Pundits are Good for the Game Even if Ex-Players’ Censure Can Feel Out of Line

 From a current player’s perspective, Gary Neville’s trenchant criticism of Arsenal in the Carabao Cup final seemed almost like the unspoken rule of protection had been broken. Photograph: Mark Leech/Offside/Getty Images
From a current player’s perspective, Gary Neville’s trenchant criticism of Arsenal in the Carabao Cup final seemed almost like the unspoken rule of protection had been broken. Photograph: Mark Leech/Offside/Getty Images
TT

Pundits are Good for the Game Even if Ex-Players’ Censure Can Feel Out of Line

 From a current player’s perspective, Gary Neville’s trenchant criticism of Arsenal in the Carabao Cup final seemed almost like the unspoken rule of protection had been broken. Photograph: Mark Leech/Offside/Getty Images
From a current player’s perspective, Gary Neville’s trenchant criticism of Arsenal in the Carabao Cup final seemed almost like the unspoken rule of protection had been broken. Photograph: Mark Leech/Offside/Getty Images

“Three … two … one … and we’re live on air.” It’s a phrase I have heard more and more over the last few months because of my first steps into the world of sports broadcasting and punditry.

I must admit that as a player I didn’t have an appreciation of the hard work by the floor staff, the producers and directors constantly instructing you through your earpiece, and the presenters with their impressive array of knowledge and awareness to stay within time constraints, and nor did I have an understanding of actually how difficult it is to be in front of lights and a camera while a vast audience evaluates your every word as you try to be as interesting and informative as possible, while knowing that any slip-up cannot be re-recorded.

With the ever-growing popularity of the Premier League all over the world and the increasingly competitive battle for TV rights and viewing figures, the art of punditry is becoming an increasing part of our sport with millions of fans expecting not only great games but informative, insightful analysis during and after matches because of the money they are paying to watch.

After Manchester City’s 3-0 win against Arsenal in last Sunday’s Carabao Cup final much of the furore wasn’t about City’s dominant performance or a bad day at the office for the Gunners, it concerned the in-game analysis of Gary Neville and his damning appraisal of the performance of Arsène Wenger’s team. As Neville stated afterwards there has now become an “analysis of analysis”, which is the perfect way to sum up what happened.

From a current player’s perspective, before I had any kind of understanding of the difficulty of being a live TV pundit, I would have taken the position that what Neville said during the game and the manner in which he said it were a step too far from someone who has been in the very same position that those Arsenal players found themselves in on Sunday afternoon. Being outclassed in a final is hurtful enough, but then having your name picked out as someone lacking effort and desire during the match is not what you would expect from a fellow, if former, pro. It’s almost like the unspoken rule of protection had been broken.

However, being fortunate enough to have had first-hand experience of being in Neville’s shoes, I understand that he’s being paid to give his expert opinion and call football matches as he sees them, live without the luxury of time to think, something that every fee-paying member of the public is more than entitled to hear and dissect in their own way. The fact is that Neville is no longer a player and, because he is now being paid to be a TV pundit, he is at liberty to say what he thinks and accept the repercussions of his words in his new occupation.

Since he has started working for Sky, Neville has raised the bar in terms of tactical analysis of football – not only commenting on what is happening on the field of play but why it is happening and the outcomes of every individual and team performance in the Premier League, which is now being appraised in a much more intelligent, in-depth and objective manner to the general public.

This can only be good for our game, even if for players such as me it means that any defensive mistake is critically analysed in front of millions of people on a Monday night. But surely objectively critiquing tactics, player performance and a coach’s decisions in an impartial manner creates an increased pressure on players and coaches, and in turn an acceptance of responsibility and accountability for our actions on the field of play.

With the increased profile of pundits such as Neville, Jamie Carragher, Steven Gerrard and Frank Lampard on our TV screens with their extensive knowledge and experience of football at the highest level, they educate not only supporters but younger players listening to every word while continually raising standards – in terms of objectively and impartially analysing matches, giving their insight without resorting to making scapegoats of players and making them easy targets for abuse in the stadiums and sensationalist phone-in radio stations, not to mention social media.

We have repeatedly seen assertions from players and managers who complain that it’s easy to talk about football away from the game in the comfort of a TV studio, out of the hotseat and away from the pressures at sharp end, and I understand that viewpoint, but in my experience it is not as easy as some make it look!

I believe that if TV punditry is performed correctly, with the homework, impartiality, professionalism and diligence that Neville exemplifies in his broadcasting, it can bring a huge benefit to our game, increasing the football knowledge of supporters at home who are a lot more intelligent than many of our previous media have catered for. And as players and coaches in an era when we are being analysed more than ever we must remember that the analysts must be analysed and challenged too because that is the nature of the game.

