Research, anyone?

Nobody should be surprised to hear Eamon Dunphy trying to say something provocative on RTE's coverage of the Germany-Portugal game last night. I suppose the only surprise was that it did not concern Portugal's Cristiano Ronaldo (presumably, he's exhausted that thread). Instead, Dunphy questioned Chelsea's decision to hire Luis Felipe Scolari as their manager.

What form did this criticism take? Did Dunphy spend a week doing research and compile a dossier,as he famously did when arguing against Terry Venables' candidacy for the Ireland manager's job? No. Instead, he extrapolated far too much from one isolated incident in the game, namely, Germany's second goal, a Klose header from a free kick which was very poorly defended.

'This fella [Scolari] could be a con man' was Dunphy's judgment. Really? What else do you know about Scolari, Eamon? I presume Chelsea did a little more research into Scolari's credentials when giving him his £27 million contract than Dunphy did before making his declaration. Sure, defending set plays is a basic prerequisite for building a sound team. It seems crass of Dunphy, in his capacity as an 'expert', providing 'expert analysis', would pass judgment based on one incident.

RTE's football coverage is the best, because the panellists are never afraid to call things like they are. The discussions between Dunphy, Graham Souness, John Giles, and occasionally Liam Brady, can make for television gold, given the right subject matter. And as a rule, I find Dunphy's pantomime villain posturing amusing. However, every now and again something like the aforementioned will crop up, and I find myself wondering aloud if ITV are really that bad after all...