HE CAN'T BELIEVE IT...........................

HE CAN'T BELIEVE IT...........................

This seems to be the latest ludicrous/banal/insufferable etc etc etc comment that must be used by commentators,especially in Australia.

For 200 odd years batsmen have been getting out caught,bowled,LBW etc etc etc but now virtually every dismissal is greeted with HE CAN'T BELIEVE IT...........................

WHY CAN'T THEY BELIEVE IT?????????????????????????????????????????????

Was it the 'wobble seam'?

It was a huge/massive wicket.

You not read the latest Grumbler?
"Sky are the key force behind the destruction of county cricket as we know it. "

VicNorth wrote:You not read the latest Grumbler?
"Sky are the key force behind the destruction of county cricket as we know it. "

I just posted the above message on it !

I'm finding it difficult to watch any Cricket on TV any more as most of  the commentators do my head in.Plus the 5 minute enquiry almost every time a wicket falls.

When a bowler bowls a poor ball which in club cricket would get hit for 6. The commentators always say what a great shot! They probably get told by the producers to make everything sound like it is a brilliant shot or they are a great player.

Badges wrote:

VicNorth wrote:You not read the latest Grumbler?
"Sky are the key force behind the destruction of county cricket as we know it. "

I just posted the above message on it !

I'm finding it difficult to watch any Cricket on TV any more as most of  the commentators do my head in.Plus the 5 minute enquiry almost every time a wicket falls.

Where do you post comments? On Facebook?

Even worse is when Isha Guah shouts “ bowled him” in her hideous high pitched voice.
It worked when Ritchie and Tony Greig did it.

VicNorth wrote:

Badges wrote:

VicNorth wrote:You not read the latest Grumbler?
"Sky are the key force behind the destruction of county cricket as we know it. "

I just posted the above message on it !

I'm finding it difficult to watch any Cricket on TV any more as most of  the commentators do my head in.Plus the 5 minute enquiry almost every time a wicket falls.

Where do you post comments? On Facebook?

Yes.Go on the County Cricket Matters site.I couldn't copy and paste as a new thread so stuck in on The Grumbler post.

Steve wrote:When a bowler bowls a poor ball which in club cricket would get hit for 6. The commentators always say what a great shot!  They probably get told by the producers to make everything sound like it is a brilliant shot or they are a great player.

Spot on.And when a terrible delivery gets a wicket it's a great piece of bowling.

I can remember years ago Brian Johnston saying "that's a great shot" as a long hop was pulled down to long leg, shortly afterwards followed by "but he's out". But then "Johnners" was IMHO more of a circus act than a commentator.

My father used to laugh about an old time boxing commentator (Barrington Dalby?) Whenever he said "there's nothing to choose between these two boys" everyone knew a knockout was imminent.

Bit harsh on “Johnners”, he was a man of his time and did much to popularise TMS. I would rather listen to him than some modern commentators I could mention.

David Lloyd used to joke that a club 3rd XI leg-spinner would be an effective bowler in pro T20.

I saw that a tight finish looked likely in today's Big Bash game and with Laurie Evans in i turned on to watch the end.5 minutes later i had seen 1 ball bowled so switched off.

For those who love Aussie commentary: Live on Sky Sports, remaining Big Bash matches:

Thursday January 11 - Hobart Hurricanes vs Adelaide Strikers (8.15am)

Friday January 12 - Sydney Sixers vs Sydney Thunder (8.15am)

Saturday January 13 - Perth Scorchers vs Brisbane Heat (5.15am)

Saturday January 13 - Melbourne Renegades vs Melbourne Stars (8.30am)

Sunday January 14 - Sydney Thunder vs Adelaide Strikers (8.15am)

Monday January 15 - Melbourne Stars vs Hobart Hurricanes

Tuesday January 16 - Perth Scorchers vs Sydney Sixers (8.40am)

Wednesday January 17 - Sydney Thunder vs Melbourne Renegades (8.15am)

Friday January 19 - Play-off #1

Saturday January 20 - Play-off #2

Monday January 22 - Play-off #3

Wednesday January 24 - Final

Surrey players involved:

Adelaide Strikers: Jamie Overton
Hobart Hurricanes: Chris Jordan
Perth Scorchers: Laurie Evans
Sydney Sixers: Tom Curran (Sean Abbott)

I don’t often get the Daily Telegraph these days ( I used to buy it because way back they would give a report on every county game with a scorecard) but interesting article today on what their readers want to revive BBC sport.
1. Trust in true broadcasters, not former athletes
2. Move on from Gary Lineker
3. Show more golf and cricket ( Test cricket)
4. Bring back a Question of Sport
5. End the moral lectures

Come along the elephant in the room is that your average TV fan does not want women summarisers/ co-commentators on men’s sports. The inconvenient truth is that they have not one ounce of understanding of the men’s game compared to their women’s versions.

