|
Post by Big Jock on Sept 10, 2019 16:32:35 GMT
So did they win? The result, alas, does not matter. As long as the itk brigade, overly opionated, weird sector, soap box shouters and curiously strange contingent have a subject bang on about, nothing else matters Aye, i can hear it now in some proud dad's house in Fishponds loggin inta here....
"Hey Heather theres a whole thread on here about yer match Sunday, wow its even had 4,000 views and 100 replies!"
"Serious Dad? Hold on i'll be there in a minute. . ."
(Dad starts to read thread)
"Oh Fucck, don't bother my love, i umm, must have read it wrong, sorry . . . . "
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2019 17:08:51 GMT
We're not talking about one weekend though Gassy, that's the point. We're not talking about one set of games, we're talking about an ongoing push to promote women's football which has been at the expense of lower league football coverage. If you're a regular viewer of BBC Football website you'll see it is happening week in week out. L1 and L2's 'normal place' has been strategically relegated in recent years. Our fixtures, including the Championship, are now listed below WSL fixtures in another subtle yet deliberate attempt to promote coverage. There's an option to view exclusively Women's football news and no such option for Men's football. No prizes for guessing why. We're not talking about other sports here so there's no need to deflect the issue. People are calling out what is a blatant attempt to use football as a vehicle to push a social agenda. But why do you hate it? How is it at the expense of lower league football? We are still getting the exact same amount of coverage, but now the woman's game just gets more. Other than being moved down one space on The BBC Sport list, as has the Championship, how are getting less coverage? What did we have before, that was so much better? Btw, the reason it's been riding a (rightful) high, is straight after the World Cup. Chewbacca rightly posted the viewing figures to back it up. Have you seen that England Vs Germany women has already sold over 60,000 at Wembley? Clearly there is a need for it & people want to read it. Regarding deflection, I'm actually not. It's a valid point as to explaining why something that brings large crowds evidently gets media coverage. These things are pretty basic, not just in sport. Please tell me what is the social agenda? And why is it so bad? I don't hate anything Gassy, just take exception and strongly object to content being filtered in or out on the basis of political correctness. There's undoubtedly an agenda and targets at the BBC to have a certain amount of news stories on women's football within the main headlines. Clearly that's to the detriment of coverage on lower league football. You say we're getting the same amount of coverage, which is inaccurate. Over recent years lower league football news has been relegated and takes on far less prominence whilst seemingly anything vaguely related to the WSL and women's football in general will be pushed to the headlines. Historically a summary of lower league news was featured on the home screen which obviously was good news to promote it's existence. It also reflected the level of interest in engagement. You've stated 'something that brings large crowds evidently gets media coverage', yet conveniently leaving out the fact the media coverage superseded the 'large crowds' rather than the other way around. Have you seen the ticket prices for England Germany? The FA are following the WSL's move in practically giving away tickets. Good luck to them. This social agenda tends to evolve around the notion of equality of outcome and is based on the narrative that men have suppressed women and anything which is predominantly engaged with by one 'gender*' (*male only) is fundamentally bad and needs correcting. Hence football is the obvious target.
|
|
|
Post by Gas Go Marching In on Sept 10, 2019 17:15:58 GMT
But why do you hate it? How is it at the expense of lower league football? We are still getting the exact same amount of coverage, but now the woman's game just gets more. Other than being moved down one space on The BBC Sport list, as has the Championship, how are getting less coverage? What did we have before, that was so much better? Btw, the reason it's been riding a (rightful) high, is straight after the World Cup. Chewbacca rightly posted the viewing figures to back it up. Have you seen that England Vs Germany women has already sold over 60,000 at Wembley? Clearly there is a need for it & people want to read it. Regarding deflection, I'm actually not. It's a valid point as to explaining why something that brings large crowds evidently gets media coverage. These things are pretty basic, not just in sport. Please tell me what is the social agenda? And why is it so bad? I don't hate anything Gassy, just take exception and strongly object to content being filtered in or out on the basis of political correctness. There's undoubtedly an agenda and targets at the BBC to have a certain amount of news stories on women's football within the main headlines. Clearly that's to the detriment of coverage on lower league football. You say we're getting the same amount of coverage, which is inaccurate. Over recent years lower league football news has been relegated and takes on far less prominence whilst seemingly anything vaguely related to the WSL and women's football in general will be pushed to the headlines. Historically a summary of lower league news was featured on the home screen which obviously was good news to promote it's existence. It also reflected the level of interest in engagement. You've stated 'something that brings large crowds evidently gets media coverage', yet conveniently leaving out the fact the media coverage superseded the 'large crowds' rather than the other way around. Have you seen the ticket prices for England Germany? The FA are following the WSL's move in practically giving away tickets. Good luck to them. This social agenda tends to evolve around the notion of equality of outcome and is based on the narrative that men have suppressed women and anything which is predominantly engaged with by one 'gender*' (*male only) is fundamentally bad and needs correcting. Hence football is the obvious target. Well said. You could make an argument that promoting women's football is at the detriment of lower league clubs and another nail in the coffin for lower league clubs. Let's ignore that possibility though as we have to be "politically correct". Admittedly it wouldnt be the sole reason, but it could definitely contribute.
