MOTD - The irrepressible beast and the unmoveable object
Tuesday, March 16, 2010 at 6:30PM by guest-blogger Tricky
Football; a lot of us watch it live, some of us listen to it and some of us have to be content with the ‘highlights’. But how much of a true representation is it and how do different media streams of the Beeb get their point across. And who chooses what gets missed out?
Well starting with Radio 5 Live it's exactly that (a true representation); on the spot, full coverage, all incident and aspect considered, often to the nth degree bordering on trivia quiz.
The Beebs live internet format is a relatively new, but in essence is simply a web based version of Ceefax (if you don’t know what that is just ask your dad, if you don’t know who your dad is give Jeremy Kyle a call) with more info.
But what of the much loved MOTD? After all condensing a 90 minute game into 11mins of highlights and 3 minutes of ‘analysis’ requires a lot of editing, but for some it is an institution. But surely the Beeb are an impartial neutral, able to report with objectivity and without bias. So if anyone can they can, right?
But then again this is a programme where - for what seems like eternity - they have employed two pundits who were given carte blanche to wax lyrical about their old clubs, so you have to question their bias in the first place on that point.
Lawro and Hansen hard at work analysing
And the integrity of the new kids on the block? Well, I only have to ask what sort of genius would employ an irrepressible beast who has a ‘face for radio’ to help analyse the game? (Do they not know that I watch the repeats on a Sunday morning and have to eat breakfast sometimes faced with the gargoyle love child of ‘Sam the Eagle’ and Andi McDowell?)
So is MOTD a true representation of the game or it is edited to buggery with intentional bias?
Well, last Sunday I managed to watch the first half of Sunderland vs. Man City, and then listened to the second whilst in the car on 5 live. Now a certain Mr, Shaun Wright-Wright Phillips had, by all accounts, a woeful game and was the cause of the head shaking by Mancini who couldn’t believe how wasteful with his possession he had been, and then the radio covered an incident.
Now this incident bought into question the competence of the referee, (The radio 5 commentator said at the time the ref “bottled” making the correct decision which would have led to the dismissal of Wright-Wright Phillips) and how one moment could affect the course of a game.
For those that didn’t hear /see it; Born of frustration WWP effectively handled the ball whilst it was in play, already on a yellow and a goal down, the ref simply restarted and looked across to the bench as though he had been expecting a substitution to occur as his ‘get out of jail free card’. Sunderland can perhaps feel a little hard done by.
And so later on when watching MOTD2 I was interested to see, err, nothing. No reference to it, nada. There was time for a little montage of woeful shooting, but an actual incident that could have altered the context of the game. Not an iota of coverage at all. Nada, just an extra minute spent on the equalizer (not the late Edward Woodward) and how Adam Johnson might now be ‘a contender for the World cup squad.
So now, if you read the online match report on Beeb or watched the highlights you would be forgiven for thinking from the comments made on MOTD by the commentator that Adam Johnson’s inclusion was just a tactical change.
Now taking a step back from the ‘one game mentality’ for one moment, we all know that any given season could be said to be nothing more than a series of interconnected ‘incidents’, out of which both the myth of ‘what goes around’ and ‘the conspiracy theories’ are born.
They help form opinion, often about opposing clubs, and with a myriad of sources available who do we tend to believe? The journalists perhaps, after all they were there? But then they’re hardly without bias (just ask the reporters at the standard).
Consequently we all know people who dislike us, not for what we are, but for how we are portrayed, our team, our manager [yet another separate barrel of fish that one] and even our fans. And you can almost forgive some of them, because six different match reports could equally be from different games.
So having watched MOTD objectively I have some new conspiracy theories, time will tell how self fulfilling they become:
- Is it now policy between now and May on MOTD to always show potential England players in a good light?
- There must be a Rooney montage available for all end credits?
- Each show should include the ‘kiss of death’ commentary that Rooney needs to ‘stay fit for the WC if we are to stand a chance’?
