Alty_Ram

*Caveat - this is in no way aimed at folk on here who are just not keen on certain female presenters/pundits*
I think what is slightly disturbing is the sheer intensity of the reaction that you get from a very small minority of men. If I hear a male pundit whose assessment I strongly disagree with, I just roll my eyes and say "Nah, b***ocks" and if its so annoying that I really can't listen to any more then I might switch over until they've gone away and think "What a c***womble". What I don't do is stalk and repeatedly harass them on social media with the most disgusting and distressing threats. These guys seem to reserve that sort of fanatical vitriolic abuse for women and frankly it must be terrifying to be on the receiving end of because you are never completely sure whether it is just some saddo shooting their mouth off from behind the anonymity of their PC, or some absolute fruitloop who is going to turn up at your workplace with a shovel in the boot of their car 😞... all because you are a woman and you thought a goal should have stood.

*Caveat - this is in no way aimed at folk on here who are just not keen on certain female presenters/pundits*
I think what is slightly disturbing is the sheer intensity of the reaction that you get from a very small minority of men. If I hear a male pundit whose assessment I strongly disagree with, I just roll my eyes and say "Nah, b***ocks" and if its so annoying that I really can't listen to any more then I might switch over until they've gone away and think "What a c***womble". What I don't do is stalk and repeatedly harass them on social media with the most disgusting and distressing threats. These guys seem to reserve that sort of fanatical vitriolic abuse for women and frankly it must be terrifying to be on the receiving end of because you are never completely sure whether it is just some saddo shooting their mouth off from behind the anonymity of their PC, or some absolute fruitloop who is going to turn up at your workplace with a shovel in the boot of their car 😞... all because you are a woman and you thought a goal should have stood.

*Caveat - this is in no way aimed at folk on here who are just not keen on certain female presenters/pundits*
I think what is slightly disturbing is the sheer intensity of the reaction that you get from a very small minority of men. If I hear a male pundit whose assessment I strongly disagree with, I just roll my eyes and say "Nah, b***ocks" and if its so annoying that I really can't listen to any more then I might switch over until they've gone away and think "What a c***womble". What I don't do is stalk and repeatedly harass them on social media with the most disgusting and distressing threats. These guys seem to reserve that sort of fanatical vitriolic abuse for women and frankly it must be terrifying to be on the receiving end of because you are never completely sure whether it is just some saddo shooting their mouth off from behind the anonymity of their PC, or some absolute fruitloop who is going to turn up at your workplace with a shovel in the boot of their car 😞... all because you are a woman and you thought a goal should have stood.

*Caveat - this is in no way aimed at folk on here who are just not keen on certain female presenters/pundits*
I think what is slightly disturbing is the sheer intensity of the reaction that you get from a very small minority of men. If I hear a male pundit whose assessment I strongly disagree with, I just roll my eyes and say "Nah, b***ocks" and if its so annoying that I really can't listen to any more then I might switch over until they've gone away and think "What a c***womble". What I don't do is stalk and repeatedly harass them on social media with the most disgusting and distressing threats. These guys seem to reserve that sort of fanatical vitriolic abuse for women and frankly it must be terrifying to be on the receiving end of because you are never completely sure whether it is just some saddo shooting their mouth off from behind the anonymity of their PC, or some absolute fruitloop who is going to turn up at your workplace with a shovel in the boot of their car 😞... all because you are a woman and you thought a goal should have stood.

Well that was all rather underwhelming. It'd have been nice to win the competition and while I'm really not really overly bothered at getting knocked out of this tournament and avoiding the extra games in what could be a big season for us, given the reasonably respectable side that we sent out you'd have expected it to give a better account of itself than that. Several fringe players totally failed to make any case for themselves and several first teamers below par.
Shrug. 'Concentrating on the league' time... again. As long as we are back on track next league game then I suppose that's all that really matters.

Well that was all rather underwhelming. It'd have been nice to win the competition and while I'm really not really overly bothered at getting knocked out of this tournament and avoiding the extra games in what could be a big season for us, given the reasonably respectable side that we sent out you'd have expected it to give a better account of itself than that. Several fringe players totally failed to make any case for themselves and several first teamers below par.
Shrug. 'Concentrating on the league' time... again. As long as we are back on track next league game then I suppose that's all that really matters.

Just my personal take on things but here goes..