|
|
|
Post by chewbacca on Sept 10, 2019 17:51:38 GMT
I don't hate anything Gassy, just take exception and strongly object to content being filtered in or out on the basis of political correctness. There's undoubtedly an agenda and targets at the BBC to have a certain amount of news stories on women's football within the main headlines. Clearly that's to the detriment of coverage on lower league football. You say we're getting the same amount of coverage, which is inaccurate. Over recent years lower league football news has been relegated and takes on far less prominence whilst seemingly anything vaguely related to the WSL and women's football in general will be pushed to the headlines. Historically a summary of lower league news was featured on the home screen which obviously was good news to promote it's existence. It also reflected the level of interest in engagement. You've stated 'something that brings large crowds evidently gets media coverage', yet conveniently leaving out the fact the media coverage superseded the 'large crowds' rather than the other way around. Have you seen the ticket prices for England Germany? The FA are following the WSL's move in practically giving away tickets. Good luck to them. This social agenda tends to evolve around the notion of equality of outcome and is based on the narrative that men have suppressed women and anything which is predominantly engaged with by one 'gender*' (*male only) is fundamentally bad and needs correcting. Hence football is the obvious target. Well said. You could make an argument that promoting women's football is at the detriment of lower league clubs and another nail in the coffin for lower league clubs. Let's ignore that possibility though as we have to be "politically correct". Admittedly it wouldnt be the sole reason, but it could definitely contribute. Or can attract new people to our club, there’s 30 girls in our squad photo. Who’s to say any of those attended Rovers matches before? Maybe, if we show that they are part of our club they’ll come along to watch our men, maybe they’ll bring friends, family, maybe as we start youth groups we’ll have hundreds more people attracted to our club. Maybe.
|
|
|
Post by Gassy on Sept 10, 2019 18:02:26 GMT
But why do you hate it? How is it at the expense of lower league football? We are still getting the exact same amount of coverage, but now the woman's game just gets more. Other than being moved down one space on The BBC Sport list, as has the Championship, how are getting less coverage? What did we have before, that was so much better? Btw, the reason it's been riding a (rightful) high, is straight after the World Cup. Chewbacca rightly posted the viewing figures to back it up. Have you seen that England Vs Germany women has already sold over 60,000 at Wembley? Clearly there is a need for it & people want to read it. Regarding deflection, I'm actually not. It's a valid point as to explaining why something that brings large crowds evidently gets media coverage. These things are pretty basic, not just in sport. Please tell me what is the social agenda? And why is it so bad? I don't hate anything Gassy, just take exception and strongly object to content being filtered in or out on the basis of political correctness. There's undoubtedly an agenda and targets at the BBC to have a certain amount of news stories on women's football within the main headlines. Clearly that's to the detriment of coverage on lower league football. You say we're getting the same amount of coverage, which is inaccurate. Over recent years lower league football news has been relegated and takes on far less prominence whilst seemingly anything vaguely related to the WSL and women's football in general will be pushed to the headlines. Historically a summary of lower league news was featured on the home screen which obviously was good news to promote it's existence. It also reflected the level of interest in engagement. You've stated 'something that brings large crowds evidently gets media coverage', yet conveniently leaving out the fact the media coverage superseded the 'large crowds' rather than the other way around. Have you seen the ticket prices for England Germany? The FA are following the WSL's move in practically giving away tickets. Good luck to them. This social agenda tends to evolve around the notion of equality of outcome and is based on the narrative that men have suppressed women and anything which is predominantly engaged with by one 'gender*' (*male only) is fundamentally bad and needs correcting. Hence football is the obvious target. I wouldn't say £15 is really a giving away tickets. I don't really see how L1 coverage has got lower. BBC never wrote up articles like the Rovers website does. The briefly highlight what happened in the game. Women's football has only really been pushed during & since the women's World Cup, so I don't see how we've had less & less coverage from BBC 'over recent years' - in fact check this out: Southampton 2-3 Rovers news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/eng_div_2/8270971.stm Rovers 3-3 Accy www.bbc.com/sport/football/49533130Southampton/Rovers has 4 sentences of analysis. Rovers/Accy has 8 sentences. So double what we had in recent years. A