[Archived] Match Of The Day

[True Blue & White]

Does anyone know where the BBC get their time manipulation machine from that allows Hansen and Shearer to watch 7 football matches in their entirety in the short space of time between them ending and MOTD being filmed.

I ask because this week Hansen seemed to give a cutting and incisive view into our first half performance which I found strange as I would be sure he'd have watched his beloved Liverpool against Arsenal on Saturday and not boring old us but he talked as if he knew what he was talking about and had witnessed our play first hand.

Now, given MOTD is filmed circa 8pm and thus clearly they don't have time to watch any of the matches except for very short highlights, are the pundits' "thoughts on the game" being derived from what they saw in the highlights package only, written for them by people who did actually watch the whole game or just made up based on established stereotypes (Blackburn bullied their way to victory today)?

Just wondered how people like Hansen can go on telly and talk so confidently about a game they probably never saw.

[Mattyblue]

If I recall, they watch the 12.45 game in it's enterity.

Then at 3pm they have various screens showing every match.

But, they usually watch one game in particular more closely as that's the match they delve deepest into on the show.

I imagine Rovers v Villa won't have got a second glance.

[only2garners]

Does anyone know where the BBC get their time manipulation machine from that allows Hansen and Shearer to watch 7 football matches in their entirety in the short space of time between them ending and MOTD being filmed.

I ask because this week Hansen seemed to give a cutting and incisive view into our first half performance which I found strange as I would be sure he'd have watched his beloved Liverpool against Arsenal on Saturday and not boring old us but he talked as if he knew what he was talking about and had witnessed our play first hand.

Now, given MOTD is filmed circa 8pm and thus clearly they don't have time to watch any of the matches except for very short highlights, are the pundits' "thoughts on the game" being derived from what they saw in the highlights package only, written for them by people who did actually watch the whole game or just made up based on established stereotypes (Blackburn bullied their way to victory today)?

Just wondered how people like Hansen can go on telly and talk so confidently about a game they probably never saw.

The Liverpool Arsenal game was a lunchtime kick-off so he could have watched our game in it's entirety as well. Doesn't negate your general point about how they talk with confidence about all the games though.

[thenodrog]

Only guessing but if there are two pundits they can each get a report from a researcher and watch long highlights of 3 matches each. They do alternate match analysis. That would give them plenty of time.

[A cup of beans]

Just wondered how people like Hansen can go on telly and talk so confidently about a game they probably never saw.

im not a big hansen fan. his analysis is often repetative, bland and far from insightful.

after last weeks carling cup final he said

"football was the winner" "kenny deserves credit." 60k a show for that!

[m1st]

If only we could get the Irish Republic's equivalent - I've tried and failed online.

It's much more insightful and the pundits [people like Johnny Giles, Eamonn Dunphy and Souey when I last watched it some seasons ago] are much less sycophantic and less bland in their criticisms.

[True Blue & White]

If I recall, they watch the 12.45 game in it's enterity.

Then at 3pm they have various screens showing every match.

Like in my house then, only my streams have Chinese commentary and buffer whenenever a bit of action happens

[donnermeat]

When Rovers are on they get instructed what to say on their earpiece by Jerome Anderson.

[Ferrit]

The £1million a year he pockets gives him the insight into every single game, didn't you know?

[gumboots]

The £1million a year he pockets gives him the insight into every single game, didn't you know?

Every match is streamed live into the BBC and is watched by people who log the matches and highlight any incidents. The clips are then edited and the presenter and pundits get what ever they need to allow them to talk about the matches. My daughter has done some of the logging before now, when she was on a work placement there.

[Brfcrule1]

cup of beans said:"football was the winner" "kenny deserves credit." 60k a show for that!

He will more likely more often than not come out with "that was a good pass" I agree though

60K a week for coming out with "that was a good pass" & other such phrases is a nice life for some.

That is why I refuse to watch MOTD the analysis is dire and the rovers highlights are always shocking.

I find football first much better, gorgeous looking presenters in Sarah Jane Mee and extended highlights

of the beautiful Rovers. Sometimes even the full 90 minutes and when coco comes out & talks I usually mute

the sound!.

[gumboots]

cup of beans said:"football was the winner" "kenny deserves credit." 60k a show for that!

