Naturally, we start with football as we have an abundance of pundits to choose from.

They seem to want to be very analytical. Analyse, analyse, analyse. The problem is that some of them find it difficult to talk fluently, let alone analyse.

I never thought I would agree with Roy Keane whose actions at times as a player I despised, but he has been criticised for being outspoken on the subject of ex-players becoming commentators.

"I would rather go to the dentist," he said, disparagingly. "You're sitting there and they're trying to sell something that is not there. They are brainwashing people."

Keane is right, BBC and Sky hand out jobs like confetti to ex-footballers and as there is so much now on television, there are more of them regurgitating the same tired cliches about 4-5-1 and diamond formations.

I'm sure Fabio Capello would voice his ideas far more succinctly and simply, but then TV has time to fill.

Garth Crooks has to be my favourite with his efforts to sensationalise the most basic of questions through the tone of his voice – when Crooks asks a question, it's as if his whole life depends on it,

Sky, meanwhile, have made a mess of the tennis commentators they have chosen. Greg Rusedski tops the bill in this respect, ably supported by Barry Cowan and Sam Smith.

Ray French got it badly wrong when interviewing England coach Tony Smith after the Australia match when he apparently intimated that Smith's team lacked commitment.

Of course there are one or two who are worth listening to. Mike Stevenson is passionate and perceptive while David Lloyd and his cricket colleagues are witty and talk sense.

My dad and I were always critical of Sir Trevor Brooking's commentaries.

That was until we were seated next to him at an awards dinner and found him very engaging.

From then on...great bloke.

Don't believe everything you read!

Ends