Worst Commentators

[Top_Cat]

What, dodgy's vs top order bats don't count? C'mon.....

Which gets me to this: how come you want to bring in a 1st chance average for batsmen, but make no allowance for when bowlers get wickets which weren't out?

 

[Burgey]

 

[Richard]

What, dodgy's vs top order bats don't count? C'mon.....

Eh? I said the bad decisions all occurred when England were on top, not they all occurred against tailenders.

Which gets me to this: how come you want to bring in a 1st chance average for batsmen, but make no allowance for when bowlers get wickets which weren't out?

You ARE kidding me aren't you? Of course I do.

None of this (first-chance batting scores, all-chance bowling averages, etc.) has any relation to team play, however, and that's what's under discussion here.

 

[Flem274*]

I'd like to hear Richard explain exactly how he is going to judge dropped catches, marginal LBWs, etc in his FCA. Firstly, the speed, height, whatever of the ball will need to be judged. Then there's the ability of the fielder, could he have caught it normally? For example, there's a big difference in fielding ability between Jamie How and Chris Martin.

Then I could go onto the LBWs....

It is absolutely impossible to get accurate data, and I mean proper, non-theoretical, hard evidence, for First Chance Averages. Unless Jesus becomes a Statsguru enthusiast it simply won't happen.

However I'm sure posters much smarter than me have made this argument and obviously it didn't get through...

Don't get me wrong, I like your posting but FCAs just won't work and I flat out disagree with you there.

 

[NassersKnock]

Yeah it wouldn't seem to disproportionate unless you were Marto! Generally the bad decisions were even, though.

Langer copped a dodgy to Simon Jones which did look out at full-speed, though. Lee was turned-down against Simon Jones with a ball which was missing leg, missing off and hitting middle half-way up.
.

Absolute rubbish were they even.

And Lee's full toss plumb in front to KP was worse than that one.

The amount of LBW let-off's given to Trescothick, Strauss and Giles against Warne were also farcical.

 

[Langeveldt]

Nasser Hussein by an absolute country mile.

Has a catalog consisting of a handful of popular buzz words & modern phrases that he will bring out in any given situation and do to death.

It won't be more than a few seconds after he begins his "stint" until the viewer hears him droan on about either "soft hands" "scrambled brains" some one being a "street fighter" or "positive intent."

Also says stupid things like how "There's no reason why Ian Bell can't do what Matthew Hayden" during the last WC.

Refuses to accept than any English player can be physically or technically inferior to anyone else or that they might be incapable of something and puts it down only to an issue of mindset, or another one of those annoying new excuse terms which are being incorrectly applied by the English about their own sports teams these days..."fear of failure"

Haha yeah true, agreed with all of that.. "Bopara into the attack... Street Fighter"

Yeah he might be a good street fighter, but he's a naff international cricketer..

 

[NassersKnock]

Haha yeah true, agreed with all of that.. "Bopara into the attack... Street Fighter"

Yeah he might be a good street fighter, but he's a naff international cricketer..

Is he a "touch player" as well as a street fighter, by any chance?

And does he show positive intent with soft hands whilst "sending a message"?

 

[zaremba]

Absolute rubbish were they even.

And Lee's full toss plumb in front to KP was worse than that one.

The amount of LBW let-off's given to Trescothick, Strauss and Giles against Warne were also farcical.

Australia got their fair share of dodgy decisions in their favour in that series.

And lest we forget, but for the rain it would have been 4-1 to England. However since we got well and truly whipped 5-0 in 06/07 I suppose I should wind my neck in.

 

[The Masterplan]

Beefy is an idiot in the commentary box.. Bob Willis is boring and slow and miserable

but Colin Croft is a Legend!

 

[NassersKnock]

Bob Willis is hilarious. As well as not being worried about calling a spade a spade, whoever you are.

He clearly plays up to his reputation though, and most of his comments are pure gold.

Also disagree about him being boring, infact, it's quite the opposite. He's a good character, sharp witted and with a good sense of humour.