genuine question: up until BBC put Championship, L1 & L2 one button further down on their website, how has BBC been 'over the recent years relegating and taking on far less prominence of lower league football, whilst seemingly anything vaguely related to the WSL & women football in general will be pushed to the headlines'? Up until the recent World Cup I can't say I've ever seen anything not The BBC site, never mind it relegating lower league football. I'm all up for a good moan about how the system is unfair & its all tailored to the big clubs etc, but to say women's football is screwing us over is just ludicrous IMO. GGMI says let's 'ignore a possibility for being PC', that's nice. I can just say 'let's make up a reason as to why & how we're getting screwed over, because we dont like women playing football' - wow, that's fun that. (PS, no falsenumber9 I dont think you hate women playing football, but you get the point im making)
|
|
|
Post by lpgas on Sept 10, 2019 18:26:28 GMT
City women's had 3041 fans which is far less than many L1 and L2 games including ours obviously. I'm for equality in some things but women's football is far far inferior product to men's. Fact. So should therefore get less coverage IMO. Also how real is most of the support in women's football at the minute? A lot of it is prawn sandwich supporters who fancy a day out. Womens football is not an inferior product. That's your opinion, but its not a fact. It's a different product altogether. It's like comparing F1 and Touring cars. It's both cars racing on a track, but its not really the same thing at all. Yes it is. 1. It is a race between motor vehicles powered by a petrol engine. 2. Both have drivers skilled at driving a car quickly on a track. 3. Both have followers who will watch for hours.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2019 19:15:43 GMT
I don't hate anything Gassy, just take exception and strongly object to content being filtered in or out on the basis of political correctness. There's undoubtedly an agenda and targets at the BBC to have a certain amount of news stories on women's football within the main headlines. Clearly that's to the detriment of coverage on lower league football. You say we're getting the same amount of coverage, which is inaccurate. Over recent years lower league football news has been relegated and takes on far less prominence whilst seemingly anything vaguely related to the WSL and women's football in general will be pushed to the headlines. Historically a summary of lower league news was featured on the home screen which obviously was good news to promote it's existence. It also reflected the level of interest in engagement. You've stated 'something that brings large crowds evidently gets media coverage', yet conveniently leaving out the fact the media coverage superseded the 'large crowds' rather than the other way around. Have you seen the ticket prices for England Germany? The FA are following the WSL's move in practically giving away tickets. Good luck to them. This social agenda tends to evolve around the notion of equality of outcome and is based on the narrative that men have suppressed women and anything which is predominantly engaged with by one 'gender*' (*male only) is fundamentally bad and needs correcting. Hence football is the obvious target. I wouldn't say £15 is really a giving away tickets. I don't really see how L1 coverage has got lower. BBC never wrote up articles like the Rovers website does. The briefly highlight what happened in the game. Women's football has only really been pushed during & since the women's World Cup, so I don't see how we've had less & less coverage from BBC 'over recent years' - in fact check this out: Southampton 2-3 Rovers news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/eng_div_2/8270971.stm Rovers 3-3 Accy www.bbc.com/sport/football/49533130Southampton/Rovers has 4 sentences of analysis. Rovers/Accy has 8 sentences. So double what we had in recent years. A genuine question: up until BBC put Championship, L1 & L2 one button further down on their website, how has BBC been 'over the recent years relegating and taking on far less prominence of lower league football, whilst seemingly anything vaguely related to the WSL & women football in general will be pushed to the headlines'? Up until the recent World Cup I can't say I've ever seen anything not The BBC site, never mind it relegating lower league football. I'm all up for a good moan about how the system is unfair & its all tailored to the big clubs etc, but to say women's football is screwing us over is just ludicrous IMO. GGMI says let's 'ignore a possibility for being PC', that's nice. I can just say 'let's make up a reason as to why & how we're getting screwed over, because we dont like women playing football' - wow, that's fun that. (PS, no falsenumber9 I dont think you hate women playing football, but you get the point im making) The game you quoted (England vs Germany) is £10 adults, £1 kids. It's as cheap as it's ever going to be and will obviously be a significant contributory factor in the 60,000 tickets sold. If you're a regular visitor to BBC Football's homepage you will have noticed the coverage of lower league football (not specifically Rovers) has