Coleman doesn’t see his future in punditry

02/09/2022 43comments  |  Jump to last

Seamus Coleman has complained about what he feels was something of an agenda against Everton last season from certain TV pundits and says that the impulse towards controversy is why he doubts he’ll move into that side of game when he retires.

Speaking to the Irish Independent, the Everton skipper takes issue with how the Blues were treated at times during what was a difficult 2021-22 season and called out Jamie Carragher, in particular, for what he felt was unnecessarily sustained criticism.

Carragher drew Evertonian ire for what were perceived to be unfair remarks about both himself and Richarlison, the latter being accused of play-acting when he was routinely among the most fouled players in the Premier League during his time at Goodison Park.

“It’s part and parcel of the game that you get criticised,” Coleman said. “When Carragher had a go at me after the Spurs game [in March], no problem at all but when you are maybe consistently having a go at Everton then you can get more angry at that.

Article continues below video content

"As a player, I have always tried to understand where people are coming from and Carragher’s comments came after the Tottenham game, when we got well beat.

“We were everyone’s punching bag at that time and we were very bad on that night, but you just want some balance in the comments from pundits at times.

“Nowadays to be a pundit, you need to be so controversial with your opinion to get back on TV next week,” Coleman continued. “That means that sometimes some of the opinions can be a bit silly.

“At the same time, you don’t want to be sitting on the fence, but it is a balancing act.

“Sometimes I question whether pundits are saying things for the sake of getting a reaction on TV. This is why I think I’d like to stay in football in some way when my career comes to an end.

“For now, I still have big targets to aim for with Everton and Ireland, but I know that day will come.”


Reader Comments (43)

Note: the following content is not moderated or vetted by the site owners at the time of submission. Comments are the responsibility of the poster. Disclaimer ()

Bill Gienapp
1 Posted 02/09/2022 at 19:38:39
Carragher just wrote an article that basically amounted to "Gerrard needs more time at Aston Villa, because he's my good friend."
Kieran Kinsella
2 Posted 02/09/2022 at 19:52:45
I remember the useless punditry starting with Greavsie. Ian St John while a Red seemed to at least try to offer some kind of insight, Greavsie on the other hand would explain everything away as "a funny ol' game," or just rant about clubs he didn't like.

But Sky took it to another level with just obnoxious loud mouths Souness, Keane etc who just are there seemingly to generate headlines for the back page of The Sun.

Anthony A Hughes
3 Posted 02/09/2022 at 19:56:40
Carragher is the epitomy of a Kopite knobhead. Classless piece of spit..sorry shit
Paul Birmingham
4 Posted 02/09/2022 at 20:00:43
Carragher was an Ale House player and talks like the Oracle of world football knowledge.

He's a gobshite and talks consistently shite on the box, the odd time I view Sky.

Ronaldo blanked him the other week, when the RS played United.

He commands no respect and should have been sacked for spitting against that United supporter from his car.

He's one many ex-professionals who talk blight every week, MotD and Sky.

Good luck to Ossie, he has a balanced view and his honest when does his stinks commentating.

Anthony A Hughes
5 Posted 02/09/2022 at 20:08:46
Agree Paul, never coached or managed.

Critises players he's not fit to clean the boots of let alone coaches who would leave him for dead.

Peter Carpenter
6 Posted 02/09/2022 at 21:49:55
Seamus is far too sensible for that shit show. He'll do something much more worthwhile when he packs up, I'm sure.
Will Mabon
7 Posted 02/09/2022 at 22:01:52
So, it's official - we do get a raw deal in the media, first time I've heard one of the players say it (correct me if I'm wrong).

Now we just need a player to address and ratify our terrible luck!

Agree with Seamus staying away, it's a complete swamp that detracts from the game, I can't watch it.

Ken Kneale
8 Posted 02/09/2022 at 22:07:43
Seamus is a top bloke - his latest comments confirm his money and fame have not gone to his head. Whenever he chooses to retire, he can look back and hold his head high.
Stan Schofield
9 Posted 03/09/2022 at 10:19:40
Well said Seamus.

