Who’s Analysing the Pundits?

As cushy numbers go, there aren’t many better ways to make a living than by being a football television pundit; filling in the gaps between the real action and the pre/post match interviews, stating the obvious in a non committal tone, praising the sublime, criticising the gavs; aimed mostly at the referee. As the aged old saying goes, its not exactly rocket-science!

But who’s responsible for determining, whether the quality of punditry spoken is of any merit? Who’s analysing the performance of the TV pundits?

To become a professional football manager you need at least a documented qualification, but to become a football pundit, it would appear the only qualification required is to have been an ex-player of notable recognition.

Most of the pundits responsible for enlightening us already seem to be well established in their roles, but just as players and managers are rotated, could the same be applied to the pundits?

Sky Sports already do this is subtle way, a guess pundit who has some close affinity with one of the days contesting teams plays second fiddle to the turbo charged novice Jamie Redknapp; his outstanding talent, to pontificate the blindingly obvious with asserted confidence, recycling the same expertise each week; “you have to have played the game to understand that move” and the equally sublime “I can’t tell you how good that pass was Richard” – yes, we kind of gathered that Jamie!

Redknapp, who incidently is looking more and more like his dad with each passing Sunday, is part of the new breed, he’s young and has a whole world of punditry skills to master ahead of him, much like his ex-team mate Steve McManaman, who plies his words of wisdom on fledging sports channel, Setanta, as part of a dumb and dumber double act with Tim Sherwood.

Like Redknapp, Macca looks pristine and pretty but, like a stereo-typical blond-babe airhead, the moment he opens his mouth, the prettiness washes away leaving a vacuous, yet expensive suit well out of its depth.

Unfair? Not really. Steve McManaman genuinely offers nothing insightful, yet the real tragedy of the Setanta setup is, Macca is incredibly the brighter part of the duo, as the mumbling dimwit Sherwood resembles more of a Gillian-esq Monty Python character than a professional TV pundit.

But what about the establishment?

Unofficially regarded as the top dog, Alan Hansen has been stating the obvious, backing favourites for years; and the years have certainly helped refine him, as on sporadic occasions he will offer moments of perception. Something his number two is seemingly incapable of doing; astute, alert and sharp as a player, Alan Shearer shows absolutely none of these qualities as a football pundit; he’s more akin to bland, boring and stupid when it comes to the pre or post match analysis – vermently consistant with his view of 2006 World Cup 3rd placed and Euro 2008 Runners-up, Germany, as a poor team?

Yet, licking his lower lip, Shearer never fails to remind Lineker and co of the rare occasions he’s been spot-on with his analysis; a curious tactic and one which highlights insecurities.

Maybe this overall level of criticism is harsh?

The point is, the quality of TV pundits covering the English Premier League is at the standard of League One at best, notable exceptions, Wilkins, Souness, Collymore and the now retired yet proficent Peacock, begging the question when purest’s like Messrs Richardson and Vickery are doing the rounds, do ex-players really make the most competent pundits?