less prominence. Trust me, women's football was pushed long before this World Cup and the analytics would back that up. Within the main headline section there's consistently been at least one story/article on Women's football which, considering their top flight average was below 900, is strange to say the least. It's almost like they've got an equality content threshold to reach? Whilst the sentences of match reports may have increased, the content is hidden behind links in a way it wasn't several years ago. Previously the homepage has a subsection on lower league football headlines, which tended to highlight managerial changes, transfers etc. It's fair to say, let's say, John Marquis' £2m transfer to Portsmouth in August would have been reported on the homepage in one form or another. Likewise Darryl Clarke's or Ryan Lowe's appointments at Walsall and Plymouth. Now it wouldn't get a mention and is a couple of clicks away. On the flip side, it's not uncommon to see a 'headline' (within top 10) story about an injury to an obscure female player where their club attracts less than 800 every week. The promotion of women's football on BBC Football is indisputable. I'm calling out the BBC and other media outlets on this, rather than pointing the finger at Women's football. Their players/clubs aren't screwing over lower league football, but I do believe the media (particularly the BBC) relegation of lower league football news and coverage isn't great. I also believe the prominence of women's football is motivated by a desire to be politically correct.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2019 19:33:37 GMT
I wouldn't say £15 is really a giving away tickets. I don't really see how L1 coverage has got lower. BBC never wrote up articles like the Rovers website does. The briefly highlight what happened in the game. Women's football has only really been pushed during & since the women's World Cup, so I don't see how we've had less & less coverage from BBC 'over recent years' - in fact check this out: Southampton 2-3 Rovers news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/eng_div_2/8270971.stm Rovers 3-3 Accy www.bbc.com/sport/football/49533130Southampton/Rovers has 4 sentences of analysis. Rovers/Accy has 8 sentences. So double what we had in recent years. A genuine question: up until BBC put Championship, L1 & L2 one button further down on their website, how has BBC been 'over the recent years relegating and taking on far less prominence of lower league football, whilst seemingly anything vaguely related to the WSL & women football in general will be pushed to the headlines'? Up until the recent World Cup I can't say I've ever seen anything not The BBC site, never mind it relegating lower league football. I'm all up for a good moan about how the system is unfair & its all tailored to the big clubs etc, but to say women's football is screwing us over is just ludicrous IMO. GGMI says let's 'ignore a possibility for being PC', that's nice. I can just say 'let's make up a reason as to why & how we're getting screwed over, because we dont like women playing football' - wow, that's fun that. (PS, no falsenumber9 I dont think you hate women playing football, but you get the point im making) The game you quoted (England vs Germany) is £10 adults, £1 kids. It's as cheap as it's ever going to be and will obviously be a significant contributory factor in the 60,000 tickets sold. If you're a regular visitor to BBC Football's homepage you will have noticed the coverage of lower league football (not specifically Rovers) has less prominence. Trust me, women's football was pushed long before this World Cup and the analytics would back that up. Within the main headline section there's consistently been at least one story/article on Women's football which, considering their top flight average was below 900, is strange to say the least. It's almost like they've got an equality content threshold to reach? Whilst the sentences of match reports may have increased, the content is hidden behind links in a way it wasn't several years ago. Previously the homepage has a subsection on lower league football headlines, which tended to highlight managerial changes, transfers etc. It's fair to say, let's say, John Marquis' £2m transfer to Portsmouth in August would have been reported on the homepage in one form or another. Likewise Darryl Clarke's or Ryan Lowe's appointments at Walsall and Plymouth. Now it wouldn't get a mention and is a couple of clicks away. On the flip side, it's not uncommon to see a 'headline' (within top 10) story about an injury to an obscure female player where their club attracts less than 800 every week. The promotion of women's football on BBC Football is indisputable. I'm calling out the BBC and other media outlets on this, rather than pointing the finger at Women's football. Their players/clubs aren't screwing over lower league football, but I do believe the media (particularly the BBC) relegation of lower league football news and coverage isn't great. I also believe the prominence of women's football is motivated by a desire to be politically correct. Did I read that Chelsea’s WSL game at Stamford Bridge attracted a crowd of 25,000 after 40,000 were given away free?