IMHO, TV shows of this nature need an engaging host who can hold the whole programme together and draw useful info and insight from whatever experts are there. Whether you think MoTD has that host is a whole other question, but the presenters ability to hold the show together and head off rambling answers or bizarre rantings is the reason why you have a presenter who needn't be a former professional male footballer. Their maleness is neither going to get me to watch it nor to avoid it, I'd just ask are they any good in the presenter role and if they are then I'll watch it. It's like the chat show host role in many ways.
Likewise, commentators largely just describe what they are seeing and provide stats and discuss what options there may be from the bench, much as we do as fans when we discuss key phases of a game. We don't need to be former pros to see when a team has gone on the defensive and is inviting pressure or run out of steam, or whether a team has switched formation due to the latest substitutions. That just needs good knowledge of the teams so you can see that a forward has been withdrawn and an extra defender has come on or whatever. Once again, I'm not overly bothered whether that is a male or female voice but on a very minor and very specific point I have very occasionally observed that at really noisy games where the commentators are embedded with the crowd, that I can sometime hear male commentators more clearly than their female counterparts but that is as likely to be my hearing range as anything else.
The only real role where ex or current pro footballers seem to be relevant to me is as a pundit. Their insight into what might be happening psychologically or tactically or some insight into the nature of the half time team talk might be useful. Based on Sky Sports shows, they are however just as likely to talk out their backsides and pointlessly squabble and contradict each other as offer much useful insight.
In terms of male vs female pundits I'd just want to hear from someone with some relevant insight. If their experience was in the male game from 30 years ago when it was OK for a manager to hurl coffee cups at people then that perhaps may not always have quite the relevant insight that you'd hope for. Likewise, if a female ex pro pundit has never played in front of more than a few thousand fans at most then their take on big game pressures might be less relevant. The women's game is growing though, their top pros are playing in front of bigger crowds, particularly in international tournaments and that is relevant experience in my book.

Whether the balance is right yet, I couldn't really say, but the basic principle is not one that I have an issue with.

I think this is an interesting point. There are many top ex pros (including ex Derby Managers) who have all the relevant experience on paper but their contributions as a pundit are just a string of "ehhhmm's", "Like I says", "at the end of the days" and other assorted cliches and little or nothing that a fan at the game couldn't have told you. There are others (in my opinion) like Martin Keown who always seem to speak eloquently and knowledgeably - whether you agree with his analysis is another issue of course.

This is pretty much spot on. Personally I prefer a mix of opinions like you get on some of the radio discussion programs where journalists and ex pros offer their opinions. I couldn't tell you the last time I actually sat through and paid attention to the post match analysis on a TV broadcast. As others in this thread have pointed out, I think the way people consume football coverage has changed with the ready availability of highlights and streams and that's driven some of the changes we see in punditry. Roy Keane's frequent hot takes whilst Micah Richards cackles maniacally in the background aren't just because Roy is a miserable curmudgeon. He's incentivised to create reactionary short form content that will be clipped and shared online.

Just my personal take on things but here goes..

IMHO, TV shows of this nature need an engaging host who can hold the whole programme together and draw useful info and insight from whatever experts are there. Whether you think MoTD has that host is a whole other question, but the presenters ability to hold the show together and head off rambling answers or bizarre rantings is the reason why you have a presenter who needn't be a former professional male footballer. Their maleness is neither going to get me to watch it nor to avoid it, I'd just ask are they any good in the presenter role and if they are then I'll watch it. It's like the chat show host role in many ways.
Likewise, commentators largely just describe what they are seeing and provide stats and discuss what options there may be from the bench, much as we do as fans when we discuss key phases of a game. We don't need to be former pros to see when a team has gone on the defensive and is inviting pressure or run out of steam, or whether a team has switched formation due to the latest substitutions. That just needs good knowledge of the teams so you can see that a forward has been withdrawn and an extra defender has come on or whatever. Once again, I'm not overly bothered whether that is a male or female voice but on a very minor and very specific point I have very occasionally observed that at really noisy games where the commentators are embedded with the crowd, that I can sometime hear male commentators more clearly than their female counterparts but that is as likely to be my hearing range as anything else.
The only real role where ex or current pro footballers seem to be relevant to me is as a pundit. Their insight into what might be happening psychologically or tactically or some insight into the nature of the half time team talk might be useful. Based on Sky Sports shows, they are however just as likely to talk out their backsides and pointlessly squabble and contradict each other as offer much useful insight.
In terms of male vs female pundits I'd just want to hear from someone with some relevant insight. If their experience was in the male game from 30 years ago when it was OK for a manager to hurl coffee cups at people then that perhaps may not always have quite the relevant insight that you'd hope for. Likewise, if a female ex pro pundit has never played in front of more than a few thousand fans at most then their take on big game pressures might be less relevant. The women's game is growing though, their top pros are playing in front of bigger crowds, particularly in international tournaments and that is relevant experience in my book.

Whether the balance is right yet, I couldn't really say, but the basic principle is not one that I have an issue with.

I hear you buddy. 👍
... Nearly midday, and the fluffy mare hasn't lifted a finger as yet...

Wow, just wow... what a complete and utter tool this man is.
A woman who has spent a successful professional career playing football to a level where she has represented her country over 100 times and has played in international tournaments, is in apparently not qualified to offer an opinion on football ?
Oh, and women shouldn't be around football clubs doing the job they are qualified to do in case some d******* footballer decides that she's attractive and therefore he is utterly powerless to avoid having an affair with her and it's totally not his fault?
Christ on a bike, is this the friggin' dark ages ?!

