• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

**Offical** Commentary complaints thread

Neil Young

State Vice-Captain
To me good commentary enhances the viewing experience. Insights into players techniques, strategical discussion, bringing up relevant stats, highlighting pattern occuring during the game. Good commentary guides the viewer, tells them what to look out for, explains why what we are seeing is compelling.

Poor commentary is banter, hyperbole, bad analysis and arguments, or completely ignoring the cricket to talk about the best pizza place in the neighborhood (looking at you Shane Warns)
To me, commentary is adding the experience. I actually don't mind hearing views on the city/surrounding area as it adds to the picture in my head if I haven't been to city in question. Unlike the radio, I can see the cricket, so I don't need talking through every ball/phase/play. It's a combination.

Blokey banter is a big no from me. That's a wincefest to be privy to. And where analysis is concerned, less is more. Sanga won't shut up. His analysis may be spot on, but he does my head in. But incisive, concise pertinent observation? Yes, please.
 

BeeGee

International Captain
They all ****ing suck ... except Bishop.

I wish there was a sound option to hear the ground sounds without the **** commentary.
 

Isura

U19 Captain
England
Athers and Nasser are fine. Ian Ward whatever don't know why he's there. Nicolas kill me now. Isha is hot and sounds great.

Australia
Slats well no comment except he's not the best.
Clarke little annoying but I can see him getting better.
Truly missing Bill Lawry and Richie

New Zealand
Truly a woeful history of commentators. Doull is useless and Smith is pretty ordinary.

South Africa
Paint drying > Smith. Pollock is okay. Miss Barry Richards.

West Indies
No complaints. Love Bish. Holding is good, can be a little annoying but he's less annoying in ODIs.

India
Harsha is kind of a weiner. I don't like Sanjay. I guess both are pretty neutral at least. I like Ganguly, it's just rare you hear him in this role.

Pakistan
Love Ramiz. PAKPASSION. Wasim is boring, hoping he gets better. He seemed to have more personality on the field than in the box.

Bangladesh
Well I guess you need to put someone out there, and he's not that bad.

Sri Lanka
Russell Arnold clearly best commentator, but he's not there. Sanga will get better. He has potential. Similar to Wasim right now and talks a bit too much.
 

TimAngas

State Vice-Captain
Holding's negativity towards everything West Indies (gambhiring or genuine dislike toward how things are being done?) absolutely unbearable this game.
 

Burgey

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Think Laxman and Bhogle are far more comfortable in English than Hindi, especially Laxman :laugh:

Hindi commentary is alright, I prefer North Indians though. But if you have someone like Sehwag, you'll get lots of nonsense banter either way. Depends on what you prefer.

I must be one of the few people who find it very hard to tell the difference between good/bad/insightful/terrible commentary (unless it's egregiously bad), it just doesn't bother me at all when I'm watching sports.
I envy you for being like this.

Re the Hindi commentary, didn’t a few of the lads mention Harby was good in the last India-England series? I’d be interested to hear more from him and the others ***** mentioned except Gavaskar and Bhogle, who I’ve heard more than enough of over the years.

Still think Sanath is the worst I’ve ever heard. Then a heap of Aussies on recent Nine.
 

wrongun

Banned
I envy you for being like this.

Re the Hindi commentary, didn’t a few of the lads mention Harby was good in the last India-England series? I’d be interested to hear more from him and the others ***** mentioned except Gavaskar and Bhogle, who I’ve heard more than enough of over the years.

Still think Sanath is the worst I’ve ever heard. Then a heap of Aussies on recent Nine.
I don't even need commentary anymore because I can easily assess the flow of the game and whats required myself. It's more fun. As far as Hindi commentary goes, I have enjoyed it during this world cup and they surprisingly have been objective and very complimentary of good play. I switch between Hindi and English and to be honest Hindi comm has been ahead of the curve in terms of its analysis. I have enjoyed Star's dugout coverage as well sans Dean Jones.
 

ankitj

Hall of Fame Member
Think Laxman and Bhogle are far more comfortable in English than Hindi, especially Laxman :laugh:

Hindi commentary is alright, I prefer North Indians though. But if you have someone like Sehwag, you'll get lots of nonsense banter either way. Depends on what you prefer.