Most punditry is uninformed drivel spouted by ignorant types who are chasing money in return for their nonsense.

Seamus Coleman is a man of integrity and good sense, and far too fine a person to be involved in the sordid little world of TV pundits.

Stale Haverstadlokken
10 Posted 03/09/2022 at 21:06:15

1) Wore a red shirt
2) Unable to do analysis
3) Failure as managers
4) No memories

Brian Dagnall
11 Posted 04/09/2022 at 13:45:18
Punditry is overdone on tv. If you look at MOTD there are 3 old centre forwards on the sofa. If they tell me what a centre forward should do, I listen, everything else they are no better qualified than I am. Shearer is a failed manager, Gary Neville and Keane the same. The rest have zero experience apart from "animal" Souness.

i like to watch footy not listen to these no-hopers while they draw yellow boxes on screens. Pathetic

Ian Bennett
12 Posted 04/09/2022 at 13:48:44
Carragher has been playing the save Stevie card for weeks.
Joe McMahon
13 Posted 04/09/2022 at 13:49:01
Brian, I do agree, however Roy Keane did very well at Sunderland.
Dave Abrahams
14 Posted 04/09/2022 at 14:00:50
I love watching football, although it is getting harder to enjoy it the way the game is manipulated by TV companies and the people they employ to commentate and analyse these games, to be honest very rarely have the sound on when watching these matches, I don’t have a commentator sitting next to me when I go to watch a live game thank God so certainly don’t need these e players spouting their nonsense while watching football on TV.

I didn’t mind Wolstenholme and Coleman back in the day when football was a good and honest game played on a level playing field for every team not just the top dogs.

Paul Kossoff
15 Posted 04/09/2022 at 15:54:05
I was in Tesco Express a while ago, Carragher walks in for his Pastie, I asked a staff member for the cleaner because someone had expulsed liquid on the floor, Carragher gave me a dirty look which I received with a sly smile, dirty on the pitch and off it.
Michael Lynch
16 Posted 04/09/2022 at 21:26:30
The pundits are useless these days, but the one good innovation for me is having more women ex-players talking about the game on telly. Apart from the fact that they seem to be less biased, they also come across as more interested in the match they're watching, rather than their own massive egos.

I assume it's because they haven't spent their entire career being spoilt, overpaid, arrogant tossers like Carra and the rest, and are much more down to earth.

Jerome Shields
17 Posted 05/09/2022 at 08:31:22
Pundits are really a waste of space. They have been irritating in the past, but at least they tried to be independent. But now they are ridiculous and obviously influenced by the stupid money they earn and their perceived view how to maintain it.

How the media companies can justify paying these idiots the huge money they do is a scandal. I often think that media pundity is the geriatric home for players who have no marbles, exposed after their football legs have gone.

They certainly could not manage a team and it would be questionable if today they would be up to playing.

Michael #16

A real and very good point.

Jon Wit
18 Posted 05/09/2022 at 09:30:52
It's a competition for click-bait and viral videos now.

Hardly any of them have shown they can manage or coach a team –you get as much insight from the person next to you in the pub.

David Ellis
19 Posted 05/09/2022 at 11:32:16
At least Greavsie was funny, and also quite pro-Everton, if only to irritate Ian St John. But let's face it he wasn't the sharpest knife in the draw.

What annoys me is that the pundits are unable to explain the rules of football. Saying "it was never a penalty for me" doesn't count as an explanation.

The facts and laws that led them to their conclusions are never mentioned because I suspect they don't know the rules – and just go off their experience of previous referring decisions (even if under different rules).

Alan McGuffog
20 Posted 05/09/2022 at 11:48:10
David... add to that, "He was entitled to go down there."

What the feck does that mean???

Michael Lynch
21 Posted 05/09/2022 at 12:35:16
David and Alan – yes to both of those posts!

