Topic: Jermaine Anthony Jenas

[Sir Capon of Debaser]

If he couldnt whistle he wouldn't know where to wipe his own arse, the daft bastard.

[redgriffin73]

As I have said many, MANY, times before on this forum, I cannot stand the boring, pointless, pinheaded prick.

[Funky_Gibbons]

Hansen was quite unique in that he was clearly insightful enough to be a good coach or manager but wanted an easier life so he became a pundit (before the really big bucks came into management).

Nowadays pundits are 10 a penny and are either failed managers (Neville/Roy Keane) or hacks phoning it in who have nothing interesting to say (Rio Ferdinand, Mcmanaman, Murphy, Jenas, Owen etc) and not good enough to manage.

30 years ago they'd have opened a bar or something after they finished playing - after not making that much money as a player - now they cling onto the PL millions via Sky/BT/BBC etc to still earn a good salary and steal a living.

To be fair to Neville, he at least did his coaching badges so has a level of authority/experience to speak from when he discusses football. He still offers some decent tactical insight into the game that someone like Souness or Keane can't.

The majority of these pundits are on TV for hours every day and offer nothing other than stating the bleeding obvious. You can't become a football manager without having the necessary coachng badges so why can you go on TV spouting absolute bollocks without any qualifications.

Another good pundit is Pat Nevin but for some reason he doesn't get as much airtime as others.......

[liversaint]

Jenas- thick
Murphy. Thicker. And Bitter.
Richards. Much Thicker. And City cheerleader.
Shearer. Better than the 3 above. Just.
Lineker. Vain self publicist with poor humour

A miserable line-up that should be put against a wall and have a cannon loaded with shit fired at them.

[Pistolero]

To be fair to Neville, he at least did his coaching badges so has a level of authority/experience to speak from when he discusses football. He still offers some decent tactical insight into the game that someone like Souness or Keane can't.

The majority of these pundits are on TV for hours every day and offer nothing other than stating the bleeding obvious. You can't become a football manager without having the necessary coachng badges so why can you go on TV spouting absolute bollocks without any qualifications.

Another good pundit is Pat Nevin but for some reason he doesn't get as much airtime as others.......

Neville's a c*nt

[AndyMuller]

To be fair to Neville, he at least did his coaching badges so has a level of authority/experience to speak from when he discusses football. He still offers some decent tactical insight into the game that someone like Souness or Keane can't.

The majority of these pundits are on TV for hours every day and offer nothing other than stating the bleeding obvious. You can't become a football manager without having the necessary coachng badges so why can you go on TV spouting absolute bollocks without any qualifications.

Another good pundit is Pat Nevin but for some reason he doesn't get as much airtime as others.......

Neville was an embarrassment at Valencia. Both Souness and Keane have far more to offer than the rat.

[Morgana]

Is there a more biased, mean-spirited dunderhead in the world of punditry? 

Jenas- thick
Murphy. Thicker. And Bitter.
Richards. Much Thicker. And City cheerleader.
Shearer. Better than the 3 above. Just.
Lineker. Vain self publicist with poor humour

A miserable line-up that should be put against a wall and have a cannon loaded with shit fired at them.

Easy now. Poisoning is quicker and can be pain-free. Bit of mercy wouldn't go amiss.   

[Funky_Gibbons]

Neville was an embarrassment at Valencia. Both Souness and Keane have far more to offer than the rat.

Keane and Souness are cut from the same cloth and offer next to nothing other than 'he's not trying hard enough' or 'he's not good enough'.

[Yorkykopite]

I used to think Murphy was ok, but he does only ever say one thing. And he says it over and over again. "I hate Rafa because he preferred Alonso over me." Sure, it comes out disguised. But scratch the surface of every comment the poor bloke makes and you can see the Alonso complaint.

[tonysleft]

he's so fucking shit at being a pundit and he was largely shit at being a player too

[wampa1]

Shearer. Better than the 3 above. Just.

