Worst Commentators

[fredfertang]

What new avatar?

The one that looked like a dodgy monochrome self portrait of a notorious serial killer

 

[neville cardus]

It had been a while since last I had molested myself with Paint's beard-making airbrush, so I went to town.

 

[Uppercut]

I actually really like Ian Botham. He's easily the least biased of the English commentators and talks a lot of sense. The worst IMO is David Lloyd, for reasons best summed up in the following quote:

"England are now the best side in the world and they will prove it in 18 months' time when they go to Australia and retain the Ashes."
David Lloyd, September 2005

 

[fredfertang]

"England are now the best side in the world and they will prove it in 18 months' time when they go to Australia and retain the Ashes."
David Lloyd, September 2005

Part of Bumble’s appeal is his occasional outburst of Barmy Army style enthusiasm – millions of us said that in Sept 2005 and like the vast majority of us I am sure dear old Bumble had his tongue firmly planted in his cheek

Come on this is sport – if you cant dream the impossible dream what is the point?

Its 2009 next year - we'll flippin' murder them

 

[Uppercut]

Haha, even so, his bias gets bloody annoying when you aren't English but have to listen to him regularly. Another example was his asking Ian Smith and Botham who the better bowler was between Panesar and Vettori. Smith simply replied "Vettori." and ten seconds of awkward silence followed while everyone acknowledged the stupidity of the comparison.

 

[zaremba]

Another example was his asking Ian Smith and Botham who the better bowler was between Panesar and Vettori. Smith simply replied "Vettori." and ten seconds of awkward silence followed while everyone acknowledged the stupidity of the comparison.

A stupid comparison?

Test stats:

Panesar: average 31.99, strike rate 65.8
Vettori: average 34.43, strike rate 77.3

First class stats:

Panesar: average 30.63, strike rate 63.3
Vettori: average 32.11, strike rate 71.4

 

[fredfertang]

A stupid comparison?

Test stats:

Panesar: average 31.99, strike rate 65.8
Vettori: average 34.43, strike rate 77.3

First class stats:

Panesar: average 30.63, strike rate 63.3
Vettori: average 32.11, strike rate 71.4

Poor old Smithy - what a gaffe

Though as a commentator, as in his wicketkeeping, I do rate the little drummer boy as a good un

 

[stumpski]

Haha, even so, his bias gets bloody annoying when you aren't English but have to listen to him regularly. Another example was his asking Ian Smith and Botham who the better bowler was between Panesar and Vettori. Smith simply replied "Vettori." and ten seconds of awkward silence followed while everyone acknowledged the stupidity of the comparison.

Whether you agree with Smith's reply is beside the point - the question was rather pointless. What did he think Smith was going to say? He'd probably maintain that Ross Taylor is better than Kevin Pietersen as well.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

I've always hated David Lloyd also. He's like a more over the top version of Bill Lawry in terms of parochialism. Starting off a match by discussing how he wants to see Glenn McGrath hit for six doesn't really strike me as the best approach for an impartial analyst.

 

[Uppercut]

His simple-minded optimism doesn't enhance the cricket on show at all. It usually just leaves me wanting to see England beaten to make him look like a plonker.

Come on this is sport – if you cant dream the impossible dream what is the point?

How do you rate Ireland's chances for the twenty20 world cup

 

[SJS]

I've always hated David Lloyd also. He's like a more over the top version of Bill Lawry in terms of parochialism. Starting off a match by discussing how he wants to see Glenn McGrath hit for six doesn't really strike me as the best approach for an impartial analyst.

His simple-minded optimism doesn't enhance the cricket on show at all. It usually just leaves me wanting to see England beaten to make him look like a plonker.

But dont you think he does this in a light hearted kind of way to indulge in and provoke some friendly banter with fellow commentators ?

 

[Uppercut]

Not really. Light-hearted would imply some level of humour involved. There's none. For instance, here is his prediction for the New Zealand test series taken from a few months ago:

"Weather permitting, England will win this 3-0. I simply don't see us having any problems at all."

His commentary is littered with such statements. Regardless of the (questionable) accuracy of the comment, it's really arrogant. It doesn't encourage banter, it isn't funny, it isn't insightful and teaches us nothing about the game other than the fact that David Lloyd is a prat.




