Time for Liggett to go!
- Thread starter Grater
- Start date
Sherwen and Liggett deserve plenty of censure.
Their commentary is repetitive, uninformative and often wrong.
Some examples...
There seems to be only a handful of things they are capable of talking about:
How many times have they talked about the yellow transponders on the bikes? That one gets a run at least once a day. But I have never heard them talk about the gear ratios that are being run (the closest was last night when Sherwen said, 'It's over on the left of the cluster, so you know he's working hard'), the choice of wheels, hell, anything other than the transponder.
Ditto the repetition of Voeckler's stint in yellow and his Yellowness's praise of same. There are other things to talk about with Voeckler (last year's GP de Plouay Ouest-France, for example); he gets a lot of screen time, so you'd think they'd have prepped up on their Voeckler stories.
Sherwen's oleaginous toadying of anything Armstrong is annoying. He'll find any excuse to mention his Yellowness's name. I recall last year when, apropos of nothing at all, we had a five-minute spiel about how wonderful his Yellowness was. It might even have been quite sincere, which would be worrying. I'm not saying that Voldemort is not to be mentioned at all, but those two (and Sherwen in particular) do go overboard.
They do their level best to talk in glowing terms about any English-speaking rider. That's a salve to the audience, I suppose, but it harms their credibility a little. Vande Velde got a big rap from Liggett last night (actually, three or four, since he repeated himself so often) because, apparently, if it weren't for VdV's acceleration at the end, Evans would not have been in yellow (as if VdV could somehow take credit for it, though he'd been doing no work in that group). It was a bit silly the first time, by the fourth time ridiculous.
My main gripe is that the commentary is, it would seem, aimed at the audience who have never ridden a bike. It is basic, lowest-common denominator stuff. I am used to commentary in other sports where a certain amount of knowledge is assumed, with the untutored audience picking it up as they go. I don't know what passes for normal in US sporting commentary, but a higher level of assumed knowledge would surely reward fans who take an interest.
The mispronunciation and mis-identification are annoyances, but I'd hang on them if the commentary were informative. It just isn't.
This might be the carping of an ungrateful viewer, but I think it's warranted. They could do themselves justice, and pay the audience a bit more respect, by raising the level of detail and changing the script every now and then. Those two actually know a great deal about cycling, but it's not on show. I don't know if it's deliberate, because of an absence of preparation or whether they've simply lost it.
Tant pis.
Their commentary is repetitive, uninformative and often wrong.
Some examples...
There seems to be only a handful of things they are capable of talking about:
How many times have they talked about the yellow transponders on the bikes? That one gets a run at least once a day. But I have never heard them talk about the gear ratios that are being run (the closest was last night when Sherwen said, 'It's over on the left of the cluster, so you know he's working hard'), the choice of wheels, hell, anything other than the transponder.
Ditto the repetition of Voeckler's stint in yellow and his Yellowness's praise of same. There are other things to talk about with Voeckler (last year's GP de Plouay Ouest-France, for example); he gets a lot of screen time, so you'd think they'd have prepped up on their Voeckler stories.
Sherwen's oleaginous toadying of anything Armstrong is annoying. He'll find any excuse to mention his Yellowness's name. I recall last year when, apropos of nothing at all, we had a five-minute spiel about how wonderful his Yellowness was. It might even have been quite sincere, which would be worrying. I'm not saying that Voldemort is not to be mentioned at all, but those two (and Sherwen in particular) do go overboard.
They do their level best to talk in glowing terms about any English-speaking rider. That's a salve to the audience, I suppose, but it harms their credibility a little. Vande Velde got a big rap from Liggett last night (actually, three or four, since he repeated himself so often) because, apparently, if it weren't for VdV's acceleration at the end, Evans would not have been in yellow (as if VdV could somehow take credit for it, though he'd been doing no work in that group). It was a bit silly the first time, by the fourth time ridiculous.
My main gripe is that the commentary is, it would seem, aimed at the audience who have never ridden a bike. It is basic, lowest-common denominator stuff. I am used to commentary in other sports where a certain amount of knowledge is assumed, with the untutored audience picking it up as they go. I don't know what passes for normal in US sporting commentary, but a higher level of assumed knowledge would surely reward fans who take an interest.
The mispronunciation and mis-identification are annoyances, but I'd hang on them if the commentary were informative. It just isn't.
This might be the carping of an ungrateful viewer, but I think it's warranted. They could do themselves justice, and pay the audience a bit more respect, by raising the level of detail and changing the script every now and then. Those two actually know a great deal about cycling, but it's not on show. I don't know if it's deliberate, because of an absence of preparation or whether they've simply lost it.
Tant pis.
ahhhhh commentating is such an easy job to please the masses, I'm sure we could all do better.
It's easy to be critical when your not in a position to be critised.