Sir Winston Churchill wrote:Come along the elephant in the room is that your average TV fan does not want women summarisers/ co-commentators on men’s sports. The inconvenient truth is that they have not one ounce of understanding of the men’s game compared to their women’s versions.

I should imagine the average Telegraph reader definitely doesn't.

Sir Winston Churchill wrote:Come along the elephant in the room is that your average TV fan does not want women summarisers/ co-commentators on men’s sports. The inconvenient truth is that they have not one ounce of understanding of the men’s game compared to their women’s versions.

Did Messrs Motson, Moore, Davies and Wolstenholme play football at anywhere the level of the mens' game? Or even as high as that of the womens' game? I very much doubt it. Understanding the game well enough to commentate on it is not dependent on having played at that level. Or possibly even to have played it at all

I note that nobody seems to complain about Jonathan Pearce or other men commentating on women's matches. Surely if they are so different the same (dodgy) argument should apply.

Summarisers, male or female, often talk nonsense. My recent favourite idiocy was Dion Dublin saying how Harry Kane should be staying in the centre and not dropping deep. Within a couple of minutes, a pass from Kane almost in the left back position set up a goal for Kyle Walker. Dublin seemed totally unaware that he had been blown out of the water by events.

I would take Emma Hayes as a summariser before many of the men that get the gig because of their supposed insight as former players. Of course she understands the mens' and womens' game, because like any good coach she is forever looking for ideas as how to improve her team. It is former players who usually become inanity machines. But that is the point the Telegraph survey brings out, that good broadcasters are better than most ex-players. But never mind that even the Telegraph readers didn't trot out the cliches about women commentators. Obviously they all decided not to mention the elephant in the room, because ... well, why? I would have thought that the Telegraph would have been happy to trumpet that as their top hate if that is what their readers had told them.

Personally I am not against female commentators or summarisers as such but it seems to me that TV and radio are having them for diversity reasons rather than for what they contribute. I’m not sure that’s right. We all have our personal likes and dislikes of course. For football I like Sue Smith and for cricket Ebony Rainford-Brent and Lydia Greenway. I won’t mention my dislikes!.

I agree with Adelaide that Emma Hayes is a much better summariser than most of the males that are around, as she understands the coaching side of things.
I also agree with Wokoval that EBR and Greenway are good on when they are for cricket.

However, the truth is that it shouldnt be whether an individual has played the game they are summarising/commentating on, or what gender they are, it should be about whether they are good with a microphone or in front of the camera. TBH im fed up with all the ex footballers that do MOTD, there was nothing wrong back in the day when Des Lynam did it, or Dickie Davies and Steve Rider with the afternoon shows on ITV & BBC

The one ex-footballer unlikely to make it onto MOTD is Joey Barton. I had to laugh when amongst his bile he claimed that white middle-aged football managers didn't have a chance. Funny that, because the vast majority are white and the majority of those middle-aged (Roy Hodgson being even later middle-aged than me, of course). They may not be British but that's a bit different.

I think the point that is sometimes missed is that if there is no trigger to make those who make appointments think about diversity they tend to appoint people like themselves, which can lead to an old boys' club situation and unconscious discrimination. That's not just about race (Richards, Shearer and Lineker look like a new "old lads' club to me) and gender. I am not a great fan of box-ticking targets but having to think about how you are going about it is no bad thing.

Great commentators can give us great lines. Barry Davies had three of them in the Spurs-Arsenal Gazza semi years ago but one of my favourites came when a Brazilian had sent three shots well wide in a few minutes in a European game - "I'd like to see his passport". Classic!

For someone of little talent and ability Joey Barton has had a remarkably long playing and management career. He obviously hasn't been able to get a presenting gig he believes he deserves since being sacked as a manager so he seems to have thrown his toys out the pram.

People get commentators mixed up with co commentators. To this day the overwhelming majority of football commentators are not former pros.

Second we can all reel off summarisers and co-com who are men and who are dreadful. However there is that common bond that the vast majority have played men’s football at the highest level, but of course this doesn’t necessarily mean they can articulate their views as well as some other former pros.
Problem for women is they have zero experience of playing prem Men’s football (this is also why we don’t have men from say division two commenting on prem games) so how in the name of god can they give an expert opinion? They are simply not remotely qualified.
On top of this is the desperation to add to the diversity that these women are not chosen for their articulation they are chosen for their sex only. What a car crash combination this is.

As for presenting, people like Kelly Dalgish  and Gabby Yorath for example have both done the hard yards and are selected on their presentation skills alone, which makes them highly respectable and indeed competent to listen to.

Meritocracy has been abandoned in favour of wokeness and diversity. And this i can assure you is putting off vast numbers of viewers from watching sports, or at least it’s build up and post match analysis.

Surely people should be chosen on their ability and competence to do the job? Any job actually. It' should not be about box ticking or indeed "diversity" with all its questionable meanings. Who cares (apart from the wokeists) what their gender or colour is. When you start employing people for pc reasons you can't always expect the best. With regard to cricket it doesn't seem to matter who it is, they all seem pretty poor these days.