The inconsistency of the refs is only beaten by the inconsistency of the pundits.

"There wasn't enough in it for me" when a player is pulled back in the penalty box, followed 10 minutes later by "He was entitled go down there" just leaves me fuming.

John McFarlane Snr
22 Posted 05/09/2022 at 12:44:55
Hi Alan, it's one of my pet hates to hear, "There was contact so he was entitled to go down" another nail in the game and one more step toward a non-contact sport.
Alan McGuffog
23 Posted 05/09/2022 at 13:59:08
John... added to which, when these plonkers say that so and so "won" a penalty.

It shouldn't be about winning penalties – it's either a foul or not. Seems to me that cheating is an accepted part of the game now.

John McFarlane Snr
24 Posted 05/09/2022 at 14:22:23
Hi again, Alan [23] another one that annoys me is "There's only one team going to win this game now" I can't recall an occasion when both teams won the same game.

I have to give a bit of lee-way on this next one, they may be saying "He struck that with his favoured left foot" but it comes across to me as his 'favourite left foot', I think that description may be the correct version, because over the years I've seen many players who qualify for that category.

John Boswell
25 Posted 06/09/2022 at 12:36:13
Dave @14, hear here, I would love the option of viewing without commentary but with crowd noise. That would be perfect for me. :). COYB
Martin Reppion
26 Posted 06/09/2022 at 13:37:18
Michael #16,

As a counterpoint, the women pundits have played football at a level that would not get them into a national league side.

They play, week-in & week-out, in front of crowds that Stalybridge Celtic would consider poor. As a result, they are not under as much pressure as the male professionals, and do not get the scrutiny, until they play in internationals. The internationals draw big crowds because, compared to the men's game, the tickets are given away.

I accept that as fans, of football, they have an opinion. But I don't think most of them are any more qualified to talk about the Premier League than a season ticket holding fan or a retired Halifax Town player.

The politically correct motivation of diversity is driving who is allowed on our screens. As a result, I always record televised sport and fast forward over all the garbage most of the pundits, whoever they are, are spouting.

(Except for Leon Osman!)

Robert Tressell
27 Posted 06/09/2022 at 13:59:57
Martin # 26,

As a counterpoint to that, I see a large number of male pundits barely able to string a sentence together, let alone offer any intelligent insight into the game underway.

Whereas if you watch stuff like Tifo football, where the pundits have no playing experience, you get exceptional analysis.

In many respects, the pundits are being asked to talk bollocks and entertain (in some cases just to provoke). Apart from a few exceptions, they're not there to add any wisdom to the debate.

Personally, I think Osman, sadly, is not one of those exceptions.

So if a few of the pundits are women, that's fine by me, and might help get girls interested in a brilliant sport too. And in fairness, plenty of the women (just as they do on ToffeeWeb) do know what they're talking about and plenty of the men (again as per ToffeeWeb – perhaps including myself) don't know what they're on about.

James Fletcher
28 Posted 06/09/2022 at 14:04:00
Surprisingly, people who were employed because their feet worked well aren't that good at analysis and insight; similar for football management, where I'm amazed that it's still only ex-players who are considered.
Raymond Fox
29 Posted 06/09/2022 at 14:19:29
I agree Martin 26, there was a time when you were employed on the basis of who was best able to do the vacant position – not what sex or colour you were.
Fran Mitchell
30 Posted 06/09/2022 at 14:30:40
Raymond "there was a time when you were employed on the basis of who was best able to do the vacant position".

Well, maybe, but only if you were a white male?

From my experience, commentators like Chris Sutton, Robbie Savage, Jim Beglin, Paul Merson, Matt Le Tissier, and countless others are the demonstration that 'ex-professional pundits are in the majority, vast vast majority, still white men.

And in their vast majority, are a bit shit, with uneducated, in researched views, all too focused on 'hot-topics' and when analysing any team other than one of the Sky 6, it becomes patently obvious that they watch very little football outside of MotD and whoever is playing on Sky.