I must be one of the few people who find it very hard to tell the difference between good/bad/insightful/terrible commentary (unless it's egregiously bad), it just doesn't bother me at all when I'm watching sports.
That's makes it 2 of us.
 

stephen

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Holding being pissed at the umpires for making tiny mistakes that were corrected was annoying.

Pollock not wanting to talk about the 99 WC was funny and a bit annoying.
 

ankitj

Hall of Fame Member
Having switched to Hindi commentary by legends of cricket, I find English commentary is still stuck with Bhogle's nothing comments like "how often you see a dropped catch followed by a boundary". Yeah great ****.
 

smash84

The Tiger King
I think Sanga's analysis of the game is very good. But somebody needs to turn off his mic every half a minute. He just doesn't know that he needs to shut up every now and then. The commentator next to him has barely finished his sentences than sanga launches into it and starts commenting on the comment that the other fellow has just made.
 

cnerd123

likes this
Okay so it's not the ICC asking the commentators to stop with the negativity, it's Sunset and Vine Asia. From the article it seems like this company is the 'ICC's rights partner' - my guess is they act on behalf of the ICC to manage their TV rights and broadcasting agreements.

This makes a lot of sense to me. Holding is naive to think he can actually say anything he wants on the air. He's being paid to speak on behalf of a company. This isn't him on a free public platform just speaking his mind. He is an employee. There will obviously be restrictions. For sure he's already been told that he can't swear, say hateful things, or spread lies and mis-information while on air. He is already censored to a certain degree, and he accepts that.

On top of that, I think everyone is aware that since this is an ICC event being broadcast all around the world, the people in charge will obviously want it keep squeaky clean. And that means no negative comments directed at any individuals involved, and no fanning the flames of any controversy. They want everything said on air to be cheer-leading the event, the sponsors, the stakeholders, the ICC itself, and cricket as a whole. And that's obvious right? Who could blame them. So it makes sense that they don't want Holding to give casual viewers the impression that this event is poorly run, or that the people involved are incompetent. That just hurts the worldwide perception of Cricket. We've moved on past the 50s and 60s, we don't need fans thinking "Oh yea umpires are biased and ****".

But at the same time - this is not the first time a commentator has talked smack about individuals involved in the game they're commenting on. They talk **** about players and administrators all the time. They highlight umpiring errors all the time. They are unbiased and wear their allegiances on their sleeves. If Sunset and Vine genuinely care about a good, professional, clean broadcast, then why not bring all the other commentators into line too? They should be like how the ICC is with their players, and have a zero-tolerance policy towards any misconduct. Instead, they seem to allow unprofessionalism up to a certain degree, only after which they remind their commentators that they are paid to do a job, and can not just say anything that comes to their minds.

Really though, this is why they should be hiring professional broadcasters to start with, and not just give former cricketers free reign over a microphone during a game.
 

Arachnodouche

International Captain
Bishop is the only one I'd like to get a beer with. He's a little too punctilious with his delivery, but I admire his work ethic and what he's trying to bring to commentary.

Everybody else is the cricket equivalent of music for airports.
 

_Ed_

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Mark Nicholas brought back some good old descriptions of NZ cricket during the South Africa game - "doughty competitors", "making up for anything they may lack in talent with spirit" etc. Always appreciated.

He also seemed to spend most of the game reminiscing about Lara's 501 and the 1999 World Cup semi-final. As you do.
 

NotMcKenzie

International Debutant
After listening to Clarke, I've decided on a new rule for the employment of commentators:

- No ex-player can be employed as a commentator while anyone they have played with is still playing
 

Top