• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Commentating Standard thread

C

CWB304

U19 Cricketer
BoyBrumby said:
Pommie and especially Polly are both top drawer, IMHO. Pollock's particularly good because he combines a keen analytical eye (his analysis on bowlers' actions suggests someone who actually follows & watches the game beyond his professional requirements; quite often when he's not on Jackman refers to Pollock being "in the back of the box", watching for the sheer love of it) with an enthusiasm for the sport that comes across in his commentry.

Very likeable chap too, which obviously helps.
Click to expand...
Pollock is a brilliant commentator, perceptive, sympathetic to what the bowlers and batters are trying to do, and good at conveying insights from his own experience. Perhaps he's just a very good actor, but one senses in him an unfeigned modesty about his own achievements combined with a deep love of the game, which together give added authority to his opinions.

I have problems with some of the others. Haysman is awful; a hectoring and slightly chauvinistic tub-thumper who once he gets on one of his hobby horses won't get off for hours. Pommie has this disconcerting habit of articulating each and every word with heightened emphasis, which distracts the viewer from the points he's trying to express. His portentous diction if anything serves only to underscore the fact that he has no real insights to offer; just conventional opinion and warmed over cliches. But he's some way to go to catch up with Mark Nicholas; that pompous simpering a*selicking purveyor of "good news" is cricket commentary's reigning king of bathos.
 
Last edited:
uvelocity

uvelocity

International Coach
CWB304 said:
Pollock is a brilliant commentator, perceptive, sympathetic to what the bowlers and batters are trying to do, and good at conveying insights from his own experience. Perhaps he's just a very good actor, but one senses in him an unfeigned modesty about his own achievements combined with a deep love of the game, which together give added authority to his opinions.

I have problems with some of the others. Haysman is awful; a hectoring and slightly chauvinistic tub-thumper who once he gets on one of his hobby horses won't get off for hours. Pommie has this disconcerting habit of articulating each and every word with heightened emphasis, which distracts the viewer from the points he's trying to express. His portentous diction if anything serves only to underscore the fact that he has no real insights to offer; just conventional opinion and warmed over cliches. But he's some way to go to catch up with Mark Nicholas; that pompous simpering a*selicking purveyor of "good news" is cricket commentary's reigning king of bathos.
Click to expand...
top post :artist:
 
Himannv

Himannv

Hall of Fame Member
CWB304 said:
Pollock is a brilliant commentator, perceptive, sympathetic to what the bowlers and batters are trying to do, and good at conveying insights from his own experience. Perhaps he's just a very good actor, but one senses in him an unfeigned modesty about his own achievements combined with a deep love of the game, which together give added authority to his opinions.

I have problems with some of the others. Haysman is awful; a hectoring and slightly chauvinistic tub-thumper who once he gets on one of his hobby horses won't get off for hours. Pommie has this disconcerting habit of articulating each and every word with heightened emphasis, which distracts the viewer from the points he's trying to express. His portentous diction if anything serves only to underscore the fact that he has no real insights to offer; just conventional opinion and warmed over cliches. But he's some way to go to catch up with Mark Nicholas; that pompous simpering a*selicking purveyor of "good news" is cricket commentary's reigning king of bathos.
Click to expand...
Best new poster imo.

Have to say I quite like Pommie although I think he doesn't really offer much in terms of analytical insights. Its not so much about what he says for me, its just how he says it I suppose. He seems to have a bit of a cheerful way of going about his task and it makes listening to him fairly pleasant and enjoyable.
 
Black_Warrior

Black_Warrior

Cricketer Of The Year
Pommie is an excellent orator..very eloquent and offers intelligent insights. I haven't heard a lot of Pollock though.
 
JBMAC

JBMAC

State Captain
None of them are even close to the standard of McGilvray,Moyes,Arlott....prefer to have the idiot box on sound muted and listen to Jim Maxwell and Geoff Lawson


Keith Miller, Bobby Simpson and Norman May were not too bad either
 
S

SteveNZ

Cricketer Of The Year
The conversation Greig and Lawry (who remind me of those two old fools on the balcony in the Muppets) on Ponting v Kallis yesterday was embarrasing.

Ponting scores a hundred, may I add a sparkling one at that, and Lawry turns straight around to Greig and suggests he change his tune that Kallis is the better player. Ignoring the fact that Kallis has the same amount (41) and a 5-run superior average (although in Lawry's defense, Kallis hadn't scored one that day).

Then Greig gets really sharp and brings up Kallis' 274 wickets, which is clearly a black mark against Ricky that he hasn't been able to achieve the same. To which Lawry fires back with a strike rate jibe. A strike rate jibe from Lawry! Ignoring the fact that it is Test cricket, the richness of that coming from a man who was once described as a 'corpse with pads on is incredible.

I honestly feel these two, along with Healy, are breeding an audience of miseducated idiots.
 
Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
SteveNZ said:
The conversation Greig and Lawry (who remind me of those two old fools on the balcony in the Muppets) on Ponting v Kallis yesterday was embarrasing.

Ponting scores a hundred, may I add a sparkling one at that, and Lawry turns straight around to Greig and suggests he change his tune that Kallis is the better player. Ignoring the fact that Kallis has the same amount (41) and a 5-run superior average (although in Lawry's defense, Kallis hadn't scored one that day).

Then Greig gets really sharp and brings up Kallis' 274 wickets, which is clearly a black mark against Ricky that he hasn't been able to achieve the same. To which Lawry fires back with a strike rate jibe. A strike rate jibe from Lawry! Ignoring the fact that it is Test cricket, the richness of that coming from a man who was once described as a 'corpse with pads on is incredible.

I honestly feel these two, along with Healy, are breeding an audience of miseducated idiots.
Click to expand...
I think the Lawry/Greig thing is a bit of a put-on sometimes.
 
Black_Warrior

Black_Warrior

Cricketer Of The Year
SteveNZ said:
The conversation Greig and Lawry (who remind me of those two old fools on the balcony in the Muppets) on Ponting v Kallis yesterday was embarrasing.

Ponting scores a hundred, may I add a sparkling one at that, and Lawry turns straight around to Greig and suggests he change his tune that Kallis is the better player. Ignoring the fact that Kallis has the same amount (41) and a 5-run superior average (although in Lawry's defense, Kallis hadn't scored one that day).

Then Greig gets really sharp and brings up Kallis' 274 wickets, which is clearly a black mark against Ricky that he hasn't been able to achieve the same. To which Lawry fires back with a strike rate jibe. A strike rate jibe from Lawry! Ignoring the fact that it is Test cricket, the richness of that coming from a man who was once described as a 'corpse with pads on is incredible.

I honestly feel these two, along with Healy, are breeding an audience of miseducated idiots.
Click to expand...
Most certainly. I have long ago stopped expecting anything remotely intelligent or interesting from the Channel 9 crowd. Chappel is good from time to time but that's it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top