Jump to content

Tiss, Thompson and Charlie Sacked from GSS


Recommended Posts

It is a shame, sounds like they want to freshen up. i suspect we'll see a more diverse cast take the reigns with regards to both gender and ethnicity. I doubt him recently speaking his mind has helped his cause, but then i might be doing Sky a disservice with that statement.

Edited by Saint86
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ironic that the only one they keep is the worst one in Merson.

I do wonder if they were only going to get rid of Thompson and Nicholas (due to age) then Matt made the decision for them with his Twitter ramblings. Just seems weird not to get rid of all of them.

No doubt they will be replaced by a black man, a woman and a foreigner then they tick all the boxes in one fell swoop. That seems to be all that matters these days after all.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I can get the need to freshen it up, getting rid of 3 at once seems a bit extreme. Wonder if it’s cost cutting too.

i can’t say i’ve Ever found Clinton Morrison impressive, so i’d Hope it’s a proper recruitment process not a grab the next cab off the rank that looks good in a pr release.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't remember the last time I watched it. Maybe it's just me, but I'd rather spend my Saturday afternoon at live match than sitting on the sofa watching other people watch football.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Jesus christ. The state of some of the above posts. 3 blokes who everyone is bored of hearing from on a show hardly anyone watches or talks about anymore whilst their rival show feels far more enthusiastic (although equally as shit, but at least it tries to be different) get the boot and everyone uses it as an excuse to have a good old rant about foreigners, women and people who aren't white. 

I watched a bit of the show for the first time in 2 seasons in the last game of the season. It was Jeff Stelling going mental at any mention of VAR and raising his voice hysterically and the others backing him up. No insight from any of the people on the panel, just bland descriptions of the games and some shouting. I'm surprised Stelling and Merson have survived but to think it's a shame when they've tried freshening up and to think it's the fault or foreigners and black people is genuinely mental.

  • Like 11
  • Confused 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Micky said:

Stand by for a new panel full of political correctness, should make for riveting viewing. 

As opposed to the riveting viewing the 4 same blokes have offered for years and years now? If Sky want some different people, from different backgrounds and different experiences to come in and give a slightly different view of matches and the game in general then fucking good on them. Maybe it's not political correctness, maybe it's just...better TV?

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, The Cat said:

Can't remember the last time I watched it. Maybe it's just me, but I'd rather spend my Saturday afternoon at live match than sitting on the sofa watching other people watch football.

I watched it more for the first three hours of discussion than the actual commentary. Whilst I agree with you in principle, if we’re away and I can’t go, or at home and so sh*t I just don’t want to, it’s not bad viewing for a lazy afternoon.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Fabrice29 said:

As opposed to the riveting viewing the 4 same blokes have offered for years and years now? If Sky want some different people, from different backgrounds and different experiences to come in and give a slightly different view of matches and the game in general then fucking good on them. Maybe it's not political correctness, maybe it's just...better TV?

Ok.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Fabrice29 said:

As opposed to the riveting viewing the 4 same blokes have offered for years and years now? If Sky want some different people, from different backgrounds and different experiences to come in and give a slightly different view of matches and the game in general then fucking good on them. Maybe it's not political correctness, maybe it's just...better TV?

If Sue Smith, Eni Aluko and Alex Scott are better TV, I’m selling mine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Le Tissier made it incredibly easy for them to sack him with the absolute horseshit he was and is coming out with on social media.

I called it several weeks ago, and here we are. Utterly predictable. 

The money and prestige won't be comparable, but would be good to hear him on Solent replacing Big Dave who hs absolutely appalling.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

They were leading to it all last season, every week one was missing, replaced by a newbie. People don’t watch it for the quality of analysis, they watch it because of the chemistry and the humour - if people just wanted score updates they’d watch football focus or just check their phone. It’s a shame, completely expected, but a shame. I like all the ‘why do you care, it’s only a tv program, who cares’ brigade when people find this stuff irritating - all the while we have days of coverage about song lyrics, ways of addressing people, and statues. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

I watched it more for the first three hours of discussion than the actual commentary. Whilst I agree with you in principle, if we’re away and I can’t go, or at home and so sh*t I just don’t want to, it’s not bad viewing for a lazy afternoon.

