• The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Overpaid pundits - fcuking Henry

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Noreasonitcantbeus

I just cannot believe that Henry gets paid a reported 4 million pounds a year by Sky. What the fcuk for?

If the guy was any good it would be a ridiculous amount but he is so average and so incapable of deciphering the nuances that it is unbelievable.

And he worked for BBC as well, no doubt being paid handsomely for that short stint.

It beggars belief it really does.

The same as most pundits, Shearer being one who are plain average, with the better pundits actually having been average players or genuine sports' journalists as opposed to footballers.

Makes me seethe.
 
Henry and Jamie Rednapp are my worst 2, what's the point of them, they open their mouths and nothing remotely interesting or incisive ever comes out.
 
Noreasonitcantbeus said:
I just cannot believe that Henry gets paid a reported 4 million pounds a year by Sky. What the fcuk for?

If the guy was any good it would be a ridiculous amount but he is so average and so incapable of deciphering the nuances that it is unbelievable.

And he worked for BBC as well, no doubt being paid handsomely for that short stint.

It beggars belief it really does.

The same as most pundits, Shearer being one who are plain average, with the better pundits actually having been average players or genuine sports' journalists as opposed to footballers.

Makes me seethe.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I cant stand any of then at the BBC and I and all of us have the privilege to pay for their jolly. Sky can do what they want-its their money. ITV are much better - I like Dixon and Wright.
 
I just yearn for intelligent football analysis. IMO one of the biggest contributors to ALL Home Nations shitness in football is because there is no education and in my view football analysis/punditry should be an education. The fact that on the radio and TV that you still hear as part of the analysis of a game that the reasons put forward for why a team lost is because "they lacked passion", then to here "us" regurgitating the same bull shit simply proves this. The fucking endless hours of debating was it, wasn't (pens/sending off's) moments again shows the inability to discuss the actual football played for the remaining 99% of the game.

The way in which Garry Neville burst onto the scene a couple of years ago I thought was a turning point (still might be) as he put all pundits to absolute shame, still yet to be replaced. For me Neville was worth every penny of his massive sky salary. What was excellent about him was he held the attention of kids, which is what really matters. Who do you want your kids listening to after a game, Neville or Shearer/Henry etc....? I would have Neville paid even more money so that all our kids would have a far better football education and who knows in a generation or two we might have a group of kids who have a sound foundation of football other than screaming passion.
 
ArtyB said:
The weird thing is that Henry was actually decent on the BBC...on Sky he's fucking terrible...
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
For me it was because he had Vialli sat next to him. On the two or three occasions Vialli was on, it was as if he raised the bar for everyone and fearing that they would look pathetic they upped their game. I didn't think Henry was that great on other appearances BUT was far better than on Sky. Maybe that was to do with the fact that they were internationals and seeing that he was on the payroll of Woolwich there was always a bias on Sky.
 
Shearer has upped his game recently though...I think BBC have recruited well recently, Danny Murphy and Jermaine Jenas being prime examples.
 
ArtyB said:
Shearer has upped his game recently though...I think BBC have recruited well recently, Danny Murphy and Jermaine Jenas being prime examples.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I think Shearer is utter garbage, seen what Neville did now trying hard to replicate with freeze-frame analysis, for me he is a shambles.

I really like Jenas, he is brave enough to challenge those in the room, shearer being one, unfortunately that may actually harm his chances as Shearer is a darling in that studio. I also like Murphy he was very similar to Jenas, picked up on the route of issues (good/bad) and also suggested what should change (no Captain hindsight stuff) but lately I feel that he has dumbed down his style somewhat, probably to advance his career (must not let Shearer look shit).
 
Perfect timing, I hope it's not seen as derailing the thread from Henry & punditry, but these are comments hot off the press from Bruce and I've heard similar comments from many pundits:
CnPAl-UW8AE4V45.jpg

What English spirit? "Back"?? We have always been shit, with very, very limited success. What does this even mean? It is completely impossible to define. If it's impossible to define, it's impossible to identify and rectify the route causes. THIS is why we are shit.
 
Last edited:
Guido said:
Perfect timing, I hope it's not seen as derailing the thread from Henry & punditry, but these are comments hot off the press from Bruce and I've heard similar comments from many pundits:
CnPAl-UW8AE4V45.jpg

What English spirt? "Back"?? We have always been shit, with very, very limited success. What does this even mean? It is completely impossible to define. If it's impossible to define, it's impossible to identify and rectify the route causes. THIS is why we are shit.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Lasting long enough in a knock out game to go out on penalties rather than in 90 mins
 
I hope this does not come across as condescending but so far this thread has been excellent.

