David Flatman Column: They might be two old boys, but I miss Lawro and Hansen

This column appears in the current edition of Sport magazine. , and follow on Twitter

When you think about it, watching sport on TV is a bit weird.

You get to see the game - which is not weird - then you sit and listen to a gaggle of so-called experts tell you what they think of the action. In order to be on there in the first place, a pundit, seemingly, should be either sufficiently eloquent or sufficiently famous.

And labelling a pundit as the latter is no insult. As a sports fan, if Paul Scholes or Eric Cantona were in the seat being asked about Stoke’s defensive set-piece organisation, or if Martin Johnson or Richie McCaw were offering their views on an Aviva Premiership breakdown, I would listen as intently as an arctic fox with the faint breaths of undersized prey in his pricked-up ears to whatever they said.

For me, though, the blend of notoriety, content and chemistry is vital - for, without any one of them, the concept falls over.

There are lots of other, perhaps less obvious, factors that can make or break a sports broadcast: dress sense is one. Too formal, and the audience could find it stuffy and difficult to relate. Too casual, and you all look like students, alienating the generation that took pride in its appearance.

Language is important, too, and for similar reasons. All pundits want to look clever, but nobody likes a smartarse. All pundits want people to understand and like their work, but speaking in too basic a manner can seem condescending - like you’re explaining things to a room full of children.

All of these things are adding up to make me nervous about Match Of The Day. First they binned Mark Lawrenson, probably because he looked like a Corrie character from the 1980s and offered comment with all the enthusiasm and vigour of a hibernating bear. His approach perhaps wasn’t snappy enough for the bods upstairs, but I thought he was brilliant and has been sorely missed since his exclusion.

In my view, this approach was Lawro’s best asset; he represented the antithesis of the media-trained generation. When asked his opinion he did not, like so many do these days, run a rapid risk assessment in his brain, wondering what he might say that could both sound sharp enough and offend no-one. He just answered, and if he didn’t think it was that important, he didn’t gesticulate and exaggerate to make it seem like it was. He was totally honest - totally comfortable in his own skin - and I miss him.

Alan Hansen will leave an even bigger hole. Never mind the immaculate side-parting and the shirt that was buttoned low enough to remind everyone that Barry Manilow was on tour. He is a brilliant, brilliant pundit.

Full of opinion with the voice and shine of a movie star, he is just as comfortable declaring Titus Bramble’s efforts diabolical as he is mocking his own oil-tanker turning circle from the good old days at Anfield (where he remains a god).

These are two old blokes who just like chatting about their game, but that’s all we ever wanted. Chemistry? Along with Des Lynam, they invented it.