I guess, although I've always just gone to football on a Saturday, any game, any level. Must be mad but I'd rather freeze my tits off watching Southern or Wessex league than be indoors with Soccer Saturday on.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

They were leading to it all last season, every week one was missing, replaced by a newbie. People don’t watch it for the quality of analysis, they watch it because of the chemistry and the humour - if people just wanted score updates they’d watch football focus or just check their phone. It’s a shame, completely expected, but a shame. I like all the ‘why do you care, it’s only a tv program, who cares’ brigade when people find this stuff irritating - all the while we have days of coverage about song lyrics, ways of addressing people, and statues. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

If Sue Smith, Eni Aluko and Alex Scott are better TV, I’m selling mine.

They the 3 replacing them are they? No? Ok. Good post though.

And btw, all 3 more relevant and more clued up than the 3 who got let go today. 

Edited by Fabrice29
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Fabrice29 said:

They the 3 replacing them are they? No? Ok. Good post though.

And btw, all 3 more relevant and more clued up than the 3 who got let go today. 

Scott and Smith are already becoming increasingly prevalent on Sky Sports and I don’t find any of them either charismatic or insightful. None have played at anything close to the level they are commenting on. If it was three players of the calibre that have just been sacked were replaced by three blokes who played for Salisbury City, I’d be similarly unimpressed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Tiss was always going to go after his Twitter antics, whether you agree with them or not, Sky are protecting a brand and he went 'off brand'. 

Thompson was an irritating scouse dimwit by the way, won't be missed. People like Alex Scott, she can be a little irritating at times, but she bloody well knows her shit. Very clued up and knowledgeable. 

Micah, I'm not sure what to make of him yet - one thing you can put on him is that he is incredibly enthusiastic, probably too much to be honest- he'd need to tone that down otherwise he'd get on my fucking tits. 

Both of those are decent shouts though, knowledgeable and confident. 

Clinton Morrison - no. He's annoying as hell, not exactly knowledgeable either. Comes across a bit simple, like Merson.

But I think what will be missed most is the 'mates' element of it, you watched the show and they would play off each other really well - that sort of camaraderie will take time to develop with a new panel, so we'll see.

Edited by S-Clarke
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m either at a game, watching a stream or out so rarely watch it these days for any length of time.

BBC are terrified of ever having an all white panel now. Sky pretty much the same.

TBF some new pundits have grown on me. The female thing is valid - they haven’t played at the level so might as well have a journalist commenting.

I should have bought shares in Micah Richards, who I like btw

 

Edited by whelk
Link to post
Share on other sites

Christ.  3 people, one of whom has been shown to be a lunatic, haven't had their contract renewed because their show has gone a bit stale and people's first reaction is to make negative comments about race and gender - how sad.

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

For me it’s important they keep the tone of the show the same. It has first and foremost always aimed to be a fun, entertaining show. They can’t lose that. Otherwise what separates them from Final Score and BT where we can already tune in for dull analysis. Couldn’t care less if they were black, white, male or female as long as they don’t lose sight of why the show has been so popular. I think Micah Richards would be great on there for that reason. Alex Scott less so. Not saying she doesn’t know her stuff, just she doesn’t fit the style. Would be like having Dan Walker present Eurotrash.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeff Stelling says it's his saddest day at Sky after Charlie Nicholas, Phil Thompson and Matt Le Tissier get sacked as Soccer Saturday pundits. Wait till he finds out that Alan Carr, Jo Brand and Nish Kumar are the replacements.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tiss already alluded to people contacting his employer trying to get him sacked because of his Twitter posts. Imagine waking up in the morning and thinking ‘that guy on the internet has a different opinion to me so i’m going to try and get him sacked’. Fucking weirdos everywhere.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, saintwbu said:

Tiss already alluded to people contacting his employer trying to get him sacked because of his Twitter posts. Imagine waking up in the morning and thinking ‘that guy on the internet has a different opinion to me so i’m going to try and get him sacked’. Fucking weirdos everywhere.