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Sept 10, 2019 19:38:18 GMT
Womens football is not an inferior product. That's your opinion, but its not a fact. It's a different product altogether. It's like comparing F1 and Touring cars. It's both cars racing on a track, but its not really the same thing at all. Yes it is. 1. It is a race between motor vehicles powered by a petrol engine. 2. Both have drivers skilled at driving a car quickly on a track. 3. Both have followers who will watch for hours. Mens football and Womens football. Both are 2 teams if 11 people. Both are kicking a ball around. Both have followers who will watch for hours. I think you completely missed the point of my post. I cant be bothered to explain it.
|
|
|
Post by Gas Go Marching In on Sept 10, 2019 19:55:43 GMT
Well said. You could make an argument that promoting women's football is at the detriment of lower league clubs and another nail in the coffin for lower league clubs. Let's ignore that possibility though as we have to be "politically correct". Admittedly it wouldnt be the sole reason, but it could definitely contribute. Or can attract new people to our club, there’s 30 girls in our squad photo. Who’s to say any of those attended Rovers matches before? Maybe, if we show that they are part of our club they’ll come along to watch our men, maybe they’ll bring friends, family, maybe as we start youth groups we’ll have hundreds more people attracted to our club. Maybe. Yes the gas girls but I'm clearly not talking about them. I'm talking about these WSL teams.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2019 20:05:02 GMT
On the subject of political correctness I see that in parliament Black Rod is now being played by a white female. What is the world coming to?
|
|
|
Post by socrates on Sept 10, 2019 20:24:25 GMT
31,000 watched Man City womens on Saturday while only 6500 watched us. Is it really unfair that they got more coverage? I don't buy this 'PC brigade stuffing it down our throats' nonsense. If you don't like women's football then scroll on. Don't even get me started on women pundits. If you can make a case of Lawrenson being a better pundit than Alex Scott then you're a genius. So a man thats been in TV broadcasting for years,has won the league title and old european cup with Liverpool shouldn't be on tv instead of a decent looking bird with only experience in the female game.Makes sense..😒😞😳 I’d rather have Alex Scott than mark Lawrenson every time.
|
|
|
Post by chewbacca on Sept 10, 2019 20:29:50 GMT
Or can attract new people to our club, there’s 30 girls in our squad photo. Who’s to say any of those attended Rovers matches before? Maybe, if we show that they are part of our club they’ll come along to watch our men, maybe they’ll bring friends, family, maybe as we start youth groups we’ll have hundreds more people attracted to our club. Maybe. Yes the gas girls but I'm clearly not talking about them. I'm talking about these WSL teams. You actually think that?
|
|
|
Post by Gas Go Marching In on Sept 10, 2019 20:37:09 GMT
Yes the gas girls but I'm clearly not talking about them. I'm talking about these WSL teams. You actually think that? I think so yes, when you have the BBC promoting it over the lower leagues. It can have an effect. As much as I dislike the media, they can be effective.
|
|
|
Post by chewbacca on Sept 10, 2019 20:45:29 GMT
I think so yes, when you have the BBC promoting it over the lower leagues. It can have an effect. As much as I dislike the media, they can be effective. Which clubs are going to steal our punters? I think we’re doing a good enough job of keeping fans away.