Fine so they make mistakes or talk repetitively over the course of 3 weeks on many subjects but I'm not complaining as it's a whole lot better than we had here years ago and that was next to nothing, a 30 min stage highlights package.
It's easy to be critical when your not in a position to be critised.
Fine so they make mistakes or talk repetitively over the course of 3 weeks on many subjects but I'm not complaining as it's a whole lot better than we had here years ago and that was next to nothing, a 30 min stage highlights package.
Whether Drongo or anyone else here is capable or commentating is not relevant. Liggett and Sherwen put themselves out there and they are supposedly professional commentators. Their commentary is at times is ridden with mistakes, repetitive, toading, inane to anyone with any knowledge of the sport and lacking insight. These are all points Drongo has made. IMO Drongos comments are essentially correct.Trev_S said:
It's great that we have better coverage than we used to, but wouldn't you prefer coverage that is as good as it can possibly be? We don't expect this level of commentary with AFL football or Premier League Football for example. Why should we have to put up with it for cycling?
Ken oath. These fellers are supposedly well-paid professionals, but, to use the Americanism, they're phoning it in. They have it within themselves to do better.Trev_S said:
Just because we had years of no coverage doesn't mean that we should put up with mediocrity. It's like listening to Gordon Bray or that Hugh Bladen chap in the rugby. Sycophantic, simplistic, parochial and wrong.
In a sense we do have to put up with it.Drongo said:
The program is bought by a television network. They buy what they see as the best available for the dollar.
So you can complain to the network and voice your disapproval for getting something they provide to you for free.
or suggest a practical yet better solution.
or you can build your own well versed coverage. (You might need many millions of dollars to do that.)
They all make mistakes so I just accept it and enjoy what we do get.
I suppose all I was getting at is it just seems that people are not happy unless they are complaining.
I guess you can always turn the sound off on the TV, and go to the Eurosport coverage and listen to their live audio instead. (although might not have the right timing with the pictures).
So why are you complaining about our complaining Trev? You can see the thread title. If you have no gripes with Liggett... then why come in here and post a complaint about us. If nothing is going to happen to Liggett as a result of this thread... why do you feel like you need to change the world in here.Trev_S said:
Just helping you to see the irony/hypocrisy a bit in your stance here...
Fact is, as everyone said, L & S are phoning it in. And I am no expert compared to the classics, Bros, Drongos etc. But they are lazy these days (were they ever better?). The problem is... a lot of peripheral fans probably like them. And perhaps the typical American fan watching Versus (no slight on anyone in this forum) is pretty happy with their lowest common denominator, hyped up, stuff. But a bit more research and watching the actual monitor wouldn't lose these fans IMO.
And I have co-commentated a televised international rugby match (world record score... and probably watched by hundreds) ....
You need to learn about the other teams first Grates....Grater said:
But hey... you sound like you gotta dream. That's better than me...
Good point, I'll pay that oneCrankyfeet said:So why are you complaining about our complaining Trev? You can see the thread title. If you have no gripes with Liggett... then why come in here and post a complaint about us. If nothing is going to happen to Liggett as a result of this thread... why do you feel like you need to change the world in here.
Just helping you to see the irony/hypocrisy a bit in your stance here...
My father commentated at a local race that was a support event during the local fesitival. His 'get off the road you clowns' comment over the loudspeaker to a couple of performing clowns who were crossing the road during the race went over a treat with the punters.Crankyfeet said:And I have co-commentated a televised international rugby match (world record score... and probably watched by hundreds) ....
Then there was the time he commentated the race at a local Italian festival. It was going really well until he decided to start trying to commentate in Italian. Hilarity ensued as a local Italian identity snatched the mic off of him.
I don't know... but thunder will be using it now 6 times a day for the next month...classic1 said:
Mate..you're Dad has a sense of humour...classic1 said:My father commentated at a local race that was a support event during the local fesitival. His 'get off the road you clowns' comment over the loudspeaker to a couple of performing clowns who were crossing the road during the race went over a treat with the punters.
Then there was the time he commentated the race at a local Italian festival. It was going really well until he decided to start trying to commentate in Italian. Hilarity ensued as a local Italian identity snatched the mic off of him.
The first game I did was Hong Kong vs. Singapore in the Asian Championships. I only got the job because I had recently retired from rugby due to knee surgery and I knew the players.
Anyway Hong Kong won 167 to nil. One guy (the HK fullback) scored 10 tries on his own. It was a world record at the time. Anyway... I knew the players... and for some reason mashed up the first name of one of the players... using Andy instead of Rodney. I had known this guy and played beside him for a whole season. I had just had a brain fart. It took until the players got home and watched it on a replay before the jokes began. I left Asia soon after... (j/k).
I guess I kinda ruined my argument about Liggett with that anecdote...
