Ah so many clubs, so many manager so which would suggest and the evidence backs that suggestion, that whilst he may have had talent, he didn't make the best use of it and hence why I wouldn't consider him a "damn good footballer". Unless of course you can point to evidence of his achievements that warrant this description?
Now Roy Keane for example was a damn good footballer and also not a character I admire. So yes I don't disagree that one does not have to admire the artist to admire the art, in Barton's case unfortunately his character hindered the expression of his art to an extent I would argue he was slightly above average at best.
Suffice it to say that the number of games he played at the top level suggests he was a lot more than ‘average’. In addition Redknapp described him as the ‘inspiration’ behind QPR’s victory over us at Wembley and McClaren capped him for England.
Not a patch on Keane, but few were and, as you say, both unlikeable characters although Keane seems to have improved where Barton, imo, just seems to have become more pretentious and delusional.
Beyond that we’ll have to differ.
I'd say Barton was a Pollock who sometimes let his clear talent come out to play, but that talent was wasted in the personality containing it.
Pollock seeming to be a spell check hybrid of pillock and *******
Talking about Keane, with the crap Manure are turning out these days I think it could be quite entertaining in their dressing room if he was playing now! I reckon there'd be one or two🤕🤕🤕!!
I don't enjoy pundits commentating on games at all, male or female, so it doesn't bother me what their "experience" is. Even with my school day / Sunday league / 5-aside experience, I know how to kick and head a ball, I don't need an expert lecturing me about it during a game.
Stick to telling me who the players are, some interesting stats, and a bit of adrenaline when things get exciting, and I'm happy.