Pundits -Sporting and Political!

With the World Cup in full swing and big matches coming thick and fact, we all get to see more and more of the expert panels charged with explaining the complexities of football to the rest of us. The more I watch these pundits, the more they remind me of political analysts -you know, the people in our media who get to explain the intricacies of our political world. And without doubt, most of us take both groups way too seriously. 

Both groups have a lot in common- to such an extent I think they deserve a collective acronym-PAPSers-Pundits, Analysts, Predictors, Specialists.

And whether its football or politics PAPSers have many common traits:

Previous predictions mean nothing. PAPSers like to hold the people they talk and write about accountable – for political decisions, for team selections, substitutions etcc but PAPSers are never held to account for their own writings and predictions. How often have we seen PAPSers predict a decisive outcome to a match only for the exact opposite result to unfold. Or political analysts say that some event will damage party X only for the next poll to show party X up in the polls.

PAPSers live in bubbles and spend too much time talking to each other. 

Non-stories get created out of nothing. It goes like this. PAPSer No. 1 speculates that politician X or Manager Y might do Z.  PAPSer no 2 hears No.1’s speculation and reports that “informed sources believe that X or Y is going to do Z”.  PAPSer No.3 reports that an announcement of Z is imminent. Often, nothing happens and PAPSers 1,2 and 3 just move on to the piece of speculation.

Most PAPSers have never actually held the jobs they profess to be experts in. Few football pundits have been managers and even fewer political analysts have run for election, been elected or (perish the thought) held Ministerial office.

PAPSers are very reluctant to admit they just don’t know what’s happening. They are not at training sessions or at Departmental or political meetings but they always seem to know what team should be picked or what policy should be pursued. 

When PAPSers have nothing new to say, a little bit of research will go a long way. The world of politics and sport are well documented and PAPSers can demonstrate their expertise with just a little research. “Player X made his debut at just 17 and had 20 caps before he was 20” or politician Y got 5,639 first preference in the 2016 election, up ten per cent on her 2011 performance.” Impressed?

A new generation of PAPSers are emerging. These are young journalists who have read and researched extensively in their specialised fields. On radio and podcasts especially, they demonstrate incredible depth of historical knowledge on past matches and elections. So, while they know their subject matters on one level, they have never played the game at even the level of “journeyman” or darkened a door canvassing.

The cross-over PAPSer is the worst. Two words. Eamonn Dunphy!

There are exceptions. Occasionally, a PAPSer demonstrates the best of all worlds -relevant experience at their topic, in-depth knowledge (beyond reading) and an ability to communicate with passion and creativity -Brian Kerr proves there is hope for all PAPSers!

Imagine Brian Kerr commentating on Leaders’ Questions in the Dail. “Yer man Veruka was wojous today. Mickey Martin hit him with a dunt of a question and a great linkie uppie between what Veruka said about Brexit at Christmas and what happened last week in Brussels. Then, things got even worser for Leo when Mary Lou had a blem at him about de nort”.

Now, that would be worth listening to!