I think Shearer is quite good but too often gets suckered into the 'banter'. Bit like the new lad at school who wants to learn but joins in with the dossing to try to fit in.

[Nobby Reserve]

I'm not having these defences of Micah Richards. He's almost as bad as Trevor Sinclair but hides behind a sunny demeanour and embarrassing, water-weak 'banter' but is a mouthpiece of idiocy and misinformation for the glorious benefit of the Rulers of Abu Dhabi. Everything he says it such shite and the way that he and Sinclair speak would make you think City are the white knight saviours of football, rather than ruining it. Richards was even bombed out post takeover for not being good enough, but he still champions the club. I'm certain both are on the payroll in some capacity.

Spot on. He's an Abu Dhabi twat.

But then Jenas is hardly unbiased. He seems to have more of a downer on Liverpool than Murphy.

Shearer is marginally the best of a bad bunch, but he pisses with the wind and contradicts himself to suit his agenda (one week with certain players from certain clubs: "There was contact and he was entitled to go down; it's a penalty all day long" / week after, different certain player from a different certain club: "There was contact, but he's made the most of it and dived; not a penalty for me")

[Funky_Gibbons]

Spot on. He's an Abu Dhabi twat.

But then Jenas is hardly unbiased. He seems to have more of a downer on Liverpool than Murphy.

Shearer is marginally the best of a bad bunch, but he pisses with the wind and contradicts himself to suit his agenda (one week with certain players from certain clubs: "There was contact and he was entitled to go down; it's a penalty all day long" / week after, different certain player from a different certain club: "There was contact, but he's made the most of it and dived; not a penalty for me")

Shearer on Calvert-Lewin dive vs Lovren: "You can’t give someone a reason to go down...”

Shearer on Lallana dive vs Holgate: "Football is a contact sport, you can touch someone without it being a penalty. I don't think that is a penalty at all. There is no way that is a penalty."

[Fromola]

To be fair to Neville, he at least did his coaching badges so has a level of authority/experience to speak from when he discusses football. He still offers some decent tactical insight into the game that someone like Souness or Keane can't.

The majority of these pundits are on TV for hours every day and offer nothing other than stating the bleeding obvious. You can't become a football manager without having the necessary coachng badges so why can you go on TV spouting absolute bollocks without any qualifications.

Another good pundit is Pat Nevin but for some reason he doesn't get as much airtime as others.......

They have nothing to offer at all.

I think podcasts have shown them up as well. Podcasts with journalists and football writers who know their stuff, or the more fan media with the likes of yourselves. If I ever watch MOTD now I have it recorded and just skip through all the punditry and if I watch a game on Sky now i'll tune in on kick off and pause it at half time.

Just being an ex-England player is enough for Sky/BT/MOTD to give you a platform, even if you're not good enough to be a coach.

Another thing that pisses me off with the pundits is they all have club biases (Neville/Rio/Richards/Shearer et al), apart from ex-LFC players who never seem to favour us (the ones that do are on LFC TV). You can live with that but when you've got many pundits actively against us (like Neville) and nobody to speak up for us, it doesn't help when agendas are pushed.

[Lee1-6Liv]

If he couldnt whistle he wouldn't know where to wipe his own arse, the daft bastard.

  you've put that image in me head now.

[Morgana]

I think Shearer is quite good but too often gets suckered into the 'banter'. Bit like the new lad at school who wants to learn but joins in with the dossing to try to fit in.

I liked his commentary on the Barca gave on BBC 5Live. It's one of my highlights of 2019, and I still have a listen on the YouTube channel every now and then when I need a big cheer up. But yeah, you do get a sense on the MotD that he's trying to fit in with the rascals sometimes. I do think him and Linekar are a decent duo though. Proper legends the both of them as well. Whereas Richards is just a lip-service-paying Man City alum and a wannabe comedian. Jenas and Murphy are just scumbags.

