MOTD in the spotlight

CollinsBeans weighs in with some thoughts on the increasingly under fire highlights show. Is it really that bad?

Match of the Day, that old stalwart of BBC television, is coming under serious scrutiny at the moment. Some people don’t like Alan Hansen’s criticism of Theo Walcott. Some people don’t like the ‘golf club’ setup. And some people just don’t like Alan Shearer. As a football blog with an, some would say unsettling, interest in media coverage of the game, we’ve jumped on the bandwagon and provided our own analysis of the, erm, analysis.

Thumbs Up – What we like about MOTD

The Host

I maybe in the minority, and I’m unsure of the views of the country here, but I quite like Gary Lineker... I think he’s done, and does, a good job since taking over and while some of his ‘jokes’ and forced one liner intro’s may fall a bit flat I think he anchors the show well. He’s actually one of the people on the program (see a thumbs down point below) that does seem willing to debate an issue, regardless of who is involved. Whether it’s just a result of being served by a crack team of researchers and an army of stat men he also always seem fairly well informed, on both the domestic and international game.

Stories you hear in the press or through rumours may not always present him in the most favourable light personally, but I’ve never met the guy, and frankly to me this has no impact on whether I like him as the host of a television program showing highlights of football matches. So as I say, as the host, I think he does a very good job, and bar someone like Jeff Stelling (who has different skills) I personally can’t think of anyone who is that much better. There you go, a ringing endorsement! (Matt Snelling)

The Format

We all know from those three disastrous years of ‘The Premiership’ on ITV that the format and timing for MOTD pretty much works. Ok, some would like longer highlights and more detailed analysis, but when it’s 11.50pm on a Saturday night, and you’ve still got two hours of Steve Claridge punditry to stay up for, the post-mortem of a Bolton – Blackburn goalless draw is best kept to a minimum.

Not everyone can be pleased, and it’s not an easy job to allot equal amount of time to all 20 clubs. So ultimately prioritising the most exciting games, while still showing all the relevant action and goals, is a fairly respectable effort.

Another positive point is that, thankfully, MOTD has shunned the de rigueur ‘footie fan’ contribution. Frankly, I don’t care what Mad Mackam 69 has to say about Kieran Richardson’s best position, and there are enough crass phone-ins and fans forums elsewhere if you want to listen to Mike from Surrey drone about how Manchester United are better off without the Glazers.

What I require from my Saturday night football highlights show is exactly that – football highlights. Some insightful analysis is a nice bonus, but ultimately I want to see the action. And that’s what MOTD gives you. Plus you can’t beat the tried and tested extras either – who doesn’t enjoy Goal of the Month, even if there is no prize and the only purpose now is to “pick your favourite”. (James Platt)

Thumbs Down – What we dislike about MOTD

The Commentary

Perhaps this might appear pernickety to some, but I feel that the general standard of commentary is slipping on MOTD. And interestingly, it’s the veteran pundits who are letting the side down.

Listening to John Motson mumble his way through the Chelsea – Blackpool highlights a couple of Sundays ago was a distressing experience. Motson, shockingly, just didn’t seem to care and the one word that sprung to mind was ‘unprofessional’. Motson stuttered and muttered his way through a serious of inaccurate and lacklustre comments, forgetting player’s names and actively ruining the viewing experience. Clearly Motson had decided pre-game that the result was just too inevitable, so rather than treat each piece action on merit, he petulantly dismissed everything as predestined. I know Motson is considered a treasure at MOTD, but if he can’t do the job, he shouldn’t be there.

Another old hand going off the rails is Jonathan Pearce, who seems to have literally become insane. Pearce has completely shunned his once trademark boisterous commentary in favour of a succession of hushed pre-prepared anecdotes and catchphrases. These are usually crass, and often entirely inappropriate. As amusing as the following example is, what is Pearce actually going on about?

“Ah, there’s Katie Perry. She kissed a West Ham fan. And she liked it.”

Pearce’s admiration for Paul Scholes has also reached intolerable levels. We all know Scholes is a top player and a pundit’s favourite, but Pearce has taken it a step too far, literally climaxing every time Scholes spreads the play.

Clearly this has developed into a seemingly light-hearted rant, but the overall standard of MOTD commentary is not up to scratch in my eyes, and it does let the programme down. (JP)

Mates Rates – A Lack of Objectivity

I guess we all have our favourites, and it would be very hard to talk about something without bringing in some form of personal bias, but as has been discussed, with MOTD often resembling something of a private little golfing club it becomes obvious that some players/managers/teams seem immune from criticism whilst others are often unfairly maligned.

Maybe this is just my blinkeredness and lack of objectivity coming to the fore, but it always seems that players like Steven Gerrard for example get exonerated an awful lot for doing things that others might get a volleyful of abuse for. A particular example was last season when I believe Wayne Rooney dived to try and win a penalty against Aston Villa I think it was. His behaviour was basically glossed over and nothing was said, when you just have to know that if the boot was on the other foot and it had been a Ronaldo or a Drogba for example then there would have been mass condemnation.

As I say, this perhaps says more about me than it does a fault in the actual program, but would it be too optimistic to ask that every player or incident be judged on its own merits rather than siding with the person you happen to play a round of golf with of an afternoon? This happens on all programs but I guess it’s just the high esteem in which I hold MOTD that I expect better. (MS)

Alan Shearer

This might be more of a personal issue, but I don’t like Shearer as a pundit. Fantastic footballer, England legend and inspirational leader – yes. Insightful pundit and astute tactician – no.

Shearer is clearly not cut out for the tactical side of the game. He’s one foray into management was catastrophic and he simply doesn’t have the knowledge, use of grammar or charisma to be worth listening to. I counted once, and Shearer used the phrase ‘great’ 17 times in one programme.

Shearer clearly knows a thing or two about banging the ball in the net, but when it comes to analysis of formations, tactics, technique and anything else the viewer might be interested to know, Shearer falls short. So much so that he doesn’t usually bother even attempting to try. Standard Shearer punditry primarily involves re-showing the goals you’ve just seen. “Great finish there from Rooney. Great composure from a great player. It’s been a great start for United”.

Personally, I’d like a little bit more and it’s exasperating that MOTD always seems so reluctant to promote anyone who is not a big name ex-player. (JP)