 

[zaremba]

disagree about him being boring, infact, it's quite the opposite. He's a good character, sharp witted and with a good sense of humour.

True. But the problem isn't that he's boring, it's just that he's so bloody miserable. He sounds suicidal and makes his audience feel suicidal too.

 

[NassersKnock]

True. But the problem isn't that he's boring, it's just that he's so bloody miserable. He sounds suicidal and makes his audience feel suicidal too.

Laughing out loud regularly does not normally give me suicidal urges.

The disparaging "misery" is what makes him different and worth listening to.

I find the nasal, cliche ridden, repetitive jargon style of Hussein to be far more monotonous.

 

[zaremba]

RGDW may have a gsoh but he's hardly laugh-a-minute...

 

[SJS]

I haven't heard him very recently but I am amazed at how many people have 'blasted' Nasser Hussain. He must have had a reallly 'off' time of late.

I did not think much of him during his playing days but I thought he was an absolute revelation in the commentators box. Wonder what happened ?

 

[zaremba]

Yes I agree with you SJS about Hussain. His voice is indeed nasal and he may resort to cliche but his great quality is that he sets out to provide insight - which the other Sky commentators unerringly fail to do.

 

[funnygirl]

Arun lal, L Sivaramakrishnan, Zaheer Abbas, Mushtaq Ahmed .....totally intolerable.

 

[NassersKnock]

Yes I agree with you SJS about Hussain. His voice is indeed nasal and he may resort to cliche but his great quality is that he sets out to provide insight - which the other Sky commentators unerringly fail to do.

Well he may set out to, and have the "intent" to provide insight....but fails to do so.

Never heard him come up with anything remotely insightful.

 

[Top_Cat]

Absolute rubbish were they even.

And Lee's full toss plumb in front to KP was worse than that one.

The amount of LBW let-off's given to Trescothick, Strauss and Giles against Warne were also farcical.

Please. Warnie went ape over everything which hit pad, very few of which could actually be given out. That Warnie would have a shout at everything probably contributed to costing him some that were out. There were plenty of poor decisions against both sides too.

And if you're talking decisions in KP's favour, he nicked one down the leg-side to Lee first ball at Edgbaston in the second dig but was given not. However, it was evened-out when he was given caught by Gilly to a leg-side swipe off Warnie which almost every part of his body but no bat, that's for sure (great catch by Gilly notwithstanding).

Not that getting rid of the bad decisions would have done much to change the outcome of the series. Australia won Lords but were playing catch-up for the rest of the series.

 

[Richard]

I'd like to hear Richard explain exactly how he is going to judge dropped catches, marginal LBWs, etc in his FCA. Firstly, the speed, height, whatever of the ball will need to be judged. Then there's the ability of the fielder, could he have caught it normally? For example, there's a big difference in fielding ability between Jamie How and Chris Martin.

Then I could go onto the LBWs....

It is absolutely impossible to get accurate data, and I mean proper, non-theoretical, hard evidence, for First Chance Averages. Unless Jesus becomes a Statsguru enthusiast it simply won't happen.

However I'm sure posters much smarter than me have made this argument and obviously it didn't get through...

Don't get me wrong, I like your posting but FCAs just won't work and I flat out disagree with you there.

Have said it many times. Marginal lbws are not-outs and that is the correct decision. Only when it's obviously out should an lbw be out. Anything which gets into the fielder's hands should be caught - obviously some things go over some fielders' heads and not others, but that's completely by-the-by. The fielder cannot be swapped in a split-second as the stroke is played. It's very obvious, in all but the tiniest, tiniest number of cases, what is catchable and what is not.

 

[Langeveldt]

Good God..

Can someone tell me the name of the oaf who has just been commentating on TMS with Phil Tuffnell? (Before Simon Mann came on).. Comfortably the worst stint of commentary I have ever heard.. Actually made me want to switch off the radio..

"The people of Lord's going about their law-abiding activities"

Get rid of him!