Garth Crooks

Status
Not open for further replies.

Football punditry is just absurd these days. 99% of them are absolutely woeful.

As smug as they often come across, at least the journos they have on the European Football Show can string a coherent sentence together. I can watch Soccer Saturday for an hour and still not have a clue what's going on in any of the games those clowns are trying to cover.
 
I remember gordon strachan saying something like he had enough time to go and make himself a cup of tea and drink it before garth crooks finished his question
 
Couple of weeks ago watching final score the host introduced Crooks and Savage as "legends of the premier league". Says it all really. Not even sure Crooks played in the Prem.
 

13807-zoom.jpg

That's inconclusive. He looks like he might be rooted to the pitch.
 
Not sure if anyone has dared say it yet but I'll dive in and do so - he's the token black pundit for the BBC, hired for his skin colour to fill quotas rather than any semblance of ability to do his job well.

It's not "racist" to point that out as it's glaringly obvious.
 

Not sure if anyone has dared say it yet but I'll dive in and do so - he's the token black pundit for the BBC, hired for his skin colour to fill quotas rather than any semblance of ability to do his job well.

It's not "racist" to point that out as it's glaringly obvious.
I'm not sure that's true. There's no real quota to meet where Robbie Savage is concerned and no such thing as a token Geordie that explains Shearer's punditry career. Just bad choices.
 
About 7 more posts before this thread gets locked I think

Why? It's obviously positive discrimination. The BBC are actually proud of doing it too - see the recent uproar over male-only comedy panels being not allowed anymore.

He's clearly not good at his job, regardless of skin colour, so you have to look for reasons why he's there. There's quite a few black pundits like Chris Kamara and to an extent Clarke Carlisle who have their positions on merit or entertainment value, which is what TV is about at the end of the day. Crooks is neither entertaining or is there on merit. He's the token black guy, which is positive discrimination.
 
I'm not sure that's true. There's no real quota to meet where Robbie Savage is concerned and no such thing as a token Geordie that explains Shearer's punditry career.

Robbie Savage - Antagonist, vocal in his opinions, gets a response.

Alan Shearer - One of England's all time great strikers.






Garth Crooks - Erm....
 
Robbie Savage - Antagonist, vocal in his opinions, gets a response.

Alan Shearer - One of England's all time great strikers.






Garth Crooks - Erm....
But what does he contribute as a pundit? No more than Crooks. His wealth of experience hasn't taught him anything.
 
But what does he contribute as a pundit? No more than Crooks. His wealth of experience hasn't taught him anything.

Agree, but I can understand why the BBC thought he was value to the licence payer due to his reputation in the game. I think he should be binned too once it became apparent how bad he was, but at least there was an acceptable reason for him being there in the first place aside from solely his skin colour, which appears to be the case with Crooks. Same with Michael Owen - I can understand the credentials for him on ESPN, but he's seriously, seriously dreadful at the actual job.

As an aside, still light years away from having a black main presenter for Match of the Day, simply because the BBC prefer people like Crooks - incompetent pieces of the office furniture who'll never rock boats as he's utterly incapable of doing anything beyond what he currently does, which he already does badly.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Shop

Back
Top