ITV broadcaster Mark Pougatch says football commentators should never use the word ‘disaster’ live, citing Hillsborough’s 37th anniversary and calling colleagues to do much better.
Mark Pougatch has sparked a fresh debate in football media after arguing that broadcasters should never utter the word “disaster” when discussing a goal going in.
His point is simple, but loaded with emotion: language matters—especially when the sport is still wrestling with past tragedies.. Writing on X on Saturday evening. the ITV star urged colleagues to “do much better” and claimed “football reporters should never ever. ever. ever use the word ‘disaster’ in relation to giving a goal away.”
The timing was also central to the reaction.. Saturday marked the 37th anniversary of the Hillsborough disaster. when 97 Liverpool supporters died during the Reds’ FA Cup semi-final against Nottingham Forest on 15 April 1989.. For many fans. Hillsborough isn’t a distant footnote; it remains a reference point for how football should speak about safety. grief. and accountability.
In his post. Pougatch linked the everyday. match-day use of “disaster” to the wider historical weight of the term—insisting it is insensitive to treat it as interchangeable with a moment of poor defending.. He added that the tragedy has been formally revisited over time. including through an inquest process that concluded the victims were unlawfully killed and that fans were not responsible for causing the disaster.
That argument is now colliding with a familiar counterpoint from parts of the audience: whether banning a word is ever realistic. and whether context should do the work.. Some replies from fans pushed back. suggesting it’s possible for “disaster” to be used descriptively in a match context. even if the meaning of the word also exists in tragedy.
But Misryoum readers will recognise why Pougatch’s intervention lands: broadcasters often operate on tight instincts—quick reactions. strong phrasing. and the need to communicate drama immediately.. In that rush, strong language becomes habit.. Calling a defensive lapse a “disaster” can feel harmless inside a football bubble. yet it risks pulling viewers away from remembrance on days when the sport’s real consequences are impossible to ignore.
There’s also a broader ethical question underneath the spat.. Broadcast journalism is still trying to balance entertainment value with responsibility. and Hillsborough has become one of the key markers for that responsibility.. For families and survivors. words used on ordinary match nights are not “just words”—they contribute to the emotional atmosphere around football. shaping what audiences hear as normal.
Pougatch’s “first rule of broadcast journalism” comment frames the issue as more than personal preference.. If you accept that terminology can carry trauma. then the safest editorial stance is restraint—especially with a term that is already strongly associated with mass loss of life.. That doesn’t necessarily require banning every harsh expression; it does. however. raise the threshold for when commentators choose loaded language.
The backlash about where it ends—whether terms like “attack”. “battle” or “dominate” should also be questioned—shows the tension between precision and slippery slopes.. Misryoum’s view is that the difference lies in immediacy and scale.. Football has plenty of metaphor, but “disaster” is not a metaphor in the same way; it is closer to finality.. When used for a goal conceded, it compresses huge real-world harm into a soundbite.
For football broadcasters, the practical takeaway is to be more intentional without losing pace.. “Do much better. ” as Pougatch put it. doesn’t mean sterilising match commentary—it means choosing alternatives that still land the moment: “costly. ” “catastrophic defending. ” “momentum swing. ” or simply “a goal they’ll regret.” Language can keep the excitement while reducing the chance of sounding insensitive. particularly in the shadow of tragedies like Hillsborough.
As the debate continues on social media, the larger conversation for Misryoum is about culture in the booth: what gets normalised through repetition, and what journalists should actively unlearn—especially when a single word can echo far beyond the pitch.
LeBron and Bronny share NBA playoff court time in Lakers’ Game 1 win
Raptors’ Brandon Ingram takes just nine shots in Game 1 loss vs Cavaliers
The ‘travel team trap’ draining families’ wallets in youth sports