Dug this old thread out, just to say well done to Fozzy.
I remember seeing him flying down the left and whipping in some terrifying crosses and thinking he was some player.
Then I saw him being given a lesson at home against Wolves and thought he was finished, likewise with the three ligament injuries.
But then he reinvents himself as a CD when needs must, with the signings of Nelson, Bradley and Elder I thought his days would be number.
But no Fozzy has re reinvented himself as a LB again and is keeping people out - assisting and scoring.
What an absolute legend, what a club man
 

I don't have an issue with wealthy owners being able to invest in a club's future (how that is administered is a whole other issue of course..) but I think what has always bugged me about this whole mechanism is the 'whiter-than-white', 'holier-than-thou', 'butter wouldn't melt' attitude of quite a lot of the fans of these clubs (it's not just this lot) who were quick to call us cheats because of the money that was being chucked around under Morris, but that somehow these teams are the good guys, some saintly protectors of the game who are always 'playing by the rules' and 'just want a level playing field' or whatever other justification they want kid themselves with. The idea that they are living within their means as clubs is just utter nonsense. They are totally gaming the system but are just better at it and better resourced than Morris was.
The only real difference between these teams and us under Morris is that their owners haven't run out patience or money yet. They are one chairman's hissy fit away from being left high and dry though. Maybe, just maybe they'll walk away and leave these clubs with draw-down funds to shield them against the worst... or maybe they'll wind the window of their Bentley down and stick a middle finger in the air and drive into the sunset. These teams are literally doing the same thing as us but their chairmen haven't found something more interesting to do yet. You are all of you potentially 'Nasty Cheaty Derby 2.0' but the planets haven't quite aligned yet.

"But the owners are local and the care about the club so it's all fine.." maybe.. The Oystons were local business folk when they bought Blackpool..

Meanwhile, in other breaking news, some small insignificant meteorites that are not in our solar system, didn't hit the earth.

Meanwhile, in other breaking news, some small insignificant meteorites that are not in our solar system, didn't hit the earth.

It's a bit dull.....company that doesn't do anything now is disolved.
I expected a bit more from our beloved friend, how does this send the chilling message to the football world that the sinister tentacles of Derby County are still active in spreading their dastardly influence upon the pure and virtuous world of football finances?

For all that he was a massive figure and someone to rally round in our darkest hours, as soon as he goes to Birmingham and their gloating tossers for fans, that's it for me, I hope his managerial career is an unmitigated disaster. Some may think that's unfair and 'just football' but I'm not fussed.. screw him and screw them.

Absolutely priceless ! Sheesh, I'll have what he's been smoking! Where do they get this b******* from ?! Spending fantasy money as if we were still in the top flight ?! Ahahaha haha hahhahaaah hhahahahaha..
There are some spectacularly ill-informed opposition fans who like to pretend to speak with authority about our past and present financial situation and they are often so far wide of the mark it's embarrassing. Same as those Wycombe clowns last week channelling the brummie morons with their "Were all having a party when Derby County dies" nonsense. I don't think someone has been keeping up with current events. Since the takeover we haven't exactly been able to spend much but we literally could not be in safer hands thanks to DC. They'll be having a long wait for their party.

Pinched from the Lincoln forum……..Barney Imp.
 “Not the result that we might have perhaps hoped for but one that was perhaps expected, especially against a club that is spending fantasy money as if they were still in the top flight.”
…………………….(insert your own expletive here) 👍🐏

Forest fans seem to think this is all done and good sources back that up. Well, there you go then. They are on a bad run but the teams below are absolute gash. Surely they could stay ahead of that lot. Owner might want the new guy in place before the transfer window in order to hang him with his own team come the summer though.

As an entertainment spectacle it was a bit of a shocker. The official stats quote two shots on target for us and one for them in 90 minutes - a thrill a minute half hour between attempts on target. If we'd held on for all 3 points then probably recollections of that non event of a game would probably be a little less harsh but the background murmur factor was very high for long periods and reflected the lack of skill and entertainment on show.
I'm still baffled at the amount of times that we get the ball at the edge of the area and go out wide with it. We almost never seem to just have a dip. With a team defending deep the keeper can be unsighted or there may be a deflection and at the very least, stinging the keepers hands lifts the crowd but every time we went wide and knocked a cross in it was dealt with pretty comfortably by their fairly large defence.
The goal was out of nothing really and seemed to surprise everyone but the rest was utterly forgettable.

Eventually you will inevitably create a chance or two however predictable your are as players tire or whatever. It was hardly creating anything in the way of chances. It just felt very predictable to me and I thought they looked comfortable against it.

Eventually you will inevitably create a chance or two however predictable your are as players tire or whatever. It was hardly creating anything in the way of chances. It just felt very predictable to me and I thought they looked comfortable against it.

As an entertainment spectacle it was a bit of a shocker. The official stats quote two shots on target for us and one for them in 90 minutes - a thrill a minute half hour between attempts on target. If we'd held on for all 3 points then probably recollections of that non event of a game would probably be a little less harsh but the background murmur factor was very high for long periods and reflected the lack of skill and entertainment on show.
I'm still baffled at the amount of times that we get the ball at the edge of the area and go out wide with it. We almost never seem to just have a dip. With a team defending deep the keeper can be unsighted or there may be a deflection and at the very least, stinging the keepers hands lifts the crowd but every time we went wide and knocked a cross in it was dealt with pretty comfortably by their fairly large defence.
The goal was out of nothing really and seemed to surprise everyone but the rest was utterly forgettable.