- No wrong decisions by referees will be shown to undermine them (or at least our representatives at the summer WC, can’t think who they might be though)?
- Do we now ignore the negative aspect of the national teams players, in order to help build up the inevitable furore and ‘national pride’ across the country, as we all believe that our players are without fault 100% of the time?
So what of Gerrard and his investigation by FA? There are those who seem to think that in a World Cup year certain players are ‘untouchable’, but it should make no difference, surely? But will it be ‘carpet and brush’ as in previous years or is this the next ‘Terrygate’? (edit: Spooky: FA have turned a blind eye much like the ref who was staring at the incident when it happened)
And what of the neutrals? Those of us who follow the game and for whom day to day banter with opposing fans in an office or out with friends and family is often based upon these half truths.
Well, as Day of the Triffics pt2 has shown (link to his rundown of Webb-isms from Blackburn match report) the fans remember the incidents, in their own way and from their perspective, so when you next watch MOTD maybe a healthy dose of cynicism wouldn’t go amiss.
For me, I will declare my bias accordingly, I still love MOTD, but then if anyone has read my biog Lineker is my childhood hero, so I’m 100% biased on this one.
And if you're looking for a new drinking game, try the ‘triffic game’ with Harry full pre- and post- match interviews, you’ll be on the floor in 90 seconds.
Reader Comments (29)
How did you fail to mention the tradition of giving Spurs 3 minutes at the end of the show and cut the edits to make it look like we were lucky?
Hansen never has a good word to say about us or at least squirms when he does. It's funny watching Lineker attempt to get a positive out of him.
I love Match of the Day. Compared to Sky Sports or ITV its the best we;ll ever get on television.
It's hilarious how I was 4th official for the gerrard incident
It's a well known fact that Hansen and Lawro are cunts,no need for proof
Another really good read. You boys keep on bringing it to the table.
Is Gerrard going to the world cup then? Thought we were picking on form these days.
Not yet willing to believe the bias is deliberate, though. And, ashamed though I am to admit it, I find Dixon and Keown's analysis on MOTD2 much better than those idiots on MOTD. But then defending at the top level is more of a skill than attacking (which is more talent than trained skill), IMHO.
As the presenter, it looks like Lineker doesn't want to get involved in the analysis, otherwise perhaps we would hear more about Spurs.
Definitely sick of all the opening/closing credits and trailers of every premier league programme assuming there are only 3 teams in the league though. And you know which ones.
Alan hansen said bales pass to set up the third goal was the best pass this season
but he is still a plastic spastic
Hansen was very pro Bale, but then you'd be silly not to praise that performance and pass. Otherwise he loves it when Spurs flops and loves it more when Gomes flaps.
Gary Linekar is the host. Like the chairman of a meeting, he is supposed to be impartial and stimualate discussion. This is why he seldom shows an opinion.
Not sure why you are having a go at Stevie G; he was clearly acting in self defence. Again!
Have to admit Bale got a lot of praise from Hansen on Saturday, but then he deseved it.
I reckon Bale has years of praise ahead of him.
Just hope he stays with us as I suspect he will be highly sought after.
Struggling to think of any other left sided defender/ attacker with his abilities, let alone one who is still only 20.
The skys the limit for him, if he can avoid injury.
Opposition full backs will be wearing incontinence pants when we have him and Lennon playing!
Matt Lucas is a card carrying gooner, more representative of Dixon and Keown on Motd 2. I like the beeb more than Sky!
I am suprised that there are people out there that still watch MOTD. With Hansen and Lawrenson you have two boring,monotoned twats with absolutly no personality. The programme is BORING.And whilst we are at it what the hell are those two doing on a programme when the BBC cover an England match. It's nothing to do with them. Piss Off.
BBC, don't make me laugh! No don't.....
Football First for me. Extended highlights, can't leave much out.