[Dench57]

I liked his commentary on the Barca gave on BBC 5Live. It's one of my highlights of 2019, and I still have a listen on the YouTube channel every now and then when I need a big cheer up.

Really would recommend to anyone who hasn't listened to it. You can tell him and Ian Dennis are absolutely buzzing, astounded by what was taking place in front of them. Just joyous. Think that will always soften my opinion of him cos while he is generally shite on MoTD, that will always remain one of my favourite bits of commentary

As for Jenas, he's a non-entity so it's irritating how ubiquitous he is; the blandest of the bland, the One Show in human form. As someone else said, the type your ma likes. Being groomed for the top job (Lineker's) by the looks of it.

[Sir Capon of Debaser]

you've put that image in me head now.

Hahaha its Pauline Calf.(Coogan)

[Flaccido Dongingo]

Have we got to the point where the TV executives realise that putting idiots in as pundits, talking nothing but ill informed, nonsensical bullshit generates more noise on Twitter etc, which in turn generates more interest in seeing the aforementioned gobshites?

I remember seeing Doug Stanhope on Newswipe years ago talking about reality TV, more or less saying that a reality TV show could be about anything, as long as you have one first class arsehole on your show, and people will tune in whether they're interested or not, because there's no way the TV executives had a big meeting and decided, "yeah, we're all decided then, Jermaine Jenas is the face of all of our football coverage from here on in, no better man for the job", I'd be interested in seeing who else was in the running that didn't make the cut.

Here's the Doug Stanhope segment if anyone wants to watch it.

https://youtu.be/-dD5zHfC-5Y

[Robinred]

Like Fromola, these days I watch just the games - no pre- or post-match stuff, nor the halftime ‘analysis’.

It helps. It also helps, with very few exceptions, to watch on mute. It probably says more about me than them, but I find most commentators irritating, though obviously some are off the scale. E.g Hinchcliffe, Macca.

Barry Davies was so, so good by comparison - but again that’s probably me showing my age.

[Flaccido Dongingo]

Like Fromola, these days I watch just the games - no pre- or post-match stuff, nor the halftime ‘analysis’.

It helps. It also helps, with very few exceptions, to watch on mute. It probably says more about me than them, but I find most commentators irritating, though obviously some are off the scale. E.g Hinchcliffe, Macca.

Barry Davies was so, so good by comparison - but again that’s probably me showing my age.

I'm in my 40s and I remember Davies, he was great, Motson gets a ton of shit, but at the very least his detractors would have to admit that he was very well researched on the match and teams involved, and this was largely pre Internet when researching for anything would have been much harder, these current crop of dickheads know nothing, can't even pronounce names of foreign players, then joke about it, how hilarious, here I am on national TV being paid tens or hundreds of thousands of pounds and I'm actually telling you how lazy and brain dead I am, Merson is the worst, it's gotten to the point now where he occupies a kind of court jester role on the show now, and he actually survived the cull in which Phil Thompson and Charlie Nicholas were binned off!

[WhereAngelsPlay]

This prick doesn't deserve a thread

[WhereAngelsPlay]

Like Fromola, these days I watch just the games - no pre- or post-match stuff, nor the halftime ‘analysis’.

It helps. It also helps, with very few exceptions, to watch on mute. It probably says more about me than them, but I find most commentators irritating, though obviously some are off the scale. E.g Hinchcliffe, Macca.

Barry Davies was so, so good by comparison - but again that’s probably me showing my age.

I always switch to LFCtv at H & FT.

[rossipersempre]

This prick doesn't deserve a thread

Exactly what I came in to say. Lock it and consign into irrelevance.

[Flaccido Dongingo]

I always switch to LFCtv at H & FT.

I can't have THE LFC TV commentator at all, he's like a broken record.

[Peabee]

He's bland, uncontroversial, and will never get caught in the BBC toilets with a crack pipe and a cheap brass. Perfect for the modern BBC. Just like the never-booked Lineker (for him, luckily, his brother has all the degenerative noncey genes in the Lineker family).

