Xtratime Community banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,867 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
whose coverage of the WC do you think has been best so far?

i usually always prefer bbc at the major championships, and watch them if both channels go "head-to-head" but this time have found ITV's coverage to be alot better

And i'm not being biased because the BBC have Martin O'Neill, while ITV have Gazza and Super Ally :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,044 Posts
I always prefer BBC because they havw an anchor-man/presenter who actually knows about football &isn't an old fart:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
271 Posts
The BBC pundits arent so desperate to talk up a game. Quite the opposite, they prefer to trash teams more often than not, which is great. :cool:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
271 Posts
Are the BBC presenters actually in Japan, while the ITV presenters are still in the UK? Seems like its only on ITV that there is a big latency gap on the communications line - just seen **** McCarthy like laughing at Des's joke 10 seconds afterwards. :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,161 Posts
BBC every time, but obviously as no group game is shown simultaneously by both channels, we are often forced to watch ITV.

I just use BBC Radio 5 or talkSPORT commentary, and turn the sound off when I have to watch ITV coverage.

ITV is so tacky, BBC has a lot more class; and better pundits.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
516 Posts
Teddy Bear said:


big Ron is so bad he is good though :D
I have to agree with that. he adds comedy to football. But i go for BBC. I thought Gazza would be good but hes absolutely crap. He just reads from his notes and doesn't make sense. Andy Townsend has always been a crap pundit and none of them compare to Hansen and O'Neill. The only good thing ITV have got going for them is Gabby Logan.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,288 Posts
ITV's analysis is like the Daily Sport of of football punditry.

Des Lynam has gone completely downhill since his switch to ITV, whilst Stubbs and Lineker are class. Lineker's one liners are sooooo much better than anything on ITV.

O'Neill and Hansen's arguements are genius, whilst on the other hand Earle, Townsend, McCoist are all stale and boring. Gazza is funny just because he's so thick, although subtitles is a must when he speaks.

ITV try to be funny, and fail, whilst the BBC are serious, succeed, but are also funny at the same time. Reidy, Redknapp, Hansen, Lawrenson, O'Leary etc. are all quality pundits. The only poor BBC pundit is Wright, who could do with a bit of objectivity.

As for commentators, well nobody rivals Motty. When Atkinson and Pleat open their mouths, the mute button is a must and as for that Ronglish.....well how about some motty lingo instead.

Oh and one final thing, the BBC theme tune for the world cup, is way better than ITV's.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,990 Posts
SLB said:
ITV's analysis is like the Daily Sport of of football punditry.

Be thankful you don't have the ESPN coverage I do.
It's that bad I watch most of the games on Univision.

Univision is a channel for Mexicans btw, and the commentary is in Spanish;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,044 Posts
SLB - Ian Wright is an ok pundit. I think his enthusiasm & positiveness about England is a good contrast with the other pundits and can be quite humorous! :tongue: :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
115 Posts
ITV are Tom Tit. Big Ron with his own language called 'Ron-glish' with new words like 'Reducer'...when some one goes in for a hard challenge & 'a Quarter to five ball'...a last minute punt up the field.

The bloke is a stain on a young boys sheets and talks total ball ocks.

gazza is a pile of poo and des just isn't a decent frontman and Gabby hasn't got her boys hanging out.

Sorry but BBC do it for me. Great theme tune(well done Rollo).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25,267 Posts
I think they're both good but BBC are much better. They have interactive converage but ITV have a longer build up but don't use that time to look at the teams playing on the day but concentrate on England way too much. Hansen is realy honest and him and Lawrenson argueing is funny. They could give more time for the build up to games and cut back on the news.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,811 Posts
leg100, i think when you decided to support argentina, and not a British side, you lost the privledge to post here ;) :angel:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,932 Posts
Me and my mates have had long discussions about this... not necessarily to do with whic is better (it is obviously the BBC)... but why we HATE ITV soo very very much?

Is it that we have been spoiled by the Beeb with no adverts, quality commentry, punditry and anchors or is ITV actualy as **** as it seems.

This is my analysis:

Commentary:

Motson is superb, in a class of his own (who will forget the 'It keeps on getting better and better and better') whilst Peter Drewry is the most annoying ****er in the world (who the hell decided to give him a mich I will never know).

Brooking is a superb co-commentator and big Ron is ok but can be annoying at times.

Des Lynam now is just the scum who sold out... and I think he has got worse as it seems that he knows nothing about football.

Liniker has excelled in replacing Lynam at the Beeb... funny and smamy to great effect...

The pundits... ah them...

Alan Hansen is a legend and Mark Lawrenson is fast becoming one. They point out things tactically that you did not notice. O Leary is good and O Neil can is superb.

Ot of the ITV lot only Robson is worth listening to... the rest just spout the obvious... (i.e. it was a goal)...

Gazza needs subtitles, El Tel needs more time and Earle, Venison and Townsend just need a punch in the face...

As for Paul Walsh and Clive Allan!!!!... oh my ****ing god I an to kill myslef...

So BBC it is:D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,458 Posts
For me it's the BBC. Hansen & O'Neill are two intelligent football analysts. And Motson has no equal IMO.

And no commercials/advertisments too.


I'd rather go to the pub with the ITV lot though;)
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top