The world of sports broadcasting and punditry is no longer the preserve of middle-aged white males. The glass ceiling was shattered a long time ago – and the industry has been enriched because of that.
Examples of women excelling in these roles are not hard to find. Last weekend in Rome, Gabby Logan delivered another masterclass in how to host and present live sport on TV.
Anchoring the BBC’s coverage of Scotland’s Six Nations game against Italy, she was superb as always. Articulate, intelligent, witty and insightful across a number of sports, Logan remains the gold standard and has long proven herself to be one of the very best in the business – male or female.
Laura Woods is another whose talent as a broadcaster has seen her smash so many barriers over the past 10 years or so.
What unites the likes of Logan and Woods is that they know how to lead a debate and shape a conversation with their pundits.
They are highly knowledgable and have risen to the top of their profession entirely on merit. Nothing has been handed to them.
Eni Aluko says she has been denied punditry opportunities despite winning more than 100 caps for England
Aluko claims Ian Wright’s presence as a pundit in women’s football is damaging and obstructive
Karen Carney is another female pundit who has excelled in covering men’s football. Likewise Izzy Christiansen. They invariably add value and enhance the coverage of whatever broadcast they are part of.
They are not shouty and nor do they seek to be overtly controversial. Instead, they are engaging, informative and articulate with their analysis.
It was most interesting to hear Woods speak earlier this week about the fallout from Eni Aluko’s latest comments.
In a long-running feud with Ian Wright, Aluko claimed that his presence as a pundit in women’s football was damaging and obstructive.
Citing a perceived lack of opportunities given to her in the media, particularly since her contract with ITV was not renewed, she insisted that coverage of women’s football should be ‘by women, for women’.
Aluko went on to claim that, had Wright been a true ally, he would have sacrificed his own position in order to give her more punditry gigs. That’s just a weird, twisted version of tokenism.
The 38-year-old chose to highlight the fact that, despite winning over 100 caps for England, she feels opportunities continue to be denied to her with regards to being a pundit in men’s football.
Responding on social media, Laura Woods wrote: ‘Caps don’t win automatic work and they don’t make a brilliant pundit either.
Aluko takes part in ITV coverage of the Lionesses with Wright and Laura Woods, far left
Wright and Karen Carney share a joke with Aluko during an ITV broadcast
‘The way you communicate, articulate yourself, do your research, inform your audience, how likeable you are and the chemistry you have with your panel are what makes a brilliant pundit.
‘”The women’s game should be by women for women” is one of the most damaging phrases I’ve heard. It will not only drag women’s sport backwards, it will drag women’s punditry in all forms of the game backwards.’
Woods was bang on the money. Wayne Rooney scored 53 goals in 120 caps for England. He was one of the best players of his generation, but he’s a lousy pundit who often struggles to string a sentence together.
Aluko has had ample opportunity in the men’s game. She has been a pundit at several major tournaments over recent years.
She believes that she was marginalised and sidelined come the end of those tournaments, and was never allowed to do TV work on a final.
The opportunities now look like they have dried up altogether, hence the reason for her latest round of media appearances this week, the latest of which saw her clash with Simon Jordan on talkSPORT.
Yet, here’s the thing. If Eni Aluko feels that her punditry appearances are drying up, it’s not because she’s a woman. It’s not because there’s some kind of conspiracy or societal prejudice against her.
Plainly, it’s because she just isn’t very good. She has made several high-profile blunders on live TV, many of which have been blown up on social media.
Eni Aluko, far right, argues with Simon Jordan on talkSPORT show hosted by Jim White
It’s not a good starting point for any pundit if they are factually incorrect and fail to offer any insight or analysis.
There’s also a sense of arrogance and entitlement to Aluko’s latest comments.
To demand that Wright, a long-standing advocate and supporter of women’s football, effectively gives up his job as an act of penance and hands it to her is absurd.
Football punditry is now more competitive than ever. In the age of instant reaction and judgment on social media, it is a meritocracy where platitudes and factual errors are quickly exposed.
How can Aluko claim that women’s football punditry should be monopolised by women and those who have played the game, while citing a perceived lack of opportunities for her to work in the men’s game?
That’s just double standards. As rightly pointed out by Woods, Aluko’s claims are actually hugely damaging to women’s football.
Whether she realises it or not, she has actually undermined the sort of diversity and progress that she purports to champion.
If you follow her claims to their natural conclusion, it would only strengthen the toxic narrative that female pundits are merely box-tickers.
At its heart, punditry is about insight, analysis and enhancing the viewer experience. Not filling a quota purely because of your gender.
Her comments are also damaging to all of the many excellent female pundits and broadcasters out there. The lack of self-awareness and self-reflection on her part is remarkable.
As the likes of Gabby Logan, Laura Woods and many others have shown, female broadcasters can and do rise to the very top of their field.
It’s about meritocracy and talent. Aluko continues to play the victim, but the reasons for her punditry gigs drying up lie far closer to home.
Henry Pollock’s a star, but will his temperament get the better of him at Murrayfield?
Love him or hate him, Henry Pollock is box-office entertainment on a rugby field.
His meteoric rise has seen him become England’s new poster boy after breaking through at Northampton with a series of stunning performances last season.
Already a British and Irish Lion at the tender age of just 21, the blond-haired back-row dynamo has the world at his feet.
Henry Pollock has become the England player that Scotland fans will love to hate
However, the Calcutta Cup clash at Murrayfield on Saturday is sure to test the temperament of this young firebrand.
Pollock will start on the bench and, whenever he comes on, Scotland fans are sure to have him in their sights.
Even when he’s on the sidelines warming up, the crowd will no doubt try to get under his skin.
With echoes of Will Carling, he comes across as the type of character who will revel in his role as the fixture’s new pantomime villain.
Loud, cocky and brash, Pollock also has an abundance of talent. But this will be a test of his mentality as much as anything else.
There were times during last summer’s Lions tour when his temperament got the better of him.
He focused his energy a little too much on noising up the Wallabies, to the extent that it was actually to the detriment of his own team.
If he starts giving it the big ‘un, which he almost certainly will at some point, who in the Scotland team will stand up to him?
Tommy Freeman, above left, and Pollock celebrate during last weekend’s win over Wales
When England try to rattle Scotland by playing mind games at Murrayfield, it doesn’t tend to go well for them.
Look what happened in the infamous tunnel bust-up between Ryan Wilson and Owen Farrell in 2018.
If Pollock sparks more argy-bargy on Saturday, Scotland need to meet fire with fire. Their best chance of success against a resurgent England is to feed off that emotion.
Pollock is only at the start of his career. Over the next decade or so, he will be the player that Scotland supporters love to hate.
He was described by England team-mate Jamie George as ‘a brilliant idiot’ recently.
Let’s not kid ourselves, though. He’s a player we would all love to have in our own team, wouldn’t we?