To be honest everyone came out of that situation looking like bloody weirdos. Le Tiss for his crazy conspiracy theories and those being sad enough to contact his employer. Don't forget Sky would have been aware of Le Tiss's twitter usage already as he was trending. I also dont fully believe thats the reason as they still employ Carragher after he spat at someone. 

Also could they just have been released due to the show not being as popular as it once was and not making the money it did before. I would guess they were on high wages from when the show was at its peak and they are deciding to trim some costs and getting cheaper alternatives. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Living 600 miles away I rely on Soccer Saturday to keep me informed on matchday. It is the only format that is "instant" in its response time. I share the excitement of the panel and it's good to have a genuine Saints fan mixing it with the guys who can only see the top 6.

Having said that, Tommo was getting a bit predictable and Charlie a bit too serious. Merson is just off the wall. Can't believe they have kept him.

Of the occasional commentators Sue Smith has been by far the most professional and knowledgeable. Clinton Morrison just bland. Some, like Joleon Lescott have just been embarrassing. You have to be able to describe which team has scored!!

Jeff Stelling really knows his stuff. He is the key to a successful show.

I hope they don't mess it up too much. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

They were probably thinking about freshening it up anyway, I mean Le Tiss was the one that played most recently and that was pretty much 20 years ago, hardly like they have much insight into modern football really.

Someone like Richards was part of the Man City title winning squads so it makes sense.

Its possible that Le Tiss was borderline and then his silly twitter rambles pushed him over the edge.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Lighthouse said:

Scott and Smith are already becoming increasingly prevalent on Sky Sports and I don’t find any of them either charismatic or insightful. None have played at anything close to the level they are commenting on. If it was three players of the calibre that have just been sacked were replaced by three blokes who played for Salisbury City, I’d be similarly unimpressed.

Correct.

Blokes for blokes football, chicks for chick football. I’m not against fresh blood, Rodney Marsh & Frank Mclintok were great on it, but times more on. The whole basis of the show was ex pros watching games and describing it, as well as Jeff Sterling being brilliant at holding it together. Now we have dopey birds that have never kicked a ball at any higher level than the Dog & Duck X11 waffling on. It’s not empowering birds giving them a job on the  basis they have ovaries, it’s sexist and condescending. You wouldn’t have some hairy arsed centre half commentating on netball or other chick heavy sport, why should we have to put up with it. 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Aluko and Smith have both been pretty bland and don’t really have much to say apart from the blindingly obvious which is very much like the Jamies, Redknapp and Carragher. Don’t mind Morrison, Dublin or Richards either but if anyone needed to go it was Jeff Stelling. Bloke used to be good but has obviously started to believe his own hype. All his moaning about VAR was tiresome, predictable, boring and in most cases plain wrong. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Fabrice29 said:

They the 3 replacing them are they? No? Ok. Good post though.

And btw, all 3 more relevant and more clued up than the 3 who got let go today. 

LOL what a load of bollox "more clued up".  You are probably right that they aren't the replacements so kind of irrelevant, but come on how the hell are they more clued up (about Football, which is the key issue)

Edited by stknowle
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Mikey88 said:

For me it’s important they keep the tone of the show the same. It has first and foremost always aimed to be a fun, entertaining show. They can’t lose that. Otherwise what separates them from Final Score and BT where we can already tune in for dull analysis. Couldn’t care less if they were black, white, male or female as long as they don’t lose sight of why the show has been so popular. I think Micah Richards would be great on there for that reason. Alex Scott less so. Not saying she doesn’t know her stuff, just she doesn’t fit the style. Would be like having Dan Walker present Eurotrash.

