Match of the Day 2 (2004– ) User Reviews

It's watchable, but it's on the decline.

[Sleepin_Dragon · 6/10 · 4 March 2021]

I still watch it, but it just doesn't seem to be as good as it used to be, is it just me, or do some of the pundits just not have any sort of clue what they're talking about?

Mark Chapman is great, but it's The BBC, so I'm sure it won't be long before he's replaced.

I know I shouldn't say this, but the content on Sky Sports is just infinitely superior.

It's alright still, but watch clips from the early years, it was a riot back then, now it's just irritating. 6/10.

Oh dear oh dear

[Koolski · 26 November 2005]

While the main Match of the Day programme has retained its classic formula, this shorter, "cooler" version has plenty of room for improvement. The sections featuring alleged comedian Kevin Day are utterly pointless, and should simply be replaced by showing us the goals. Which is the point of the show after all.

In fact, MOTD2 appears to be trying to be different from the original just for the sake of it, when all they need to do is just show five minutes of each game at the weekend and be done with it. Don't bother with analysis (it's too short for that) or crass attempts at being amusing.

Worst of all though is the mere existence of the presenter - one Adrian Chiles. It seems that someone once told this guy he was amusing - and he unfortunately believed it. Every line stinks, every matey comment is cringeworthy. Hopefully word will filter through to the BBC and they'll replace him with a more conventional presenter for next season.

All in all, a mediocre effort.

It's Fun, But the Original is Better

[rohanumpleby-34057 · 6/10 · 14 August 2023]

Yes it's no secret that the Saturday installment of the show is infact better, with more chaos pursuing and more matches, which equalls more Entertainment. Match of the Day 2 only has a few matches, less jokes, and offers a lot less Entertainment. It's not a bad thing, just the first one is better, and the Chemistry between the pundits are really showcased in the original, the same can't be said for the predecessor. Not that the Punditry is bad, I just think an hour of two matches is abit dull, and could easily be toned down to 10 minutes less or so. With that said, it's a breath of fresh air, and honestly a lot simpler then the original. Which is a good thing, and can be a bad thing, as we've already established.

The Games are still Entertaining to watch, just less so. BUT with that said, the punditry is still top notch. And Mark Chapman offers something different to what Gary Lineker offers us. He's a bit quiter, and is streight to the point, still showcasing that he knows what he's on about. And it's an inspired choice from the BBC. Mark Chapman, should be the main pundit for awhile, his commentary is pretty good, and he's got a charming personality. That makes jokes with the other pundits from time to time. The show itself is above average, with not much Entertainment value being provided, 2 matches which is stretched out to an 1hr is overly long, and doesn't fit the narrative very well. They are trying to be simpler, and it works, but it should also be shorter in my books. As they talk for too long sometimes, and the episode hinges on that. And for me it doesn't work, it feels Boring in places. They should perhaps talk less. But the analysis of the game is still fun, it should be rectified with making it shorter, but on the whole they aren't bad punditrys. A fine, short and simpler version of the original Match of the Day!

The Reviewers on this are right, it's by no means bad, far from it. Just sort of in that good category, and will hopefully stay lingering on that. Tonely it's inconsistent, with the fast paced matches, and the slow analysis. But if this does change then it's guaranteed to be a solid 7. It still is great to see the prem ensue with giving us great action. And providing us with good punditry.