Maybe as a Northern Irish soccer fan I'm up to my knees in unfounded pro-English bias and hence have a particular sensitivity to it

 

[fredfertang]

How do you rate Ireland's chances for the twenty20 world cup

Well assuming they qualify - not good - but remember Zimbabwe/Australia - I hope the Irish ruffle a few feathers and if they get a few breaks you never know!!!

 

[Perm]

And if I was Andrew Symonds, I'd have a restraining order out on him.

Would be more concerned about Brett Lee and Michael Clarke tbf, Nicholas has an emphatuation with them.

 

[Perm]

A stupid comparison?

Test stats:

Panesar: average 31.99, strike rate 65.8
Vettori: average 34.43, strike rate 77.3

First class stats:

Panesar: average 30.63, strike rate 63.3
Vettori: average 32.11, strike rate 71.4

Look, I'm not a Vettori supporter by any stretch, but he's a hell of a lot better than Monty Panesar. It's a very stupid comparison, unless it was taken out of context. For example, it could have been a comparison on form, or who is likely to end up the better bowler.

 

[stumpski]

I've always hated David Lloyd also. He's like a more over the top version of Bill Lawry in terms of parochialism. Starting off a match by discussing how he wants to see Glenn McGrath hit for six doesn't really strike me as the best approach for an impartial analyst.

Rather harsh IMO. I don't 'hate' any of them. Lloyd can be annyoying, he should learn to think before he speaks sometimes (a fault he also had as England coach) and he should desist from using 'we' and 'us' when talking about the England team - but he also makes me smile and the box would be a good deal duller without him.

 

[zaremba]

Look, I'm not a Vettori supporter by any stretch, but he's a hell of a lot better than Monty Panesar. It's a very stupid comparison, unless it was taken out of context. For example, it could have been a comparison on form, or who is likely to end up the better bowler.

Their Test and First Class averages don't support your case that DV is "a hell of a lot better" than MP. You might say that MP's figures flatter him, but I'd disagree. Or that DV's figures don't reflect his ability, but after 83 Tests that would be surprising. Overall it's not immediately obvious why the bowler averaging 34.4 is a hell of a lot better than the bowler averaging 32.

I'd also (respectfully) disagree about whether the comparison between the two is an interesting one. They have contrasting styles, and are probably the 2 best SLA bowlers in world cricket at the moment. I think it would be surprising not to compare them, as indeed you have done.

 

[Perm]

Their Test and First Class averages don't support your case that DV is "a hell of a lot better" than MP. You might say that MP's figures flatter him, but I'd disagree. Or that DV's figures don't reflect his ability, but after 83 Tests that would be surprising. Overall it's not immediately obvious why the bowler averaging 34.4 is a hell of a lot better than the bowler averaging 32.

It seems as though you're forgetting something called ODI cricket, which, in today's game, is hugely important. And seeing how Vettori absolutely dominates Panesar in that format then I think it's fair to say he's a much better bowler. Besides, Panesar's only played a handful of games and Vettori is a seasoned veteran with 500 international wickets. I don't think it's possible to make a good case saying Panesar>Vettori at the moment, obviously once their respective careers have finished people will view things differently.

 

[zaremba]

You're right that Vettori is a better one-day bowler than Panesar. How important that fact is is a matter of personal opinion I suppose.

As for Panesar playing a "handful" of games, he has in fact played 29 Tests. More than SF Barnes, Larwood, Lohmann, Adcock, Heine, Peter Pollock, Bruce Reid, and Richard Hadlee. Ok I lied about Hadlee. And I'm not saying he's as good as the others btw - just making the point that 29 Tests is a fair length of time over which to assess someone's ability.

Edit: I've been digging around on statsguru on cricinfo and it's fair to say that Vettori has averaged 28.78 with the ball in his last 29 matches, which is better than Panesar.

 

[wpdavid]

You're right that Vettori is a better one-day bowler than Panesar. How important that fact is is a matter of personal opinion I suppose.

As for Panesar playing a "handful" of games, he has in fact played 29 Tests. More than SF Barnes, Larwood, Lohmann, Adcock, Heine, Peter Pollock, Bruce Reid, and Richard Hadlee. Ok I lied about Hadlee. And I'm not saying he's as good as the others btw - just making the point that 29 Tests is a fair length of time over which to assess someone's ability.

Edit: I've been digging around on statsguru on cricinfo and it's fair to say that Vettori has averaged 28.78 with the ball in his last 29 matches, which is better than Panesar.

Even so, that hardly makes it a 'stupid' question in he first place.