My view also, the banter and interaction between the guys was the key to it's successl, take this away and it will be a sea of blandness !

I've no problem with phasing in others (female, BAME etc..) but the important thing is to keep the spirit of the show and I fear that they are about to abandon it ☹️!

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

It’s not empowering birds giving them a job on the  basis they have ovaries, it’s sexist and condescending. You wouldn’t have some hairy arsed centre half commentating on netball or other chick heavy sport, why should we have to put up with it. 

Its called selective sexism or racism. Everybody is so busy running around desperate not to look homophobic, racist or sexist that giving a job to the best qualified has gone out the window. They just are intent on ticking boxes. 

What Sky have done with Thompson and Nicholas is ageist, they can dress it up as "freshening up" but if thats the case why keep Merson, the bloke is a tit. Matt, I firmly believe, dumped in his own nest with his Twitter views, thats his own fault, I havent got much sympathy for him.

There will definitely be a woman on the new panel, there will definitely be a black man, probably Morrison who is shockingly bad. I bet they dont have anyone much over 50 either.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, stknowle said:

LOL what a load of bollox "more clued up".  You are probably right that they aren't the replacements so kind of irrelevant, but come on how the hell are they more clued up (about Football, which is the key issue)

Well it's a matter of opinion isn't it. For me, I find that whole Soccer Saturday panel dull, outdated and very much had it's time (and fair play by the way, it was a good time). I prefer listening to other presenters, including those 3 mentioned. They offer different views and less clichés. They aren't angry about VAR all the time (granted, neither was Le Tissier) for a start.

The best show of this ilk is the BT European Goals show. Granted being able to the action is a massive reason for that but having presenters who clearly know there stuff, researched and up to date is also a huge plus. None of them have played football at any level so using the quality of womens football as a reason they shouldn't be talking about mens football is genuinely nuts, so the people doing that really need to look at themselves and realise that if they truly believe that then they too shouldn't be offering any opinions on the game themselves either.

  

27 minutes ago, beatlesaint said:

Its called selective sexism or racism. Everybody is so busy running around desperate not to look homophobic, racist or sexist that giving a job to the best qualified has gone out the window. They just are intent on ticking boxes. 

What Sky have done with Thompson and Nicholas is ageist, they can dress it up as "freshening up" but if thats the case why keep Merson, the bloke is a tit. Matt, I firmly believe, dumped in his own nest with his Twitter views, thats his own fault, I havent got much sympathy for him.

There will definitely be a woman on the new panel, there will definitely be a black man, probably Morrison who is shockingly bad. I bet they dont have anyone much over 50 either.  

Yes because anyone under 50, a woman or black simply must be a box ticked rather than selected on merit. 

Honestly, as Ian Wright has brilliantly put recently, if you're using the letting go of these 3 as an excuse to have a pop at women or black people then you really need to be having a word with yourself. Nobody has replaced anybody yet but any excuse to for some good old fashioned racism and sexism eh!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The 'Soccer Saturday' format does need freshening up a bit, it feels like exactly the same show it was in 1999. Not a bad thing in some ways, it's endured because it basically is quite amusing, but there are other alternatives now which do the job arguably better. (BT and even the BBC's final score..........)

It does feel like watching an old boys club, fine if that's what you enjoy but it's clearly not going to have wider appeal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Fabrice29 said:

Well it's a matter of opinion isn't it. For me, I find that whole Soccer Saturday panel dull, outdated and very much had it's time (and fair play by the way, it was a good time). I prefer listening to other presenters, including those 3 mentioned. They offer different views and less clichés. They aren't angry about VAR all the time (granted, neither was Le Tissier) for a start.

The best show of this ilk is the BT European Goals show. Granted being able to the action is a massive reason for that but having presenters who clearly know there stuff, researched and up to date is also a huge plus. None of them have played football at any level so using the quality of womens football as a reason they shouldn't be talking about mens football is genuinely nuts, so the people doing that really need to look at themselves and realise that if they truly believe that then they too shouldn't be offering any opinions on the game themselves either.