Some (not all), of the female commentators, however, I find that they often watch much more, simply because they have to do research, they have to prepare themselves, because they get criticism so much more easily than male commentators.

Jim Beglin can say whatever he wants, and he'll get criticism for being an idiot by some, but he'll never get criticism for being a man.

Lucy Ward, however, will be castigated because of being a woman first.

Andy Meighan
31 Posted 06/09/2022 at 20:48:06
Alan 20. Well said, makes my piss boil that line. What they mean is entitled to go down if you're Kane, Ronaldo, Salah etc.

Not if you're Mitrovic, Adams, Maupay etc, then it's "Oh he's trying to buy a foul there." Absolutely sickening.

Andy Meighan
32 Posted 06/09/2022 at 21:38:11
Also got to agree with Martin @26. The only reason women are infiltrating the men's game now, is because it ticks boxes.

I always record MotD myself because I can't stand the smug drivel from Lineker and his cohorts, but mainly because there's absolutely nothing worse than a woman commentating on a Premier League game. It's excruciating.

People can call me sexist all they want, I don't really care. But, in my view, women should stick to the women's game and men to the men's game.

But it won't happen because there's no real market for the women's game which is watched by one man and his dog. Therefore the major companies bring them on board for the men's game.

Another bastion lost to the PC gang.

Jamie Crowley
33 Posted 06/09/2022 at 22:06:42
I actually prefer having pundits, with a caveat:

Good ones!

A former player undoubtedly has a perspective, having played at the same professional level, of the game most will not have. The problem is most of them are frankly terrible at commentary.

But for me, the good ones are gold. I appreciate their perspective.

And I honestly could care less if the commentator is male or female, again with a caveat. Of all the female commentators I've heard, like one or two was any good at all. Most of them are frankly awful, and absolutely smack of "box ticking" hires as Andy @32 mentions.

Just get good, intelligent commentators. I could care less what gender, color, age, orientation, whatever! Stop box-ticking, stop hiring idiots, stop hiring biased buffoons, etc. Hire qualified individuals and close your eyes while you do it to any external "noise" about identities. Rebecca Lowe (female), Tim Howard (black), Robbie Earl (black) all spring to mind! I never, ever see gender or color – I love them as commentators and pundits. They are spectacular.

But we get what we get.

The good thing about all this is that some very qualified individuals are getting opportunities that they wouldn't have years ago. The bad thing is some really unqualified people are butchering opportunities that we have to suffer through because of the societal push to afford said opportunity.

Some of it, I'd argue, is an overreaction – but that would fill pages and therefore I'll leave it at that. I'm a firm believer that the last few years the PC movement has over-reached, and we're seeing a "correction" lately.

I'm also a firm believer that society is doing a dance, trying to find a balancing act, and I have a lot of confidence we will, as human beings, find that balance in the end.

The push and pull of politics and societal values will continue forever, long after anyone on TW is here on earth. The human race has, in the main over time, done a fabulous job of advancing and becoming more aware and cognizant of where they should ultimately be.

Commentators are just pawns in the gigantic dance to strike the right balance. So the push and pull goes on and on, and in the end we're all better for it.

So says I. Take it or leave it.

And lastly, I despise political correctness, for the record, just so you know where I'm coming from. But even despising it, I'd argue it's done a hell of a lot of good in many respects.

Andy Crooks
34 Posted 06/09/2022 at 22:23:02
The notion that one should have played the game to be a pundit is utterly ludicrous. The very finest commentry on art and sport has always come from people who never excelled at it. Cardus on cricket, Mailer on Boxing, O'Sullivan on horse racing, Leavis on literature and too many football writers to mention.

The reason for their skill is not just that they are more eloquent, articulate and, frankly, intelligent. It is because they have neutrality, no axe to grind and a viewpoint that is in line with the viewer or reader. They are skilled communicators.

