Working in the football media, I have to say that Michelle Owen (works for Sky) is one of the most knowledgable people I've met in football. A very nice lass too. Great at what she does. But if you check twitter etc, all you'll see are messages regards her being 'fit'. I'll take fit, knowledgable football reporters over millionaire ex-pro blokes who struggle to string sentences together. I do accept that women being involved on TV as much as they are nowadays in football is agenda driven, but I like it. Some right odious folk 'report' on football, I have to come across a fair few. None are women.
Don't see why you need to have played football at any level to be a pundit. They're different skills.
On the few occasions I do watch MOTD I fast forward the chitchat and just watch the action. Remember Brian Clough tearing into John Motson about it saying there was too much talking and not enough action.
Most of our top football writers have never played at the top level, so should they stop writing, I find it refreshing to hear points of view on sport from a variety of pundits, and find women’s points of view just as relevant as a mans, I think this is a bit sexist to be honest
True equality will be when you have aged women who have never been "fit" in their lives but are very knowledgeable about football as pundits.Not holding my breath on that one.
If you watched Sky Sports for any length of time you'd come to the conclusion that no such person exists. However, the only thing Sky Sports does for intelligence is to insult it.
See also: Steve Bloody Claridge. Played almost every level, shockingly poor presenter. And following the argument, why's it worth having women talk about tennis? How come Sue Barker presents that? Federer, or back in the day Bjorn Borg, would have smashed her.
They won't have played football for an obvious reason, but what relevance does this have to my original post?
Why bring tennis into it when I am talking about MOTD? In any case, they show women's and men's tennis on the same show so it's completely different. I expect most folk switch over when the women's matches come on.
People would then say this women is only there to redress the balance of there being too many "fit" women.
When I used to regularly watch Sky Sports News they'd conveniently put this 50+ year old woman presenting in the graveyard shifts.
I find it highly insulting of Sky that they think I'm incapable of paying attention to anything unless I've got a pretty face and a pair of t**s to look at. Or I did until I binned them years ago, that being one of the reasons.
Why does it matter if an analyst or presenter is male/female, young/old, pretty/not pretty? You want something sensible and insightful said. Doesn't matter a jot who says it.
I never said they had to be young and pretty. I am just asking why male pundits on MODT have played at the highest level but the women haven't.