Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Andy Murray 2012

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 117
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 26 66 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 86 117 template Next
    #1126
    Originally posted by Neil Young View Post
    I bet they don't put precisely that.

    Anyway I expect it's for people who otherwise wouldn't know what the asterisk signifies.

    On a similar note though, it's bugging me the way all the cycling commentators are constantly explaining the basics to all the new viewers they've got since July. I mean, it's a good thing and helping all these new fans understand is good but it gets a bit boring for us cog-nosh-empty. So I understand your vexation.
    They do though. Look at the 'in summary' bit.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/19537576


    Makes no sense.

    I understand your thing about cycling commentary. Its similar, I suppose, to when I like a band or a film that doesn't get that much media exposure... and then they begin to become popular, and a thing that was special to me is ruined because a load of plebs like it.
    Modifying post.

    Comment

      #1127
      Originally posted by Nigey View Post
      Like Shaggy and Foggy?
      Yes. Although their interest may have peaked.
      .
      Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.



      May the Lord bless this post.

      Comment

        #1128
        Originally posted by Neil Young View Post
        Yes. Although their interest may have peaked.
        They'll have forgotten the rules by the time of the next Olympics.
        Are we winning?

        Comment

          #1129
          Yeah F1 is the same on Sky. They think that because they are new to the coverage, the audience is new to the sport.

          ****wits.

          Comment

            #1130
            Originally posted by Buzzo View Post
            They do though. Look at the 'in summary' bit.

            http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/19537576


            Makes no sense.

            I understand your thing about cycling commentary. Its similar, I suppose, to when I like a band or a film that doesn't get that much media exposure... and then they begin to become popular, and a thing that was special to me is ruined because a load of plebs like it.
            No, it's not quite the same as that. I mean, I know what you mean from being snobbily in-crowdish about bands when I was younger. I don't begrudge my interest being "taken over" or becoming popular. It just gets a bit repetitive when you watch as much cycling as I do.

            What I do hate are commentators that don't know what they're talking about. On today's Tour of Britain coverage on ITV4, Hugh Porter talked some real tosh. Maybe he knows a lot about British cycling but he doesn't seem up to it on the international stuff. And Phil Liggett seems to make quite a few factual errors too (not to mention his excruciating defence of Armstrong recently).

            Anyway I checked the link and it says "denotes", not "donates", you Buttso. Get some glasses.
            .
            Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.



            May the Lord bless this post.

            Comment

              #1131
              Originally posted by Nigey View Post
              They'll have forgotten the rules by the time of the next Olympics.
              Maybe. But that's cool.
              .
              Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.



              May the Lord bless this post.

              Comment

                #1132
                Originally posted by Neil Young View Post
                No, it's not quite the same as that. I mean, I know what you mean from being snobbily in-crowdish about bands when I was younger. I don't begrudge my interest being "taken over" or becoming popular. It just gets a bit repetitive when you watch as much cycling as I do.

                What I do hate are commentators that don't know what they're talking about. On today's Tour of Britain coverage on ITV4, Hugh Porter talked some real tosh. Maybe he knows a lot about British cycling but he doesn't seem up to it on the international stuff. And Phil Liggett seems to make quite a few factual errors too (not to mention his excruciating defence of Armstrong recently).

                Anyway I checked the link and it says "denotes", not "donates", you Buttso. Get some glasses.
                yeah denotes, that would make more sense. Thats just my bad typing/being a bit dim But my point remains. Just denote the guy who is serving in the game you are writing about.

                Did Phil Liggett commentate at the Olympics, because one guy particularly on the road racing made loads of mistakes (getting cyclists wrong etc). I think cricket leads the way in intelligent and insightful commenary.
                Modifying post.

                Comment

                  #1133
                  No, the Olympics commentator was Hugh Porter. He really isn't up to it.

                  I could do better.

                  There was a great moment at the Olympics when Porter and Chris Boardman were actually on camera. Porter said something wrong and Boardman looked at him and had to bite his lip to stop himself from correcting him on air.

                  I agree about cricket analysis, except for Sky, which has far too much jokey banter and not enough proper discussion (and I'm not even counting David Lloyd's unfunny comic turns at T20). Even so, they manage some analysis sometimes.

                  As for cycling, Sean Kelly and David Harmon are really good on Eurosport. And Roger Hammond has been excellent on ITV4 during the Vuelta.

                  ITV4's live coverage today was a bit pants all round. It started off with a f*ck-up, had crap commentary and ended with a crap shot of the podium. Rob Hayles is a good bloke but a bit too kind to the riders. As for Hugh Porter:

                  It's a French team and I must admit I don't know much about them.
                  That may not be word for word but it's pretty close. He was talking about Saur-Sojasun, FFS, they're not unknown. For instance, Jimmy Engoulvent won the overall at the Four Days of Dunkirk back in May.

                  Good fact about the Four Days of Dunkirk: it lasts five days.
                  .
                  Suppose you have a physicist and a sociologist standing at the side of a field, observing a set of events unfolding on the field. The physicist does [describes] it using the terminology of mass and velocity and frequency of radiation and the rest. And the sociologist does it by describing it as a rugby match.



                  May the Lord bless this post.

                  Comment

                    #1134
                    Serena v Azarenko is a good game, 1-1 in the deciding set.
                    Thanks very much for being ‘This Mornings’ Farmer’

                    Comment

                      #1135
                      Azarenko serving for the title.
                      Modifying post.

                      Comment

                        #1136
                        Williams breaks back.
                        Modifying post.

                        Comment

                          #1137
                          Williams wins.

                          Decent game, hate Serena Williams though.
                          The times they are a changin'.

                          Comment

                            #1138
                            15th Slam for Serena.

                            Amazing.
                            Modifying post.

                            Comment

                              #1139
                              http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?num=10&hl=en&biw=1236&bih=545&tbm=isch&tbnid=MDw4PUMMcMM6zM:&imgrefurl=http://www.radiotimes.com/episode/r459x/paralympic-games-2012--paralympic-games-2012-closing-ceremony

                              http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?hl=en&sa=X&biw=1236&bih=545&tbm=isch&prmd=imvns&tbnid=KvG5X33VQN6vpM:&imgrefurl=http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/tennis/article-2200244/US-Open-2012-Andy-Murrays-bid-reach-final-held-torrential-rain-New-York.html&docid=0jIFPHuRG8u2VM&imgurl=http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/09/08/article-0-14E8B79A00


                              London does a major sports event.
                              New York does a major sports event.

                              Comment

                                #1140
                                Originally posted by Gibbo View Post
                                Williams wins.

                                Decent game, hate Serena Williams though.
                                she's way too macho/physical for the women's game.....should enter the men's tournaments

                                Comment

                                Previous 1 26 66 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 86 117 template Next
                                Working...
                                X