WED, 2:45PM ET
LIV0
REAL3
WED, 2:45PM ET
AND1
ARS2
WED, 2:45PM ET
OLY1
JUV0
WED, 2:45PM ET
GAL0
BVB4
WED, 2:45PM ET
ATL5
MAL0
WED, 2:45PM ET
LEV2
ZEN0

Like a Zoo! (EPL Talk Review Podcast)

Some strange actions in the Premier League this weekend, made even more bizarre by the reactions to them. To discuss this, the panel take a look at the best and worst of the action.

Credit to Wenger? Credit to his team? Credit to creativity?

Plenty of chatter about race, in so many way and so the pod dive in. Newcaslte, LFC, United and Stoke also play their part. What of Mourinho? Let’s Talk Soccer, World:

EPL Talk: @epltalk

Kartik: @kkfla737

Kristan: @kheneage

Matt: @mattcrduncan

Morgan: @Morgan_Green

Laurence: @lozcast

Here are the different ways you can listen to the EPL Talk Podcast:

Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Like a Zoo! (EPL Talk Review Podcast)

  1. Chris says:

    “Anyone here follow ArsenalFan TV?”

    “..No, we don’t give a s**t about Arsenal.. We just talk about them because we have to.”

    “I get a lot of Arsenal tweets and I wish they would stop.. F**k that team.”

  2. MG says:

    “It got a deflection”

    yeah, two flicks from Giroud, if that’s what we call ‘deflections’ nowadays.

    an exceptional and special goal. no sense in trying to belittle it.

    • James Coleman says:

      Good point MG. There was no deflection. It was a flick by Wilshere that looked like a deflection off the Norwich defender.

      I made the same mistake the first 3 times I saw it. Truly exceptional.

      • Laurence McKenna says:

        I don’t think that I was clear enough guys. My mistake, I love the goal: the initial reaction on Twitter was that it was deflected. That didn’t come through in the tone. My bad.

        Thanks,

        Laurence

  3. Dust says:

    I checked in again on the pod…

    What kind of a review of the Spurs game was that?

    “Their quality cancelled each other out”…what? It wasn’t a draw….villa were literally kicking out all game long as they became more and more frustrated with their 37% possession.

    It wasn’t close, Villa had maybe 2 chances of any note, 1 header from Benteke, but it was no more clear cut than siggy’s header miss in the first half.

    Démbèle came on and made Benteke look like a YTS trainee as he disposed him off the ball in our box. It could’ve quite easily been 3 or 4 nil.

    It was the only game on Sunday & got a couple of mins of poor analysis….nothing on the impact jan made at LB, the omission of Eriksen, Lamela, return of Lennon or more importantly the tweak on minute 30 by AVB holding Sandro back and pushing Paulinho forward and it’s effect, 5 mins later Townsend scores & while it was a cross missed by Soldado, it was cleverly left by Holtby and followed up by Paulinho just in case Guzman got a hand as we pressed further forward. Paulinho driving forward and setting up Soldado’s effortless quick combo & strike to seal the game.

    That tweak completely changed the complexity of the game, but because it wasn’t a substitution so it wasn’t noticed. Except by Martino on NBC that is. AVB has been critiqued a lot for his alleged lack of ability to make changes to positively impact a game, yesterday was a great example of if you know what you’re looking at then perhaps their is more to a game than just looking at substitutions. Great job Martino, not so much epl podcast.

    • COYS_USA1 says:

      Couldnt agree more. It seems more and more like the only games that get talked about are the games that their supporters of. Man city, Chelsea, and Sunderland are more in depth breakdowns than any other teams.

      I still enjoy listening just wish there was greater coverage for all teams not just Spurs.

  4. Pakapala says:

    Really disappointed by the way the crew covered the “monkey” story. Just as disappointed about the handle of the “FA Commission not being diverse” story. In both cases you omitted big essential parts of the stories.
    For the letter that Heather Rabbatts wrote, somehow it escaped you that she did bring the subject directly to the board only to be ignored and considered non essential.
    As for the “monkey” story itself: You might want to learn more about it before covering it. Stories like that though trivial maybe to some of you are serious issues that cannot be covered just with lip service and backhanded jokes.

    from The Guardian:
    “A lot of people seem to be under the belief that Hodgson went through the whole Nasa space-monkey joke. Actually, it was more or less just the “feed the monkey” line at first, mistakenly thinking Chris Smalling, Andros Townsend and the other players would know the full version. As they didn’t, it should not really be a surprise if it did actually cause offence. Kick It Out, with a direct line into the relevant players, certainly has information that is the case and, as such, deserves better than to be cast as meddlers.”

    http://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2013/oct/19/roy-hodgson-not-racist-monkey

    • insert name here says:

      Do you really believe Hodgson was been racist when he told that story. You do realise that the word monkey isnt always racist right?? It was a bad choice of words used by someone who clearly was so unracist that the double meaning of the word hadnt even entered his head… Do you really believe the England manager would deliberately be so blatantly racist.. I mean if he were a racist then he’d certainly hid that dont you think. The fact that the player in question said he thinks its a non story should be enough for you. The lads covered the story well.. The real mess up on the POD was the prediction of a 0-0 in the Fulham game.

      • Pakapala says:

        You might want to learn how to read my comment first before replying to it. Because nowhere in there did I say that I believe Roy is a racist. Nor was I talking about Roy at all. I talked about how disappointed I was about the way the podcast crew covered the story with little knowledge of what actually happened in there. Reading would help you a lot.

        • Laurence McKenna says:

          Hi Pakapala,

          Thanks for the feedback. I appreciate it. I also appreciate that it could be a sensitive subject for some people. With regards to Heather Rabbatts, we had spoken in the pre-pod about her approach to the media and neglected to mention the wider story: though I was aware that she has approached the FA before. We might try to make this clearer in the future.

          With regards to Roy: I think it’s quite a simple point. After Roy explains himself then surely this is open and shut? If there are more details that we aren’t aware of then that’s another matter. No one has cast Kick It Out as meddlers in this, but I certainly feel like some people treat this as a way of politically maneuvering themselves or serving another purpose. Of course, it is right for Kick It Out to comment on a racial issue like this but if it’s been sorted out then surely we can look back at the circus and go through that. Like we said on the podcast: maybe Roy has suffered from being older and referencing history. What is your angle on it?

          Cheers,

          Laurence

        • insert name here says:

          I did read your comment and I read it again there and to be honest you seem to be saying nothing. Sitting on the fence. If you had read my comment then youll see that no where did I claim you said anything. I asked you questions to which you didnt answer. Like I said the player in question said it was a non story and that should be the end of it. I felt the lads covered it well. In fact I think its had too much media coverage. Now what do you think??

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>