour

 

[wolvesaywe]

I watched it back then, but can only recall seeing firstly with David Coleman and then Jimmy Hill. I don’t recall their being expert analysis back then, but I may be wrong.

I'm not old enough to remember in real time but punditry started with ITV (The Doog et al) at the 1970 Mexico world cup and gave ITV higher viewing figures than the Beeb

Screen Test: How ITV Introduced Us To The World Cup Panel

These days we take football punditry very much for granted but prior to1970 the only place you’d find a group of like-minded individuals sitting around,…

www.thesportsman.com

I presume MOTD copied the format shortly after and folk have been moaning about it ever since!

 

[tonto]

The format last night, as it stands, could not replace MOTD permanently. No commentary and no team sheets is frankly ridiculous and smacks me of BBC Sport doing their best to make the show as poor as they could to try to show people what they’re missing. Remember that it was the BBC Sport team which didn’t want to suspend Lineker.

Now, given a week to prepare, and perhaps relieving a few BBC Sport managers of their duties, they could easily replace the missing commentary, add team sheets, add a short introduction and an end with tables. I’d still like to see some post match analysis, but if the pundits wish to continue their walk out, then even without them, it could still work for as long as needed until pundits sign up to provide insight and analysis.

Do the pundits really have to be ex players

 

[tonto]

I don't think the MoTD pundits are particularly biased towards the 'Top Six' -- not if you compare them to the complete **** show of Sky , where the Top Six are the only game in town. and some of the pundits are half-wits. To me, the BBC pundits come across as super-knowledgeable football fans and we all know what teams they support because they make no secret of it and it's generally who they played for and/or where they come from: Leicester (Lineker), Newcastle (Shearer), Arsenal & Palace (Wright), Spurs and Notts Forest (Jenas), City (Richards), Liverpool (Murphy), Arsenal (Keowne). It's a bloody good programme and one I have watched since it first became Match of the Day (and it was just one match) in the mid-60s.

One match great commentator and no pundit also black and white if I remember correctly

 

[tonto]

I'm not old enough to remember in real time but punditry started with ITV (The Doog et al) at the 1970 Mexico world cup and gave ITV higher viewing figures than the Beeb

Screen Test: How ITV Introduced Us To The World Cup Panel

These days we take football punditry very much for granted but prior to1970 the only place you’d find a group of like-minded individuals sitting around,…

www.thesportsman.com

I presume MOTD copied the format shortly after and folk have been moaning about it ever since!

I was about to post that

 

[bod101]

Do the pundits really have to be ex players

They could revamp the show and have different fans each week for the pundits probably be more interesting and in some cases insightful

 

[Spitfire]

Didn't they have one person in the studio in the 70s?

When I started watching in the mid 70’s it was just Jimmy Hill presenting 2 matches and him commenting on any noteworthy incidents. Then Bob Wilson joined him to present a round up of news. Think programme was about 50 minutes long with about 20 minutes highlights of each game.

 

[rincewind]

....I always have this argument with me dad whose only access to Premier league football is watching wolves at home and match of the day ...he thinks everyone is brilliant apart from us ....he only sees the 60/70 mins of poor football from us and the best bits of the rest. ...

Does he comment on the match thread?

 

[WolvTown]

They could revamp the show and have different fans each week for the pundits probably be more interesting and in some cases insightful

Being a pundit is a job, you'd have fans falling over their words, or freezing on camera, with the real pundits carrying them.. imo

 

[old wittonian]

Just been reported on Classic FM news that half a million more people watched MOTD last night than the week before.

 

[old wittonian]

Do the pundits really have to be ex players

I've wondered that for a while now. Has there ever been a manager. They would probably be more tactically aware.
I recall Mick being particularly astute on a channel some time ago.

 

[Black Coffee]

A real shame you included the blatant sexism.

TBF that Vicky (her surname escapes me is) absolutely dreadful her screeching (and that's what it is) is off putting.

Another female commentator Pien Mulenstein is actually quite good so believe me from my POV it isn't sexism it's just the other lady is just dreadful.

 

[Wonder Boyo]

Do the pundits really have to be ex players

All of my favourite football podcasts have journalists as pundits, with the odd player featuring now and again. The journalists are mainly British but also include some from Europe and the rest of the world. I find their analysis a lot more interesting and insightful than the pros. There are some good ex pros out there too who know how to express themselves well. A lot of the journalists who started on The Guardian Football Weekly and also feature in The Totally Football Show have proved their worth and been recruited by Talksport on various shows and also BT Sport, particularly in their Champions League/ Europa League goals shows.

A mix of journalists and pros would work well I think.

 

[DJW]

Just been reported on Classic FM news that half a million more people watched MOTD last night than the week before.

Well I fully support GL's comments and like many, would have watched it to laugh at how awful it is but I'm not in the country at the moment. Slowing down to watch a car crash on the opposite carriage way springs to mind.

 

[Wolf in Kenilworth]

The whole point of commentary, punditry and analysis is to listen to the experts pick apart the plays, dig into the controversy and talk through the intricacies of the game we are all obsessed about.

Yes the commentary may appear big club bias on a lot of occasions but it’s just not the same without it.

 

[Ned]

Why are so many people who don't care about/don't want to hear others opinions, registered on a football forum?

How else would they be able to tell other people this? Doing it privately doesn’t appear to be an option.