Just not cricket – how Channel Nine is destroying a legacy

[jeemak]

Re: Just not cricket – how Channel Nine is destroying a legacy

I've seen this article pop up many times on Twitter and facebook the last few days. Who knows, it may actually get some real traction. But it's also deeply ironic that the article itself is too bloody long

Thought the same myself. Hit its target but got boring after a while.

That's seemingly the point of difference this particular publication likes to uphold (original was a Guardian article).

[jeemak]

Re: Just not cricket – how Channel Nine is destroying a legacy

Could also be titled: From AFL to cricket: James Brayshaw and the dumbing down of Australian sports commentary.

Yep. In my ignorance I thought his rubbish style was the reason he wouldn't get a channel 9 spot. Alas, it's why he got the job. We can't be the only ones...

It's actually just a version of The Footy Show that roles over the entire day of a test match. It's the perfect formula for CH9 because they know it will work.


I've said it in previous threads eluding to this issue. We and those that we associate with are to blame for this crap being poured over us. The people at CH9 aren't dickheads, they know what we as a broader populace know and expect from a broadcasting team.

We are a stupid bunch who individually know what is being dished up is tripe. The fact is we don't want or expect any more as a collective and that's the downfall we all suffer from, and the reason we have to put up with this rubbish.

[hujsh]

Re: Just not cricket – how Channel Nine is destroying a legacy

Dad was talking on the plane to the guy in charge of Fairfax's sport stuff a year or two ago. Though it's no surprise, they mainly look for that jokey banter and feel that's what people want to hear/what bring in the ratings.

[chef]

Re: Just not cricket – how Channel Nine is destroying a legacy

I guess it's tough with a game like Cricket thats so stop start and has so many gaps in play, theres only so much of the game to talk about.

Must say they do have the worst commentators around, they seem more set on entertaining themselves than the people at home.

[azabob]

Re: Just not cricket – how Channel Nine is destroying a legacy

I do like Clark as a commentator and it is a Monty that he will get a spot in the box when his playing career is over.
One thing though when a player seems to be nearing a milestone he does tend to drag the conversation back to his accomplishments at times.

Clarkes teammates didn't.

[GVGjr]

Re: Just not cricket – how Channel Nine is destroying a legacy

I guess it's tough with a game like Cricket thats so stop start and has so many gaps in play, theres only so much of the game to talk about.

Must say they do have the worst commentators around, they seem more set on entertaining themselves than the people at home.

Baseball commentators though do a great job of calling the game. I rate them as some of the very best commentators of world sport.

Channel 9 need to get their pairings right and break the chat that isn't about the game. They need specialist commentators to be paired with recent or past players. I was listening to Gerard Whateley call the cricket yesterday while I was on a walk and thought he was great. I don't think I lost much by not watching the game.

[chef]

Re: Just not cricket – how Channel Nine is destroying a legacy

Baseball commentators though do a great job of calling the game. I rate them as some of the very best commentators of world sport.

Channel 9 need to get their pairings right and break the chat that isn't about the game. They need specialist commentators to be paired with recent or past players. I was listening to Gerard Whateley call the cricket yesterday while I was on a walk and thought he was great. I don't think I lost much by not watching the game.

I'm guessing the difference would be Baseball wouldn't be just sticking a bunch of blokey mates together to talk about what ever they want and occasionally whats going on out on the ground. The guys would be experts in the analysing game.

Too many ex players and not enough expert commentators.

[jeemak]

Re: Just not cricket – how Channel Nine is destroying a legacy

I guess it's tough with a game like Cricket thats so stop start and has so many gaps in play, theres only so much of the game to talk about.

Must say they do have the worst commentators around, they seem more set on entertaining themselves than the people at home.

Baseball commentators though do a great job of calling the game. I rate them as some of the very best commentators of world sport.

Channel 9 need to get their pairings right and break the chat that isn't about the game. They need specialist commentators to be paired with recent or past players. I was listening to Gerard Whateley call the cricket yesterday while I was on a walk and thought he was great. I don't think I lost much by not watching the game.

