We are often told in today's society that feelings can surpass facts and so those feelings are so very important and defining. But now we have invested commentators in the game and showed a certain degree of emotion, it seems that we don't want that either!
I refer to the criticism aimed at Rio Ferdinand and Robbie Savage for their very exciting response – conveniently recorded by a cam from a commentators – to the comeback victory of Manchester United in Europe.
Clive Tyldesley has led the dissidents and compared the mainstream broadcaster with a fans TV channel.
I'm not sure if I agree with him. The insight that someone has by playing the game at the highest level, whether it is Ferdinand, Gary Neville or Jamie Carragher, is not the same as some of what is observations from a range of fank channels; Of the type of language used for their incoherent nonsense offered as an analysis.
I know who I prefer to listen to and do not see why observed impartiality is always required, just because the event is on traditional television instead of YouTube?
Someone was offended by boxing commentator Harry Carpenter when he shouted in a moment of spontaneity: “Go in Frank,” while Bruno Mike Tyson hit with a big right hand.
As excellent a commentator as Clive is, observations are possible in any dissatisfaction by being replaced on ITV and the loss of observed relevance, or perhaps that is simply cynicism on my part.
His opinion seems to be that former players must be seen instead of hearing if they show bias towards the clubs for which they used to play.
I don't see it that way. There is already enough paralysis due to analysis and football is steeped in emotion.
In an ideal world you get objectivity and balanced opinions, but our sport is tribal and people make the exception because of it, even to Neville that does not sound objective if he calls a goal for Man United.
Don't get me wrong, there are times when Neville becomes tiring, usually by turning his views on the glazers into a constant reading; The United owners blame everything, from the corner flag that is not correctly placed to the way the team plays.
Maybe I don't always want to listen to that, but the dynamics in the studio between players of different relationships can be fascinating.
Who could forget Graeme Souness there who was there after Liverpool Man United hit 7-0 and tried to suggest Neville that it wasn't that bad.
Souness' Response from 'what in the hell is wrong with you' – people want to see that!
Some people, and not necessarily Lyon fans, will be upset by Ferdinand and Savage's Histrionics because they always want impartiality and neutrality to even when a team comes back from 4-2 to win 5-4.
But I think most viewers are fairly ambivalent. If Clive feels that fans is replicating TV and wants to send it in a story, well, unlike most of his game commentary that is well supported, these observations are not.
Once John Motson or Kenneth Wolstenholme would comment for him, and that was it. They had no specific expertise firsthand, apart from telling who passed to whom and descriptively see what was in front of them.
Today's co-commentators have won and collected qualifications of a different level by playing the game.
I am sure that most television viewers and radio listeners can see the weeds through and tell what a good comment is, and what no objectivity and steer in the unhearable.
There may be reasons to feel irritated by Neville and Ferdinand, but not necessarily because they are biased and one -dimensional.
If you are going to condemn Rio as a fool, this would be due to statements such as 'Ollie's at the Wheel' that did not get older last week, instead of the roar of a Late United winner.
The only area where Clive has a point is that these excited reactions that we see on television must be authentic. Carpenter's line over Bruno that Tyson hit worked because it was not artificial.
We can give Rio and Savage the benefit of the doubt because the United comeback was extraordinary.
We have all seen the cutaways of people like Ian Wright up and down when the female team of England's team score, but eventually if TV companies push it too far, they are assessed by the viewer.
I realize that Sky Neville sent a memo long ago that said that everything he said was good, but it is not and most people will not subscribe to that vision, even if he does!
Common sense usually prevails in football like in life – as we saw in this week's British Supreme Court that a woman is determined by biological sex.
When it comes to how our sport is broadcast, quality always comes to the surface. If the football 'consumer' decides that Robbie Savage – just like an example – acts his emotion instead of being real, it will not endure the test of time and people will not be long in their positions.
But to try to castrate the passion on the screen in the game for the Charade of impartiality is the message of a fool, or perhaps we all really want an Mr. Cholmondeley-Warner approach to comment. Somehow I doubt it.
Watch out for temptation of permanent rashford -deal
Speaking of Bias, I hope that my FA Cup Tip Aston Villa was not recorded this weekend and that Crystal Palace will continue to have the bad eye about them, after he has won three of their last four meetings.
I am also aware of the irony as he, because I have been an avid critical observer of Marcus Rashford, the one who kills us my boys' team.
Rashford appeared in Villa Park after he had left Manchester United. The least he could have done was running around for them instead of recording podcasts that are played for soft music with a 'woe is me' mentality.
I predicted that Villa would get a fit and would fire Rashford. He had no choice if he wanted to show New England manager Thomas Tuchel what he could do with a world cup on the horizon.
He had some good competitions for Unai Emery, also on the Etihad on Tuesday evening, and was able to have another one in Wembley on Saturday. But I would still be wary to change a permanent transfer of his loan.
Assuming Manchester United wants a fee of £ 40 million to help alleviate financial problems and Rashford does not want to drop his £ 320k-per-week contract, it is an investment too far.
Rashford has been good in the short term, but who allows him to him for three or four years, would leave Villa with the same challenges that United had, despite the change of geography.
The problems he had in Manchester would eventually manifest in Birmingham-which does not mean that I don't fear what he can do to in the semi-final!
Blowing trent softened
While Liverpool fans are waiting for the future of Trent Alexander-Arnold, I think Liverpool can afford to feel relaxed.
By keeping Virgil van Dijk in the dressing room next season and Mo Salah on the field, losing Trent is a sacrifice with which they can live.