Alan Hansen

[Iron]

Hansen makes £40K per MOTD episode:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ds-newsxml

What a waste of money at a time of BBC cutbacks!

It's not like he's some footballing guru, full of profound and original insights, and nor does he radiate much charisma.

They could save a fortune by bringing in different guest pundits every week. And you'd get a greater diversity of views in the bargain.

Jeff

[superfrank]

I think the beeb does this sort of thing to help justify the salaries of the permies.

Hansen didn't have the balls to try it as a manager so his 'insight' is limited. There are plenty of ex-managers who'd step in each week for 500 quid and provide much more entertainment than him.

It's time the BBC was privatised. Their drama is shockingly poor measured against the American's who their own love to ridicule (Sopranos, Mad Men, The Wire etc.) and their news coverage is just socialist propaganda for plebs.

[Iron]

Occasionally, the BBC does come out with a brilliant drama (The Office being the best example in recent years IMHO). The main problem with BBC dramas is that they reflect the values of the corporation. When I watch a drama, I want to get immersed in the plot, not feel like some patronising twit is trying to indoctrinate me with their PC values!

Another point about Hansen is that it's questionable whether, if the BBC didn't pay him such a high salary, he'd be poached by Sky or ITV. If the BBC were to reduce his pay to a mere £200K, Hansen might hate it, but I have a funny feeling he'd keep showing up for work!

I agree about the news, although I like Newsnight, particularly when Paxo is presenting. If any BBC presenter deserves a million quid, it's him... Oh, and the Top Gear guys are pretty good IMHO (although I do find Hammond a tad irritating! ). And let's not forget Brucie - a living legend who's worth 10 Alan Hansens!

Jeff

[Iron]

Not wise! BBC director general compares football pundit Alan Hansen to Eric and Ernie

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z1cXMsBUz8

Not sure you can really compare Britain's most loved ever comedy duo with a guy who tells us about shocking defending in every match he commentates on...

Jeff

[superfrank]

I'd get rid of the studio/presenters/pundits entirely and just have the highlights back to back - we would then get to see more football, listen to less drivel and footballers trying to be funny (they're not) and it would also save several £million a year (of taxpayers money).

[Iron]

I think having some analysis is good - I enjoy the discussions about whether a penalty should have been given, why a team are playing poorly, etc.

I just don't see why we need to pay so much for Hansen's pearls of wisdom. The BBC are big on diversity, so why not bring in a greater diversity of football commentators? There are loads of ex-managers, ex-players and newspaper journalists to choose from! And it would be interesting if they occasionally brought in a retired referee to comment on free kick decisions, etc.

I also think it would be great if we could return to the days when there was lively debate between the commentators.

Jeff

[Consty1]

There are loads of ex-managers, ex-players and newspaper journalists to choose from! And it would be interesting if they occasionally brought in a retired referee to comment on free kick decisions, etc.

Jeff

I've always enjoyed what Guillem Balague and Graham Hunter bring to the table on Revista de la Liga. It's a deeper knowledge of the Spanish clubs than what an ex player can bring.

SSN draft in Dermot Gallagher on a Monday to comment on ref decisions and Goals on Sunday usually cover the more contentious moments as well.

[dogform]

It's not like he's some footballing guru, full of profound and original insights, and nor does he radiate much charisma.Jeff

C**e

[pdupre1961]

It's not like he's some footballing guru, full of profound and original insights, and nor does he radiate much charisma.

Jeff

Quite the opposite - he is a footballing guru. It's clear he knows more about football than most the Premiership Managers.

He's not a Manager because you have to waste your time teaching players how to play. It bothers me that you still think Ferguson is a good Manager. All good Managers are successful immediately - not just when they have £200 million to spend.

Currently the only above average Premier Managers are:-
Harry Redknapp - Excellent in attack
Arsene Wenger - Excellent in attack
Roy Hodgson - All round organisation
Alex McLeish - Excellent defence
David Moyes - Excellent defence

The rest are mediocre at best. My overall top Manager would be Roy Hodgson obviously - however, I think England need an attack minded Manager, so my choice for Manager of England would be Harry.

The reason Hansen is not a Manager is that he can do what he wants 80% of the time and earn his crust weekends only. Isn't that what we all want.

Paul

[Iron]

Quite the opposite - he is a footballing guru.

I disagree. Sure, he's knowledgeable, especially when it comes to defence, but his commentary is rarely massively insightful. I don't recall ever thinking 'Wow! What a clever argument! I'd never have thought of that'...

You could replace him with any number of football journalists, ex-players or former managers, and I doubt the BBC would be flooded with complaints...

It's clear he knows more about football than most the Premiership Managers.

What makes you think that?

It bothers me that you still think Ferguson is a good Manager.

You really shouldn't let it bother you!

You obviously think that Man U's many titles over the years were due to luck and had nothing to do with Fergie's managerial skills. But how do you explain Fergie's success at Aberdeen, where he took a minor Scottish side to European Cup Winners' Cup glory?

All good Managers are successful immediately

Like Roy Hodgson was at Liverpool?

- not just when they have £200 million to spend.

It's undeniable that Man U's wealth has played a part in their success.

But the fact that they've held their own against City and Chelsea in recent years shows that's not the whole story. Ferguson is great at spotting and nurturing talent. That's why we've had players come up through the academy and into the first team, and we've had players who we bought for relatively little turn into superstars.

BTW, it's 25 years to the day since Sir Alex became Man U manager.

Jeff

[pdupre1961]

You obviously think that Man U's many titles over the years were due to luck and had nothing to do with Fergie's managerial skills. But how do you explain Fergie's success at Aberdeen, where he took a minor Scottish side to European Cup Winners' Cup glory?

Jeff

No not luck - Money...

Success, that's equivalent to the Trophy Roy Hodgson won with a mediocre English side Fulham - Oh no they didn't win therefore Ferguson MUST be a better Manager.

Which country did Ferguson get to the 1994 World Cup. In my opinion Hodgson is a far better Manager than Ferguson. Switzerland were non-entities and they thrashed Romania 4-1, when has a Manchester United team ever beaten a better team than they are by 4-1.
Answer - Never because they are the best .

Paul

[Iron]

That's what I meant to write.

So do you think that if Mike Bassett had been Man U manager for the past 25 years, he'd have won as many trophies, or would you accept that there was some skill involved?

Jeff

PS Hansen - the commentator you regard as a guru - was singing Fergie's praises on MOTD a minute ago!

No not luck - Money...

[pdupre1961]

the commentator you regard as a guru - was singing Fergie's praises on MOTD a minute ago!

He also said Beckham was rubbish, then someone got to him. Now he says Beckham is great. For £40K a week I would say Beckham is great. Though, I honestly believe the opposite...

[SilentDave]

During his time at Liverpool, Benitez spent more money than Ferguson. Chelsea have outspent United in recent years.
Yes, Ferguson has had a decent amount of money to spend over the years but to suggest his success is purely down to financial muscle is clearly not the case. Net transfer spend under the Glazer's has been relatively low compared with United's direct rivals.

[pdupre1961]

... his success is purely down to financial muscle is clearly not the case.....

I think you're getting confused it's NOT Ferguson that has won all these trophies - It's Manchester United.

He is just one of many reasons, not the only reason. Brian Kidd, Roy Keane, Eric Cantona, and more recently Wayne Rooney being factors of Man Utd's success.

Having a big stadium means that teams are intimidated, they also think they're above the law, and get away with more than other teams.