The Guardian Sport



Olympics in India a ‘Dream’ Facing Many Hurdles

A laborer fixes the Olympic signage at the entrance of a venue ahead of the upcoming 141st International Olympic Committee (IOC) session in Mumbai on October 11, 2023. (AFP)
A laborer fixes the Olympic signage at the entrance of a venue ahead of the upcoming 141st International Olympic Committee (IOC) session in Mumbai on October 11, 2023. (AFP)
TT

Olympics in India a ‘Dream’ Facing Many Hurdles

A laborer fixes the Olympic signage at the entrance of a venue ahead of the upcoming 141st International Olympic Committee (IOC) session in Mumbai on October 11, 2023. (AFP)
A laborer fixes the Olympic signage at the entrance of a venue ahead of the upcoming 141st International Olympic Committee (IOC) session in Mumbai on October 11, 2023. (AFP)

India says it wants the 2036 Olympics in what is seen as an attempt by Narendra Modi to cement his legacy, but the country faces numerous challenges to host the biggest show on earth.

The prime minister says staging the Games in a nation where cricket is the only sport that really matters is the "dream and aspiration" of 1.4 billion people.

Experts say it is more about Modi's personal ambitions and leaving his mark on the world stage, while also sending a message about India's political and economic rise.

Modi, who is also pushing for a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, will be 86 in 2036.

"Hosting the Olympics will, in a way, burnish India's credentials as a global power," said academic Ronojoy Sen, author of "Nation at Play", a history of sport in India.

"The current government wants to showcase India's rise and its place on the global high table, and hosting the Olympic Games is one way to do it."

Already the most populous nation, India is on track to become the world's third-biggest economy long before the planned Olympics.

- Olympics in 50-degree heat? -

India submitted a formal letter of intent to the International Olympic Committee in October, but has not said where it wants to hold the Games.

Local media are tipping Ahmedabad in Modi's home state of Gujarat, a semi-arid region where temperatures surge above 50 degrees Celsius (122F) in summer.

Gujarat state has already floated a company, the Gujarat Olympic Planning and Infrastructure Corporation, with a $710 million budget.

Ahmedabad has about six million people, its heart boasting a UNESCO-listed 15th-century wall which sprawls out into a rapidly growing metropolis.

The city is home to a 130,000-seater arena, the world's biggest cricket stadium, named after Modi. It staged the 2023 Cricket World Cup final.

The city is also the headquarters of the Adani Group conglomerate, headed by billionaire tycoon and Modi's close friend Gautam Adani.

Adani was the principal sponsor for the Indian team at this summer's Paris Olympics, where the country's athletes won one silver and five bronze medals.

- 'Window of opportunity' -

Despite its vast population India's record at the Olympics is poor for a country of its size, winning only 10 gold medals in its history.

Sports lawyer Nandan Kamath said hosting an Olympics was an "unprecedented window of opportunity" to strengthen Indian sport.

"I'd like to see the Olympics as a two-week-long wedding event," he said.

"A wedding is a gateway to a marriage. The work you do before the event, and all that follows, solidifies the relationship."

Outside cricket, which will be played at the Los Angeles Games in 2028, Indian strengths traditionally include hockey and wrestling.

New Delhi is reported to be pushing for the inclusion at the Olympics of Indian sports including kabaddi and kho kho -- tag team sports -- and yoga.

Retired tennis pro Manisha Malhotra, a former Olympian and now talent scout, agreed that global sporting events can boost grassroots sports but worries India might deploy a "top-down" approach.

"Big money will come in for the elite athletes, the 2036 medal hopefuls, but it will probably end at that," said Malhotra, president of the privately funded training center, the Inspire Institute of Sport.

Veteran sports journalist Sharda Ugra said India's underwhelming sports record -- apart from cricket -- was "because of its governance structure, sporting administrations and paucity of events".

"So then, is it viable for us to be building large stadiums just because we are going to be holding the Olympics?

"The answer is definitely no."

The Indian Olympic Association is split between two rival factions, with its president P.T. Usha admitting to "internal challenges" to any bid.

- 'Poor reputation' -

After Los Angeles, Brisbane will stage the 2032 Games.

The United States and Australia both have deep experience of hosting major sporting events, including previous Olympics.

India has staged World Cups for cricket and the Asian Games twice, the last time in 1982, but it has never had an event the size of an Olympics.

Many are skeptical it can successfully pull it off.

The 2010 Commonwealth Games in New Delhi were marked by construction delays, substandard infrastructure and accusations of corruption.

Many venues today are in a poor state.

"India will need serious repairing of its poor reputation on punctuality and cleanliness," The Indian Express daily wrote in an editorial.

"While stadium aesthetics look pretty in PowerPoint presentations and 3D printing, leaking roofs or sub-par sustainability goals in construction won't help in India making the cut."