[rafathegaffa83]

The thing with a lot of punditry is that it's lowest common denominator. Find a familiar face that a casual supporter might know that has played for at least one of Man City, Chelsea, Man Utd, Liverpool, Arsenal, Spurs, West Ham, Newcastle, Leeds or Everton. But like with management, the best players generally don't make the best pundits. Richie Sadlier played for Millwall, but his views are more erudite than Michael Owen's or Danny Murphy's

[Alan_X]

The whole premise of "...you have to have played the game to be able to talk about it..." is bollocks for a start. There's no reason why someone excelling at a non-verbal skill like playing football is going to be able to explain the nuances of tactics.

It's certainly evident that far too many selected as pundits don't know the Laws of the Game. The fact that there are rule changes or the interpretation changes is no excuse either - if they've changed then fucking learn what the chanages are so you can explain you muppets.

If I want analysis of a Liverpool game I'll read one of the better print journalists or the Anfield Wrap.

[rafathegaffa83]

The whole premise of "...you have to have played the game to be able to talk about it..." is bollocks for a start. There's no reason why someone excelling at a non-verbal skill like playing football is going to be able to explain the nuances of tactics.

It's certainly evident that far too many selected as pundits don't know the Laws of the Game. The fact that there are rule changes or the interpretation changes is no excuse either - if they've changed then fucking learn what the chanages are so you can explain you muppets.

If I want analysis of a Liverpool game I'll read one of the better print journalists or the Anfield Wrap.

Spot on

[Peabee]

The whole premise of "...you have to have played the game to be able to talk about it..." is bollocks for a start. There's no reason why someone excelling at a non-verbal skill like playing football is going to be able to explain the nuances of tactics.

It's certainly evident that far too many selected as pundits don't know the Laws of the Game. The fact that there are rule changes or the interpretation changes is no excuse either - if they've changed then fucking learn what the chanages are so you can explain you muppets.

If I want analysis of a Liverpool game I'll read one of the better print journalists or the Anfield Wrap.

Yep, there’s plenty of knowledgeable journalists/writers/analysts. I’d like to see them use a mix of analysts, journalists, etc, with one ex-player at most. Some people with actual insight. I don’t mind the ex players who do their research, such as Alex Scott, but it’s still too much like an old boys club with them all making good money from very little work - or being given a job because they’re a laugh (a certain ex City player). They clearly, on the whole, don’t read up on the laws of the game or the latest methods used in coaching etc. Danny Murphy even lambasted the use of a set-piece coach as “it’s the manager's job”. He seems to have not progressed his ideas on football since he retired.

[Robinred]

I can't have THE LFC TV commentator at all, he's like a broken record.

Do you mean Steve Hunter (who does the non-1st team games) or John Bradley (who is often paired with Gary Gillespie - he who refers to players by their stature and birthplace😉). They both get a lot of stick on the various chat rooms, but Bradley is far the better of the two.

[Robinred]

Yep, there’s plenty of knowledgeable journalists/writers/analysts. I’d like to see them use a mix of analysts, journalists, etc, with one ex-player at most. Some people with actual insight. I don’t mind the ex players who do their research, such as Alex Scott, but it’s still too much like an old boys club with them all making good money from very little work - or being given a job because they’re a laugh (a certain ex City player). They clearly, on the whole, don’t read up on the laws of the game or the latest methods used in coaching etc. Danny Murphy even lambasted the use of a set-piece coach as “it’s the manager's job”. He seems to have not progressed his ideas on football since he retired.

Indeed. And it’s worth comparing football punditry/commentary with Sky’s cricket or racing coverage - which is superior in every way; entertaining, knowledgeable and up to speed.

[bradders1011]

He's bland, uncontroversial, and will never get caught in the BBC toilets with a crack pipe and a cheap brass.

Operative words highlighted. At least I hope so, for his sake. Nobody can be that bland.

