Kevin Keegan doesn't like women presenters commenting on men's football

[Bairn in Exile]

I see Kegan Keevins, sorry, Kevin Keegan has opened his mouth and put his foot in it. Or has he? Discuss.

https://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/23840650.keegans-comments-women-show-football-moved-without/

 

[Jacksgranda]

1 hour ago, Bairn in Exile said:

I see Kegan Keevins, sorry, Kevin Keegan has opened his mouth and put his foot in it. Or has he? Discuss.

https://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/23840650.keegans-comments-women-show-football-moved-without/

 

The article might have had more credence if she had spelt "barrel" correctly.

[Aufc]

It doesn’t really bother me who commentates on games. However, it does feel like some of the ladies are put on it purely to tick a box as they are completely useless (this could also apply to men as well). I wish people could just be put on it purely based on their qualities as a commentator rather than having to adhere to some form of box ticking exercise but that’s the world we live in these days. 

[Scary Bear]

If Joey Barton and Peter Shilton are your backers you’re in bother.

I’ll give him this, Football Focus used to be unmissable and now I rarely watch it. Is that because I have better things to do or because of the new format with women presenters and a bigger focus on women’s football?

I’m not really into women’s football that much. The only women’s football I watch is the SWNT and women’s World Cup.

In terms of the TV companies embracing women presenters, commentators, etc. that’s a good thing that the TV companies have embraced diversity, but as a man of a certain age (not quite Keegan but getting there) it does feel odd sometimes, and they still have the format of attractive female host with some ex players, which feels like it’s only done to appease the ‘blokes’.

[accies1874]

The most egregious examples of "box ticking" are when Sky just give jobs to whoever happened to play for one of the teams they're showing. I'd much rather listen to Karen Carney or Lucy Ward than some guy you forgot played for Fulham in 2012. 

[forameus]

It would be better to just look at not giving roles to people who are fucking useless, rather than constantly pitching it as a problem with women.  There are plenty of women brought in as pundits who have shown they have the knowledge and charisma to do a decent job.  There are also some that absolutely haven't.  But I'd argue there's fucking hunners of guys that have been brought in and shown they have absolutely zero aptitude for it, yet they'll continually be booked, and get little pushback from your average football fan.  Problem is always the "box-ticking" argument, but without that, do any women even get a chance anyway?  I was always against that kind of stuff, thinking it should just be the best person for the job, regardless of who they are, but an old boss of my wife's put it quite well.  It's a shite thing, but if it takes that for things to change so that you can eventually do away with it and be sensible, then it's worth doing.  They'll undoubtedly find plenty of women who can be great assets to football coverage, and hopefully at that point they can start punting the absolute charisma vacuums they use now.

As for what Keegan's actually said, the article makes things a bit better than the headline, but not by much.  It's just a really odd mindset I find, treating football like it's some kind of sacred art that no-one could possibly understand if they haven't been a pler.  You could pick a guy (or girl) off the street who has an interest in the sport and they'll probably give a similar level of insight to some people they roll out, yet someone who has represented their country in the sport should be discounted just because it wasn't in the men's game?  Jeezo.

[Barry Ferguson's Hat]

I don't mind a bit of eye candy to leer at over my Carling, but listening to them is a bit much.

[BFTD]

We had a wee outbreak of "women shouldn't be allowed near the men's game" from the usual suspects a while back, so presumably they'll be along presently. Well, the ones who haven't been punted already, along with their awful wives.

It doesn't seem to matter that the women's game is full of men, and that most male commentators/pundits are notoriously dreadful, and that virtually every male official is regularly accused of being shite/not understanding the rules. There are still plenty with the golf club mentality that hearing/seeing a woman somehow ruins their day, but somehow they aren't misogynists.

[KirkieRR]

What I object to on telly is that on the BBC UK the main qualification required for punditry or presenting on fitba, rugby, athletics or anythingelse, male or female, is that you have represented England.

[Savage Henry]

1 hour ago, BFTD said:

We had a wee outbreak of "women shouldn't be allowed near the men's game" from the usual suspects a while back, so presumably they'll be along presently. Well, the ones who haven't been punted already, along with their awful wives.

It doesn't seem to matter that the women's game is full of men, and that most male commentators/pundits are notoriously dreadful, and that virtually every male official is regularly accused of being shite/not understanding the rules. There are still plenty with the golf club mentality that hearing/seeing a woman somehow ruins their day, but somehow they aren't misogynists.

Indeed.  The dotting accounts are out already.   Football punditry seems to boil down to willingness rather than competence.  Some of the female pundits have proved themselves hopeless, but Lee Dixon/Willie Miller/Michael Stewart have been hopeless for years with no repercussions.   All of a sudden having a non white male voice is perceived as a threat.  

