Match of the Day?

Match of the Day has often annoyed fans; from the choice and 'insight' of pundits to the hyperbolic commentators, the show is far from a perfect model of a football program. But last night, it was the decision of what order games should appear in that was baffling.

The match between the top two, Manchester United and Chelsea, was always going to be the first match aired; between the two clubs, they must have the largest audience in the country, and the importance - in the football world - was paramount.

However, when looking at results elsewhere in the Premier League, one would have presumed that the other Manchester team would have been next up. An obscene 6-1 away win at Burnley, including three goals after seven minutes, was surely the most entertaining game of the day.

Failing that, Sunderland's 3-1 home win against Champions League hunters Tottenham Hotspur, which also included two missed penalties and a disallowed goal, would have been a wise choice.

But no, the MOTD bods chose Arsenal's 1-0 win over 10-man Wolverhampton Wanderers as their second game.

Tradtionally, the games shown first and second are the features matches - with extended highlights and insight. Surely it would be better to spend twenty minutes talking about the seven goals at Turf Moor or the four at the Stadium of Light than the solitary late effort at the Emirates.

My question is, how the the BBC select that matches? If goals and entertainment make way for league position and gravitas, doesn't that bring the value of an analytical football program down?