For the armchair sports fan, there is some reassurance as the sun sets on another fabulous Ashes contest: the football Premier League season will soon begin. But while the football is certain to be a match for the breakneck cricket we’ve enjoyed over recent weeks, the commentary that runs alongside it won’t be.

Cricket fans enjoy analysis from the erudite, intelligent and calmly explained voices of test match commentators. Football supporters must put up with the frenetic, confrontational and frankly banal screeching of the sport’s equivalent.

The change from Bazball to football on our screens is most noticeable not for what goes on pitchside but how it is described in the commentary box and the studio. Where the former has maintained the air of measured observation that has worked since the days of Blofeld, Bailey and Benaud, football has moved on from Moore, Motson and Davies to something very different indeed.

Failed manager and Sky pundit Gary Neville tells us why the coach has got it all wrong

Cricket has gentle humour mixed in with intelligent insight; it is also able to do so without bias. Broadcasters can call on former Australian firebrands Ricky Ponting and Glenn McGrath for analysis without tribal favouritism. Yet when Jamie Carragher is the in-box summariser at a Liverpool game on Sky he can hardly control his emotions.

Yes, there are one or two pundits who irritate in cricket, whether it’s the squeaky-voiced Kevin Pietersen trying too hard or the rather dull Andrew Strauss. But, in general, the beauty of cricket’s broadcast teams is that they only speak when they need to rather than fill every second of airtime with chatter. The silences are golden. Compare this to football where commentators such as Sam Matterface on ITV insist on filling every spare moment with yet another pre-prepared though completely irrelevant statistic; or failed manager Gary Neville on Sky tells us why the coach has got it all wrong. I suspect he blames it on the Tories.

When cricket is on TV, former bowlers and batters inform rather than preach, whether it’s about field positions or why Stuart Broad is brought on to bowl at left-handed batsmen for instance. Cricket has the likes of Nasser Hussain or Michael Atherton to calmly guide us through what’s happening. Both are intelligent experts who clearly know what they are talking about.

Football has instead gone for commentators who can reel off facts about the height of the corner flag or tell you Raheem Sterling’s mum’s name. Those poring over the game in the studio or elsewhere often appear to have been added for comedy value, whether it is Paul Merson mispronouncing foreign names or Roy Keane’s well-crafted grumpiness routine.

That’s not to say some traditions remain. Match of the Day is still just as boring to the extent that many fans these days choose to record the show then play it back while fast forwarding. By doing so, they avoid the chummy chit chat of former players and golfing buddies led by Gary Lineker, the BBC’s highest earning star, swapping pre-prepared ‘jokes’ with Alan Shearer, Ian Wright and Danny Murphy.

Away from this faux chumminess, conflict is now a major selling point in football coverage. No Sky after-match discussion is complete without an argument between studio guests. For almost 15 years, Graeme Souness’s role appeared to consist mainly of finding a way to wind up others in the studio.

This isn’t only a problem when football is on TV. Radio station TalkSPORT has fuelled a new kind of aggressive tribalism in football. It appears to be designed specifically to stoke up arguments and gather likes and hits but with a much poorer pool of performers.

So, when the football season starts up, I’m sure I won’t be the only fan who tunes in – but also reaches for the mute button. Football commentary sadly just isn’t cricket.