Would to love see a form expert/punter on both the terrestrial (especially) and Racing Channels who is not a former jockey!
Jason Weaver is very good but I agree in principle.
Racing shares the punditry problem with football. It seems the producers are only interested in former participants for punditry. I think they're doing the viewing public a disservice.
I'm not avidly into sports on TV but I do like serious technical analysis.
In snooker the pundits can tell you what a player
going to do. They can super-impose the path a ball is going to take before it's struck. In American football the technical analysis is bamboozling [to me but probably makes perfect sense to the enthusiast]. In athletics they can analyse the sectionals of a race while it's being run and predict what the final time will be, as near as dammit. In golf they can tell you how the player is going to strike the ball and where he's aiming to put it.
We don't have anything like that in racing. On the odd occasion they'll highlight one that looks outstanding in the parade ring or that went to post well but often far too late for people to act on it and get a bet on if that's what they want to do. Sometimes they'll tell us they strongly fancy something as it's being loaded. This, to me, is code for inside information they've agreed not to divulge until this point. That's not good enough.
Football is even worse and I still believe Match of the Day is responsible for most of English football's ills. The analysis is dreadful and it all started when they brought in that big fanny Alan Hansen. Before that there was no pretence towards knowledgeability but he became the master of stating the obvious with no meaningful analysis. Alan Shearer is even worse. I've watched youtube clips of Cruyff and other top managers talking about football and it's like a different sport altogether from we see on British TV. Martin O'Neill started talking sense and was soon dropped, presumably because it was too technical for the average viewer. Gordon Strachan has started dumbing down his input but can still throw in the odd brilliant bit of insight. I'm disappointed that Glen Hoddle doesn't offer more when he's got a gig. I read somewhere before he got the England job that he had a reputation among the elite as being a tactical and analytical genius. I'm not seeing it. For a year or so on BBC Scotland they had a tactics board the analysts would use to illustrate how play had developed or how it could have developed differently but it didn't last long. I think the viewers found it boring. As someone who was coached as much via a tactics board (by a former Scotland schoolboys coach) as on a pitch, I wanted more of it. I soaked up all that stuff like a sponge but unfortunately didn't have enough ability to put it into best effect on the pitch but I knew where I was
supposed to be and what I was
supposed to be doing
Graham Cunningham at least tried to promote sectional analysis before C4 lost the contract. He was too far ahead of his time because now "sectional splits" get a mention in the context of every other race on ITV.
I could go on.
(You fuckin do, I hear the cry.)