  

Yes because anyone under 50, a woman or black simply must be a box ticked rather than selected on merit. 

Honestly, as Ian Wright has brilliantly put recently, if you're using the letting go of these 3 as an excuse to have a pop at women or black people then you really need to be having a word with yourself. Nobody has replaced anybody yet but any excuse to for some good old fashioned racism and sexism eh!

 

1 hour ago, Batman said:

The idea of a few middle-aged white blokes, having a laugh and watching football - just aint saintly and must be squashed

It's not so much that a few middle-aged white blokes having a laugh and watching Football has to be squashed.   More the case that there's a lot of people watching and listening to all things Football who aren't white, middle-aged blokes and therefore it's a good idea to have a range of presenters/commentators who reflect the changing face of Football and Sports fans.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, austsaint said:

 

It's not so much that a few middle-aged white blokes having a laugh and watching Football has to be squashed.   More the case that there's a lot of people watching and listening to all things Football who aren't white, middle-aged blokes and therefore it's a good idea to have a range of presenters/commentators who reflect the changing face of Football and Sports fans.

racism just aint saintly....even positive racism

In response to this (as I am out of posts) - you'd have to explain what you mean by positive racism

Look, no doubt MLT and co where not sacked, rather told they would no longer be required (and on effectively a contract)

But as Lighthouse said, they have been 'moved aside' because of the age, race and gender.  The last time I looked, those are characteristics protected by law/employment law.

I do wonder if SS will remain as popular going forward...

Edited by Batman
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Batman said:

racism just aint saintly....even positive racism

You'd have to explain what you mean by positive racism.  If you're trying to suggest replacing three middle-aged white guys with a fresher more representative group of pundits is somehow racist then I'm struggling to understand your thinking.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Fabrice29 said:

Well it's a matter of opinion isn't it. For me, I find that whole Soccer Saturday panel dull, outdated and very much had it's time (and fair play by the way, it was a good time). I prefer listening to other presenters, including those 3 mentioned. They offer different views and less clichés. They aren't angry about VAR all the time (granted, neither was Le Tissier) for a start.

The best show of this ilk is the BT European Goals show. Granted being able to the action is a massive reason for that but having presenters who clearly know there stuff, researched and up to date is also a huge plus. None of them have played football at any level so using the quality of womens football as a reason they shouldn't be talking about mens football is genuinely nuts, so the people doing that really need to look at themselves and realise that if they truly believe that then they too shouldn't be offering any opinions on the game themselves either.

  

Yes because anyone under 50, a woman or black simply must be a box ticked rather than selected on merit. 

Honestly, as Ian Wright has brilliantly put recently, if you're using the letting go of these 3 as an excuse to have a pop at women or black people then you really need to be having a word with yourself. Nobody has replaced anybody yet but any excuse to for some good old fashioned racism and sexism eh!

You haven’t read what I’ve said before launching off on the racism route. If the best candidates to replace the three are all white men they will not all get selected, merit goes out the window. If they are selected on merit then great but they won’t be. It’s not a pop at women or black men in the slightest ffs

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, austsaint said:

You'd have to explain what you mean by positive racism.  If you're trying to suggest replacing three middle-aged white guys with a fresher more representative group of pundits is somehow racist then I'm struggling to understand your thinking.

Three people have basically been sacked because of their age, race and gender. Individually they don’t deserve to lose their jobs but they have because it’s good PR.

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, beatlesaint said:

You haven’t read what I’ve said before launching off on the racism route. If the best candidates to replace the three are all white men they will not all get selected, merit goes out the window. If they are selected on merit then great but they won’t be. It’s not a pop at women or black men in the slightest ffs

I don't disagree with you at all. Your views aren't racist, sexist or homophobic or whatever else is out there, but this is what will be labelled at anyone with a differing view now days. Welcome to the world post 2020. This is now where we live. Enjoy.

Edited by S-Clarke
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})