|
|
|
Post by Gas Go Marching In on Sept 10, 2019 21:00:53 GMT
I think so yes, when you have the BBC promoting it over the lower leagues. It can have an effect. As much as I dislike the media, they can be effective. Which clubs are going to steal our punters? I think we’re doing a good enough job of keeping fans away. It's more the potential general effect of prioritising WSL over EFL leagues 1 and 2 in particular. If that carries on, it could be detrimental. We are getting left behind, yes a big part of that is our fault but this is sort of thing won't help us IMO.
|
|
|
Post by chewbacca on Sept 10, 2019 21:10:51 GMT
Which clubs are going to steal our punters? I think we’re doing a good enough job of keeping fans away. It's more the potential general effect of prioritising WSL over EFL leagues 1 and 2 in particular. If that carries on, it could be detrimental. We are getting left behind, yes a big part of that is our fault but this is sort of thing won't help us IMO. The EFL sold its rights to Quest, the WSL to the BBC. The BBC is obviously going to advertise it’s product...
|
|
|
Post by warehamgas on Sept 10, 2019 22:03:22 GMT
31,000 watched Man City womens on Saturday while only 6500 watched us. Is it really unfair that they got more coverage? I don't buy this 'PC brigade stuffing it down our throats' nonsense. If you don't like women's football then scroll on. Don't even get me started on women pundits. If you can make a case of Lawrenson being a better pundit than Alex Scott then you're a genius. This topic has been done several times over on here and no doubt the arguments will be recycled in this thread. The fact is that women's football has received a disproportionate amount of coverage for a while now which is due to media attempting to promote the cause, openly in many cases. I personally feel there is a political element to this and it's understandable many are calling it out. When established media outlets attempt to promote selective social causes their credibility rapidly gets called into question. Good luck to the Gas Girls and the women's game in general. It doesn't interest me but wish them the best. Up until now perhaps it has received a disproportionate amount of coverage but I guess that often happens in a bid to promote and widen knowledge and publicity of a cause or anything. The FA have stated objectives to widen the appeal and participation of Women’s football as part of their vision and ethos so it’s not at all strange to see them trying to achieve their objectives. Likewise the BBC as a public service provider have a duty to promote and widen the attraction of Women’s football. In that you are probably right falsenumber9 there is a political element to it, that people are calling it out is probably not so right. I don’t think the BBC or the FA in promoting Women’s Football are promoting “selective social causes,” more a case of promoting the BBC Charter which has equality and diversity written into it as does the FA ethos and vision statement. Supporting or promoting causes which impact on 50% of the population isn’t too much of a stretch I wouldn’t have thought. I’d be surprised if they weren’t supporting or promoting something that effects half the population! That 31,000 turned up to see the Manchester derby and other attendances were also much higher together with the success of their World Cup shows that it has worked and there is a much increased interest in the game and people are responding. Great for everyone I would have thought. Like you fn9, it’s not my cup of tea but good luck to them. UTG!
|
|
|
Post by warehamgas on Sept 10, 2019 22:07:51 GMT
26.5m watched the 2018 Men's World Cup Semi-Final vs Croatia. 11.7m watched the 2019 Women's Semi-Final vs The US. 11.3m watched the 2019 Champions League Final. 9.6m watched the 2019 Men's Wimbledon Final. 8.3m watched the 2019 Cricket World Cup Final. 2.8m watched the 2019 British Grand Prix.
The Women's World Cup Semi Final was the most watched TV event of 2019 thus far.
Owed to the fact the Champions League Final wasn't on terrestrial of course... Yes, totally correct. Hide anything away on Sky, or any non terrestrial station and the total watching goes down. Put it on ITV or BBC and it will grow. I guess anyone looking to grow any game should aim for terrestrial at the start to grow the game. Such as the Women World Cup. It’s why cricket has shrunk hidden away on Sky. UTG!
|
|
|
Post by warehamgas on Sept 10, 2019 22:17:55 GMT
So a man thats been in TV broadcasting for years,has won the league title and old european cup with Liverpool shouldn't be on tv instead of a decent looking bird with only experience in the female game.Makes sense..😒😞😳 I’d rather have Alex Scott than mark Lawrenson every time. Are you still talking about football pundits? 😉 UTG!
|
|