He will more likely more often than not come out with "that was a good pass" I agree though

60K a week for coming out with "that was a good pass" & other such phrases is a nice life for some.

That is why I refuse to watch MOTD the analysis is dire and the rovers highlights are always shocking.

I find football first much better, gorgeous looking presenters in Sarah Jane Mee and extended highlights

of the beautiful Rovers. Sometimes even the full 90 minutes and when coco comes out & talks I usually mute

the sound!.

Don't like Sarah Jane Mee, so avoid the analysis bit of Football first (and not everyone has Sky contrary to what many people think.)

[Captain Dunsel]

If only we could get the Irish Republic's equivalent - I've tried and failed online.

It's much more insightful and the pundits [people like Johnny Giles, Eamonn Dunphy and Souey when I last watched it some seasons ago] are much less sycophantic and less bland in their criticisms.

How do THEY manage to watch all the games? Or do you think they can read copy more convincingly?

[Stuart]

Love this thread. The thought of Lawrenson and Hansen sat researching games from the day and then giving in depth, insightful analysis!

Hilarious.

[Kamy100]

Maybe Bolton are giving us the minimum number that they are required to do so under PL rules, and want to sell the rest to their own fans, it's a huge game and I assume they want as many home fans in as possible.

[gumboots]

Maybe Bolton are giving us the minimum number that they are required to do so under PL rules, and want to sell the rest to their own fans, it's a huge game and I assume they want as many home fans in as possible.

Wrong thread?

[bennyboyt11]

I'd imagine they're given key points to raise from researchers, and then use their own knowledge to offer a better insight.

[Laurence]

For most games they just trot out the same tired old cliches they'd used the weeks before. When was the last time one of them came out with something actually incisive and interesting?

[Ozz]

They certainly put the anal into analysis.

[LeChuck]

For most games they just trot out the same tired old cliches they'd used the weeks before. When was the last time one of them came out with something actually incisive and interesting?

Just like anything that caters for the masses though, it will be dumbed down massively so that it doesn't threaten to exclude the casual viewer.

There is certainly room in the market for a more in-depth and technical show. I think the obstacle to this is the cost of showing highlights, so unfortunately the only option is to have a bland show with mass market appeal.

[K-Hod]

Only the BBC could make a show with football highlights so poorly.

Goals on Sunday is a far better bet IMO, each game gets equal billing and there's not as much 'analysis'. There's far too much of that on MOTD IMO.

[Amo]

The show doesn't even make any sense. If you want to keep the mainstream audience tuned in for longer, wouldn't you keep the "big games" until the end? Most viewers will probably turn over once they've seen Hansen & Shearer jerking off over Rooney & co.

I'm one MOTD's biggest critics. I rarely even bother with it these days, and when I do I turn over during the "analysis" since it's the same trite and patronizing rubbish from previous weeks. The format has simply become stale and likes of Hansen, Lineker and Lawro are too cosy. They don't need to earn their money when they can sit on the couch and go through the motions, picking apart blindingly obvious defensive mistakes or making token remarks about struggling clubs. The show needs a major overhaul.

[Mattyblue]

Bring back 'The Premiership' with Townsend and the gang.

[Amo]

Bring back 'The Premiership' with Townsend and the gang.

As terrible as ITV are, at least Roy Keane never minces his words.

I'd love to see some genuine controversy on MOTD. The closest they get to controversy is 'Who will win The Title?' Other than that it's usually:

Lineker: Can City go all the way?

Hansen: *insert opinion*

Shearer: I. Agree.

Lineker: And ummm tough times for Wigan. Our next game-

You could argue they're not allowed, since the BBC is supposedly non-partisan, but that's a cop-out.

[Mattyblue]

And whenever the BBC do a live game (rare I know), they have the same trite exchanges:

Lineker: 'who's going to win?'

Hansen: 'I'm going for Liverpool'

Shearer: 'I'm going to say Cardiff just to annoy Hansen'

Or

Lineker: 'Carragher should have done better there, Alan?

Shearer: As a member of the strikers union, I think it's good finishing

Lineker: 'I agree with you there Alan'

Hansen 'Ganging up on me ay? Well as a member of the defenders union, I disagree'.

Mattyblue: (shouts at tele) 'Stop stealing my TV licence!'