IMO, it was absolutely unnecessary and inappropriate to lump Harry into this mix and take a cheap shot at him. By doing so you don’t come across any better than the clowns you tried to expose.
Still trying to work out why Sulzeers assault on that Hull player was described as 'tough but fair' and a 'great challenge' when he lunged in out of control like a steam train. If it had been on Walcott, they would have been screaming (no pun intended) about referees not protecting skillful players.
On another note. 10 out of 10 for Maureen's vinegar strokes face as Inter shut the Cheatski louts up. Top work.
Wasn't that the point? Perhaps I mis read it.
Hey Spooks, guest writers having a hard time from the audience at the moment?
Chelsea's home fans can be proud at least for the atmosphere they created this evening.
/cough
great read - well done - and no mention on the Beeb of the national ephedrin scandal either
Has everyone forgotten about sky's apparent bias against us, and in particular Andy Gray?! I cannot stand the man, he constantly slags us off and never has a good word to say - even against mid to lower table clubs. Kind of understand bias towards the 'Sky 4' being sky and all, but he is just plain anti-spurs. Helmet!
good read Tricky , a bit less random and 'flowery' then usual :-)
But i have to love MOTD , we do not have ITV and no sky over here so MOTD and buggy livestreams will have to do for now ...
i actually count on the Spooky analysis of the game to see if we performed well (if i havent been able to watch it live)
And that quite often differs from what the MOTD (2) images and pundits made me believe ...
You know a lot of us bang on about the 'sky 4' etc. but I swear the Blackburn game was something like the 6th or 7th game in a row to be televised on either sky, espn or terrestrial tv. A lot of our random games are on sky. I'm almost certain that outside of the top 4 we are the most televised team in the league. Probably down to the fact our games our often some of the most entertaining. Either we blow teams away with great football or monumentally stuff up, which makes great telly for neutral fans.
I know some of the guys who work at Sky and there are a LOT of spurs fans in the production team. On an international marketing level this has no bearing but it's worth bearing in mind next time you slag them off for hating us.
Andy Gray is a massive anti-spurs crotch pheasant though.
I never said anything about the frequency that we appear on sky, I know we have been televised a lot, which of course I am grateful for - just the fact that when we are on, despite the opposition we always seem to be slagged off and hardly every praise no matter how well we play or the opposition we are up against! Maybe they love doing it so much and that's why we have been televised a lot! Lol.
If I've seen a game live, I'm very aware of how the MOTD edit has slanted things, selecting what to show according to the result and with a clear bias towards the "traditional" Prem top 4. But I'd still take it over ITV and Sky, who both have greater failings.
Inter were good last night, weren't they?
I do believe the points about trying to put the English players under a positive light. I'm never a fan of any of the pundits BBC employ. The coverage we get is less than complimentary.
Going off track a bit. The Gerrard incident I think was a complete joke. Ok so he sticks to fingers up at the ref and verbally swears at him also. Ok, I can see that one sliding despite the whole 'respect' campaign the FA have been going on about for ages now. But the elbow to Michael Brown as he ran past him, that was the joke. Rio gets a 3 (4 after the appeal I think) match ban for elbowing Huth. That was when they were tussling in the box waiting for a delivery. So when Brown is running back to defend and Gerrard throws an elbow to his head does he get let off?
Well I hear it is because the ref saw it and warned Gerrard. I wonder what the warning was... "please don't elbow any more players Stephen" but the fact the FA can now not take any action is stupid. If the ref achknowledges anything happening and doesn't take action that means the FA are helpless? I thought if it was if the player gets booked they can't get a ban.
To sum up, I think its terrible hes now got away with 2 incidents 2 weeks in a row. Great example for kids. Smash someone up in a nightclub if they don't play the music you want, treat people with authority with contempent and bodily harm against another professional, sure yeah, go for it.
Why is this man not England captain?
I prefer the Premier League Review Show. The commentary is the same from the match, and Spurs are normally chosen for extended highlights
sounds like good news on the Hudd front lads!