I agree with much of what has been written. I thought Neville got better but was never his biggest fan. Maybe me but he was certainly better just in basic analysis than the useless Shearer, Henry and Redknapp. I think the jury is still out on Jenas. Murphy is as boring as fcuk BUT a good pundit.

All cuking international teams play with passion. When I hear that term it just reminds me of Keegan. It is so much more about tactics and getting the most out of your players. Neutralising your opponent. Playing to your strengths. Getting the balance right. Responding to game-time changes and a pinch of good fortune.

How many predicted a Portugal France final and gave reasons for it? So reactive and full of banal nonsense that honestly some posters on here could emulate pundits' tripe and many do much better.

I want to hear of mentality, of systems, of players who are excelling and how impressive they are and why their form (Pepe as a prime example) makes a difference. Of being able to say that an impressive France lost the final because fear took over and how Ronaldo's exit in the end helped not hinder Portugal but yet and in the end he still showed little humility in success by seeking to hog the limelight......

But good good thread thus far. Maybe we should start a petition for better pundits!
 
Noreasonitcantbeus said:
I hope this does not come across as condescending but so far this thread has been excellent.

I agree with much of what has been written. I thought Neville got better but was never his biggest fan. Maybe me but he was certainly better just in basic analysis than the useless Shearer, Henry and Redknapp. I think the jury is still out on Jenas. Murphy is as boring as fcuk BUT a good pundit.

All cuking international teams play with passion. When I hear that term it just reminds me of Keegan. It is so much more about tactics and getting the most out of your players. Neutralising your opponent. Playing to your strengths. Getting the balance right. Responding to game-time changes and a pinch of good fortune.

How many predicted a Portugal France final and gave reasons for it? So reactive and full of banal nonsense that honestly some posters on here could emulate pundits' tripe and many do much better.

I want to hear of mentality, of systems, of players who are excelling and how impressive they are and why their form (Pepe as a prime example) makes a difference. Of being able to say that an impressive France lost the final because fear took over and how Ronaldo's exit in the end helped not hinder Portugal but yet and in the end he still showed little humility in success by seeking to hog the limelight......

But good good thread thus far. Maybe we should start a petition for better pundits!
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Danny Higginbotham: First 20 minutes will decide who wins Euro 2016
 
ArtyB said:
Inglorious failure?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It's about taking back control.

Bring back that English bulldog spirit, the great escape, dam busters, cup of tea and orange at half time. We need that stiff upper lip, we need hard graft. We shall not be defeated by Johnny foreigner with his mad philosophies, tactical approach, pasta munching, intense pressing, 4 4 fackin' 2 is how the game should be played.

Now that's the spirit!
 
Colonel_K said:
It's about taking back control.

Bring back that English bulldog spirit, the great escape, dam busters, cup of tea and orange at half time. We need that stiff upper lip, we need hard graft. We shall not be defeated by Johnny foreigner with his mad philosophies, tactical approach, pasta munching, intense pressing, 4 4 fackin' 2 is how the game should be played.

Now that's the spirit!
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You've had too much spirits mate...
 
Colonel_K said:
It's about taking back control.

Bring back that English bulldog spirit, the great escape, dam busters, cup of tea and orange at half time. We need that stiff upper lip, we need hard graft. We shall not be defeated by Johnny foreigner with his mad philosophies, tactical approach, pasta munching, intense pressing, 4 4 fackin' 2 is how the game should be played.

Now that's the spirit!
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Big man little man combo up front - but there won't be a better pair than these two

tottenham-crouch-defoe-e1273484771381.jpg
 
Noreasonitcantbeus said:
I just cannot believe that Henry gets paid a reported 4 million pounds a year by Sky. What the fcuk for?

If the guy was any good it would be a ridiculous amount but he is so average and so incapable of deciphering the nuances that it is unbelievable.

And he worked for BBC as well, no doubt being paid handsomely for that short stint.

It beggars belief it really does.

The same as most pundits, Shearer being one who are plain average, with the better pundits actually having been average players or genuine sports' journalists as opposed to footballers.

Makes me seethe.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Anyone who works for Sky
Guido said:
Perfect timing, I hope it's not seen as derailing the thread from Henry & punditry, but these are comments hot off the press from Bruce and I've heard similar comments from many pundits:
CnPAl-UW8AE4V45.jpg

What English spirit? "Back"?? We have always been shit, with very, very limited success. What does this even mean? It is completely impossible to define. If it's impossible to define, it's impossible to identify and rectify the route causes. THIS is why we are shit.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Been grazing in a good paddock that Bruce man!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top