[Peabee]

Operative words highlighted. At least I hope so, for his sake. Nobody can be that bland.

Nah, he’d never get caught because he wouldn’t do it.

Also, I love that your definition of “bland” is anyone who doesn’t smoke crack with a brass. I’d like to go on a night out with you. 

[Fromola]

Yep, there’s plenty of knowledgeable journalists/writers/analysts. I’d like to see them use a mix of analysts, journalists, etc, with one ex-player at most. Some people with actual insight. I don’t mind the ex players who do their research, such as Alex Scott, but it’s still too much like an old boys club with them all making good money from very little work - or being given a job because they’re a laugh (a certain ex City player). They clearly, on the whole, don’t read up on the laws of the game or the latest methods used in coaching etc. Danny Murphy even lambasted the use of a set-piece coach as “it’s the manager's job”. He seems to have not progressed his ideas on football since he retired.

Would be better. but when that's the dynamic the ex-player's arrogance shines through in terms of 'well I played the game, so i'm right and you're wrong'.

I'd just rather they got rid of ex-players (unless they're particularly good at it) and used the best writers and journalists instead (like some of the Guardian/Totally/Athletic type pods). Ally McCoist for example is a very good co-commentator, so you'd use him. It's a novel idea but have people who are good at the jobs.

By and large the best minds in football after their playing careers over will go into coaching. The ones who are good at it will stay in coaching/management. The ones who aren't (or are failed managers) become pundits and cream off the TV companies for an easy salary.

[Graeme]

He's an awful pundit. So is Danny Murphy sadly.

[Peabee]

Would be better. but when that's the dynamic the ex-player's arrogance shines through in terms of 'well I played the game, so i'm right and you're wrong'.

I'd just rather they got rid of ex-players (unless they're particularly good at it) and used the best writers and journalists instead (like some of the Guardian/Totally/Athletic type pods). Ally McCoist for example is a very good co-commentator, so you'd use him. It's a novel idea but have people who are good at the jobs.

By and large the best minds in football after their playing careers over will go into coaching. The ones who are good at it will stay in coaching/management. The ones who aren't (or are failed managers) become pundits and cream off the TV companies for an easy salary.

Yeah, that’s why I said “at most”. But it wouldn’t be fair to exclude the ex-players such as Alex Scott who do clearly put in the work (and also don’t have the millions banked from a career in the top men’s leagues like her male counterparts).

[4pool]

Do you mean Steve Hunter (who does the non-1st team games) or John Bradley (who is often paired with Gary Gillespie - he who refers to players by their stature and birthplace😉). They both get a lot of stick on the various chat rooms, but Bradley is far the better of the two.

Steve Hunter calls all the First team games--live. John Bradley calls the matches for the replay the club shows.

When I can I mute the commentary on the tv and sync the tv to LFCTV GO and Steve Hunters call of the match.

I much prefer our own to the commentary teams that call the match for the networks.

[Bobinhood]

WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaalllllllllllllthewayfromVladimirSmicer! AND. THATS. MORE. LIKE IT from Istanbul!!!!!

Steve Hunter


A truly classic call.

Hes an acquired taste but i like him, his barca comeback freakout was also pretty good. at heart hes just a fan like the rest of us. 

[Fromola]

The whole premise of "...you have to have played the game to be able to talk about it..." is bollocks for a start. There's no reason why someone excelling at a non-verbal skill like playing football is going to be able to explain the nuances of tactics.

It's certainly evident that far too many selected as pundits don't know the Laws of the Game. The fact that there are rule changes or the interpretation changes is no excuse either - if they've changed then fucking learn what the chanages are so you can explain you muppets.

If I want analysis of a Liverpool game I'll read one of the better print journalists or the Anfield Wrap.

The you have to have played the game argument surely went out when Mourinho rocked up and won everything as a manager. But these ex-players who aren't up to managing a team think they know it all.