We now have the appalling situation of good players, average players, and really average players becoming pundits. I enjoy women's football but having the box-ticking, utterly cliche-ridden, half-witted ex-women players joining the cretinous males who have stunk out our living rooms for years, is unbearable.

It is a vomit inducing, matey, lads and ladettes club that is absolutely fucking rotten. Not one iota of insight, discernment, subtlety, eloquence or courage. Only the desire to have their contract renewed to continue being sniggering self regarding oafs.

Seamus, you are better than that.

Dale Self
35 Posted 06/09/2022 at 22:51:36
I'd like to add an American commentator to that list, Doc Emrick of the NHL. His delivery was impeccable, spoke at a speed that matched hockey's action and could cite each player as they touched the puck out of their end of the ice.

From what I could see he was only a commentator never a player but his understanding and how he contributed to others' understanding of the sport cannot be overstated. To some extent it can take someone from the audience to get it and put it into words to find the proper story.

Danny O’Neill
36 Posted 06/09/2022 at 22:59:21
I tend to agree with you Andy. I preferred sports journalists rather than ex players. The latter do act and say things for effect.
Colin Glassar
37 Posted 06/09/2022 at 23:23:14
Back in the 70’s Brian Clough predicted that tv pundits and punditry would ruin football with their over-analysis. He wasn’t wrong. After a game ends I turn off the box and even motd (recorded) I skip the post-match shite spoken by Lineker, Shearer and the brain dead Danny Murphy.
Jamie Crowley
38 Posted 07/09/2022 at 01:02:25
Dale @35 -

That's a GREAT shout. Doc was to hockey what peanut butter is to jelly.

An amazing announcer that underscores Andy Crook's excellent point @34. Never played the game but knew it inside and out and was the best of commentators / announcers in any sport on planet earth.

A very small and almost geeky-looking fella, all the previous NHL players loved the man dearly - it was patently obvious.

Great shout.

James Flynn
39 Posted 07/09/2022 at 03:41:37
Best pundit "never played the game" here in the States.

Boxing's Al Bernstein.

Played the game and are pretty good, The 2 Robbies (Earle and Mustoe) are in the studio pundits for NBC soccer here in the States.

Generally, I mute my TV or computer during half-time for any sport. I leave it on for them.

Allen Rodgers
40 Posted 07/09/2022 at 08:26:06
Sherwood is definitely anti-Everton but I've noticed he's much more respectful when Jules Warren is in the chair.
Ray Roche
41 Posted 07/09/2022 at 09:06:48
My only problem with women's football is that they're trying too hard to be men. They have now adopted the same puerile, childish celebrations, the same sliding on their knees shite, and now, slowly, the ‘going to ground' too easily culture.

Their game will very soon become a parody of the men’s game. *And how many men provide commentary or analysis on the women's game? Just asking.

* I was tempted to write “Full of tits” here but thought better of it.

Dave Abrahams
42 Posted 07/09/2022 at 10:27:23
Danny (36),

Spot on there, Dann,y about sports journalists, none better than the late Peter Wilson of the Daily Mirror when he was writing about boxing or tennis, especially boxers. Whether in the ring or out of it, his knowledge of them was profound. When he wrote about the actual fights, you felt like you were in the ring with the boxers and he could put you in your place if you had a different opinion to him.

I think he liked Henry Cooper a lot, the man and the boxer, because he obviously knew him. When I wrote to him about Henry's two fights with Ali and suggested that Henry wasn't a real test for the great Ali, he wrote back with a nice letter but finished by saying only one man had stayed on his feet throughout the two fights. Well, I couldn't really argue with that!!

Alan McGuffog
43 Posted 07/09/2022 at 14:46:22
Harry Carpenter

Add Your Comments

In order to post a comment, you need to be logged in as a registered user of the site.

» Log in now

Or Sign up as a ToffeeWeb Member — it's free, takes just a few minutes and will allow you to post your comments on articles and Talking Points submissions across the site.

How to get rid of these ads and support TW

© ToffeeWeb