I'm 50% of the way with you here. I like Anka a lot, he's thoughtful and calm. Just can't take to Mitten, dunno why.
Is it because he tries so hard to be neutral fence sitter?
He can hardly ever criticize any player without then praising them.
Or how he almost always answers questions with questions? Again to avoid being concrete.
I get that he wants to maintain his wide network of friends. He is a popular man and respected journalist.
But it also comes at the cost of hardly ever being able to offer any real, hard opinions on anything. He just waffles and puts his feet in both camps. At most he will say: "It is not good enough.", and that's him being harsh. But then he will likely follow it up with why it's actually not that bad, or something completely contradictory to what he just said.
I like him as a person. But as a podcaster it's just very predictable and meaningless to listen to someone you know will almost always temper their words and not present their truly honest opinions.
I really like Anka on the podcast. Even though he talks in a quirky manner, he is by far the most tactically and technically knowledgeable on the pod. He can actually analyze and breakdown performances and tactics, unlike the rest of the crew. And he is usually very honest, both when praising and being critical. Without him, it would just be waffling.
Whitwell is a fantastic journalist with great knowledge of the corporate workings of United, but his ball knowledge is not his strong suit. It's usually very superficial analysis of the actual games from him. So Anka is really why the pod works for me, seeing what's happening on the pitch is the meat and potatoes of everything.
Also the banter between them is good. They are obviously good at playing off of each other with the gentle mocking and such. That makes it a fun listen.