[Aufc]

25 minutes ago, Savage Henry said:

Indeed.  The dotting accounts are out already.   Football punditry seems to boil down to willingness rather than competence.  Some of the female pundits have proved themselves hopeless, but Lee Dixon/Willie Miller/Michael Stewart have been hopeless for years with no repercussions.   All of a sudden having a non white male voice is perceived as a threat.  

Not entirely sure why you marked down my post as I feel we are saying the same thing. There are loads oF male pundits who are rotten, just the same as there are female pundits are are shite. It should come down to how good they are rather than anything else. 

[tamthebam]

1 hour ago, KirkieRR said:

What I object to on telly is that on the BBC UK the main qualification required for punditry or presenting on fitba, rugby, athletics or anythingelse, male or female, is that you have represented England.

It's amusing when during World Cups they have a token foreigner (e.g. Kilnnsmann) and they give the English ex-players a right showing up by being intelligent and erudite in their non-native language. 

 

[throbber]

I haven’t seen a video of it but to me it seems like it’s KK talking about how out of touch he is with the modern game rather than him saying women don’t have a place in men’s football so I don’t see It as a controversial thing to say.

Im all for inclusion and enjoy having women commentators, pundits and presenters. People on here seem to get pretty fussy about the standard of analysis they get when watching games which always seems pointless to me, it’s just a bit of background noise. 

[Savage Henry]

49 minutes ago, Aufc said:

Not entirely sure why you marked down my post as I feel we are saying the same thing. There are loads oF male pundits who are rotten, just the same as there are female pundits are are shite. It should come down to how good they are rather than anything else. 

Sorry.  Didn’t intend to. Have a compensatory greenie.  

[senorsoupe]

Why is it that pundits (male or female) always have to be former star players (who are often thick as pigshit)?  Over here the best pundits in sports like Ice Hockey are all retired backup goalies and bench warmers who had a lot more time to analyze the game when they were players. 

Edited October 9, 2023 by senorsoupe

[velo army]

Having read what he said I think this is more outrage baiting. He says that women's football and men's football are different sports and it may be. Equality isn't negated or threatened by this argument being true.

 

[pozbaird]

If I’m watching a live Sky game, half time for me signals time for a lavvy break, the kettle going on, a fly look at P&B, or the sound of a beer tin being opened, accompanied by the sound of a cheese & onion bag being opened. With any luck, if I get my timing right, I will have avoided listening to any of the talking heads in the studio and the second half will begin. These days, in the case of programmes where I already know the scores, I never watch MoTD or Sportscene, I always record them. I have no desire to listen to Danny Murphy, Michael Stewart, Ian Wright, or Alex Scott. I watch the action, then whizz through the pish to the next game.

Don’t care if it’s a man, a woman, a one legged transvestite from Bolivia, or an ex-player of any sexual orientation, colour, religion, or even if they’ve employed someone who has professed to liking any Radiohead album released after OK Computer… I just want to watch the fitba’, and whizz through the talking heads.

In an ideal world, if they could ensure Jamie Carragher’s nasal Scouse whine, and Gary Neville’s ‘Manchessserrunited’ or ‘Manchessserrcity’ spoken as if it’s a one-word statement could never be heard again on screen, then that would be just grand. That gurning buffoon Micah Richards can fcuk off too.

IMHO, the ‘pundits’ on TV these days add nothing, absolutely nothing, to my enjoyment of watching fitba’ on TV.

Edited October 9, 2023 by pozbaird

[Miguel Sanchez]

2 hours ago, senorsoupe said:

Why is it that pundits (male or female) always have to be former star players (who are often thick as pigshit)?  Over here the best pundits in sports like Ice Hockey are all retired backup goalies and bench warmers who had a lot more time to analyze the game when they were players. 

Some of us have seen Brian Boucher and Paul Bissonette on the television and have a differing view of their capacity for insight.

[Savage Henry]

2 hours ago, senorsoupe said:

Why is it that pundits (male or female) always have to be former star players (who are often thick as pigshit)?  Over here the best pundits in sports like Ice Hockey are all retired backup goalies and bench warmers who had a lot more time to analyze the game when they were players. 

Because in the public eye, talent = insight. It’s the knowledge economy.  For every Alan Shearer or Gary Lineker, there are 20 Lee Dixons.  

[StellarHibee]

Female commentators with high pitched screechy voices are absolute torture to listen to for 90 minutes. Leave female commentary and punditry to the women's game and male commentary and punditry to the men's game. The crossovers come across as awkward because they're forced to meet some diversity check list that nobody asked for.