Er, if you're a pundit earning upwards of half a million quid of tax-payers money a year then surely the minimum expectation would be to develop at least a basic knowledge of what you're being paid so handsomely to talk about - or am I being daft? Christ, anyone could talk about probablity, like I said earlier Lawrenson bases his predictions on the fixed odds coupon from William Hill from the evidence I've seen. He is a joke pundit, but he's not even funny - that dour sarcasm you talk of ceased to be entertaining years ago, just makes him sound the arrogant prick that he is if you ask me.
However I do agree with you about Hansen, who I really don't mind at all these days, and Colin Murray who I also personally like - though I know a lot of people who can't stand those two either.