Sutton and Stewart’s shock jock coverage is boring and tiresome, we deserve better than a pantomime show

The weekend’s Old Firm game may not have been a classic in terms of technical quality but as the title race draws to a conclusion a dramatic 3-3 draw with penalties and VAR incidents drew a SPFL record viewership of 1.4 million people.

The only shame is that they had to endure Chris Sutton on commentary with many more suffering Michael Stewart’s analysis elsewhere.

Punditry has gone tabloid. It is no longer about insight and analysis in the clickbait online world from which so many of consume our information. It is about generating viral clips and stoking faux controversy to maximise engagement rather than informing or entertaining viewers.

And it’s absolutely chronic.

Sky’s English Premier League coverage has drifted down this route a little with the Neville vs Carragher head-to-head and similar however if there are depths to be plumbed then Scottish football will sink quicker than the pitch at Dens Park. At least in England they get the opinions of Champions League winners and legends of the game.

We get nobodies like Michael Stewart whose commentary on Scottish football would have you wishing you hadn’t been blessed with the gift of hearing.

So here we have a showcase fixture, a record viewership and yet we surround it with fake, ill-informed coverage that detracts from the enjoyment of the product itself. Quite why broadcasters have decided this is the way to go I’ll never quite understand but here we are, sacrificing quality and intellect for clicks.

The style of coverage that is now all too common place, and the individuals used to execute it, really is an insult to the intelligence of the public. It’s as if they think we can’t understand nuanced and sensible debate or that we’d lose interest without the Punch & Judy cartoon that they’ve chosen to inflict upon us each week.

I must confess, half the time I don’t even watch the half-time “analysis” of games – and I’m being generous with that word – but sadly there’s no escape from the often dreadful co-commentary.

It’s little wonder fan media is thriving. Some of the Rangers coverage from our own support is far superior to the official mainstream output. Even here at Four Lads we have thousands of readers, listeners and followers as we embrace new communication methods and try to cover our beloved club as normal fans rather than just manufacturing controversial opinions for a few cheap clicks.

People want real opinions, debates and analysis. They don’t want talked down to or treated like imbeciles.

In Chris Sutton we have someone who is the Jekyll and Hyde of the punditry world. South of the border he is sensible, measured and almost normal. But the minute he covers Scottish football he puts on the green-tinted spectacles, the clown mask and performs his role as the classroom idiot for his employers, for that’s seemingly what they want.

He is a performing actor who is willing to make himself look like a moron in exchange for his pay-packet, abandoning the semi-reasonable persona he shows to England and becoming nothing more than a biased cheerleader whom we must endure.  

Michael Stewart on the other hand doesn’t even benefit from the normal alter-ego of Sutton. The failed Rangers trialist – not that he’s bitter – has to be one of the worst commentators anywhere in sport. Like Sutton he is unquestionably biased, so much so he was called out by Tom English on this weekend’s show, however Stewart also makes the fatal mistake of misjudging his own intelligence.

As a combination this is particularly toxic and results in a level of insight that actually has you feeling your own brain cells decaying as you listen.

What is remarkable for both, but particularly Stewart, is that they are allowed to comment freely on our game without displaying even a basic understanding of the rules. While Sutton will argue black was green, Stewart will simply state ‘that’s not a foul because I don’t think it should be’, ignoring the actual laws of the game and replacing him with his own view of what they might be in his little fantasy world. And he gets paid for it.

The reaction to the Rangers penalty at the weekend has been typically hysterical with the gruesome twosome at the forefront of the frothing. A correct decision, verified by I think almost every former referee who has commented, has resulted in endless moonhowling and tears. What’s new right?

Michael Stewart said the officiating was ‘embarrassing our game’ with Sutton also stating that the Rangers penalty would be ‘embarrassing’ if awarded during the in-game VAR check.

No gentlemen, what’s embarrassing is paid professionals who are either too lazy or too thick to understand the rules. It was so bad even Graeme Souness called out the blinkered commentary of a decision which anywhere else wouldn’t even be a debate. And he was bang on.  

Stewart tweeted out “I do wonder if Nick Walsh didn’t see the initial touch of the ball, hence why he never showed it” (he did show it, FYI). He reiterated this “he got the ball, he got the ball” remark elsewhere as if that was somehow the only consideration that meant it could not possible be a penalty.

Newsflash: touching the ball does not mean it isn’t a foul and Stewart rather amusingly had a community note correcting his idiocy on Twitter. Amateur players know this so quite why former top-flight player and now paid commentators don’t know this beggars belief. In Sutton’s case it’s quite deliberate, in Stewart’s it’s simply a lack of brain cells.

You cannot glance the ball, barely changing its direction, and then proceed to raise your leg, kick your opponent above the knee and bring them down and then claim that’s a legal tackle when the ball is still free to be played. You only need to look at the penalty awarded for the foul on Gabriel Jesus by Tariq Lamptey last week which in itself was less obvious than the foul on Silva.

Yes the Brighton defender touched the ball (even more so than Johnston) but he then wipes out the attacker in an ‘unfair’ manner. And again, almost every ex-referee has confirmed it was a penalty but what do they know?

But we already understand that Rangers cannot win a game or get a result without it being unmerited cheating.

Stewart’s coverage of Rangers’ game at Easter Road really should be held up as a classroom exhibit in how not to cover a game of football for any aspiring journalists or broadcasters.

Even if you hate Rangers – and he won’t be the only one who does – to show your bitterness so openly when supposedly being a professional really hints at the depths of those scars.

It would be funny if it didn’t make our ears bleed every bloody week.

There are some decent pundits in Scotland. Christ, even Neil Lennon has displayed more balance and measure than the Chuckle Brothers discussed above and we all know how he feels about us. It’s about time we actually looked for quality output, not comedy output.  

Fans deserve to hear grown-up discussions around the game, the decisions and, god forbid, even the tactics used by both teams. Instead the clickbait tabloid approach remains and so do the stooges who provide it.

It would actually be interesting to hear Sutton’s opinions on football if he took the same approach as he does in England. Down there he is actually worth listening to and he could add to the coverage of Scottish football instead of detracting from it. Alas, I’m not sure we’ll ever see that side either due to engrained bias/bitterness or because his employers want the more outspoken, controversial persona we see up here.

As for Michael Stewart, well, I’m not sure there are any redeeming features. He is perhaps the epitome of what’s wrong with much of the coverage of our national sport. Whether it be ignorant, ill-informed analysis or the shock-jock social media outbursts he adds absolutely nothing for listeners or viewers. If you have to attract attention in such a manner then it can only mean you’ve got nothing worth listening to otherwise.

Scottish football might not have the glamour and riches of the English Premier League or the Champions League however you only have to look at the weekend for drama, excitement and a product that still attracts a huge viewership. While we sometimes have a chuckle at the “cannae beat the Cinch” patter for the occasional self-deprecating laugh, it’s about time those actually showcasing our game gave it a bit more respect, starting with the type of coverage they aim to provide and the people they use to provide it.

So, dear broadcasters, if you have any sense, please give the viewers coverage and opinions which are worthy of their time and attention. Prioritise the overall experience rather than the creation of content for social media hits and clicks. And for goodness sake, get some of these idiots off our screens and airwaves.