Therein lies the issue.

Nobody doubts it's a game - much like baseball - that has many gaps in physical entertainment. Therefore, the commentary needs to be insightful and interesting to keep viewers engaged. What we have now is banal and mundane stroking among a one sided commentary team that is completely ignorant towards any technicality the sport delivers. The horrific thing about it all - as the article points out - is that a good majority of the team is actually capable of delivering something beyond the banal and mundane.

The biggest takeaway from the article is that this current predicament is commercially driven. You and I live among very basic individuals that want to see Binga smash Morgan on a lunch break, just for a laugh.......CH9 have a captive audience, now they're just trying to squeeze every bit out of them, and we happen to fill the position of collateral in the exchange.

[GVGjr]

Re: Just not cricket – how Channel Nine is destroying a legacy

I'm guessing the difference would be Baseball wouldn't be just sticking a bunch of blokey mates together to talk about what ever they want and occasionally whats going on out on the ground. The guys would be experts in the analysing game.

Too many ex players and not enough expert commentators.

Yes they don't really talk about the past that much and concentrate of informing the audience what the pitchers and batters are doing which is often backed up by stats.
Channel 9 can do a better job of it and revert back to a more traditional call of the game. Yes it has to be entertaining but a greater focus of informing the audience.

[KT31]

Re: Just not cricket – how Channel Nine is destroying a legacy

The nine commentators certainly could do far worse than take a few pointers from Phil Liggett and listen to how he manages to commentate for a whole day and make it interesting.
I actually wonder if you dissected a day of nines commentary and took out all the mentions of KFC, memorabilia sales, talking about themselves, promotions for upcoming shows and in-jokes how few minutes would be devoted to the game on hand.

[Twodogs]

Re: Just not cricket – how Channel Nine is destroying a legacy

It's the worse year for the commentary on C9 to go sour because C10 really nailed it with their commentary/commentators on the Big Bash this year. Gilchrist and Fleming were particularly good.

[GVGjr]

Re: Just not cricket – how Channel Nine is destroying a legacy

It's the worse year for the commentary on C9 to go sour because C10 really nailed it with their commentary/commentators on the Big Bash this year. Gilchrist and Fleming were particularly good.

I didn't watch a lot of the Big Bash but I think the commentary in that format can be more about the excitement than the attributes of the game and yes Ponting, Gilchrist and Fleming did a good job.

[Twodogs]

Re: Just not cricket – how Channel Nine is destroying a legacy

Ponting, thank you. I knew there was another name.


What you say is true, T20 is an easier game to commentate. it would be though if those guys ignored the play for 15 minutes and talked about their golf game.

Maybe that's why C10 were better. Their commentators didn't have 100 stories to tell about T20 games they had played in to talk about so they had to talk about the play? Except Gilchrist of course. But he'd hate to talk about himself.,

[Sedat]

Re: Just not cricket – how Channel Nine is destroying a legacy

Channel 9 commentary team are merely plumbing the depths of what their braindead audience expects from them. Channel 7 and their wretched footy commentary are no less deplorable, and with a sport that should be much easier to provide something of worth in the commentary box.

Brayshaw is a blokey mug but that is exactly what the great unwashed want. Healy is such a biased cheerleader he should just sit with the fanatics and wear green and gold face paint. Slater is the helium balloon of the crew. Nicholas is the token sycophantic arse licker - the Andy Maher of Channel 9 if you will. A truly horrible bunch of commentators.

The appalling state of cricket and footy commentary today reminds me of quote from Frontline over 20 years ago. One if Mike Moore's executive producers once said "no EP has ever been sacked for under-estimating the intelligence of the viewing public"

[Twodogs]

Re: Just not cricket – how Channel Nine is destroying a legacy

Channel 9 commentary team are merely plumbing the depths of what their braindead audience expects from them. Channel 7 and their wretched footy commentary are no less deplorable, and with a sport that should be much easier to provide something of worth in the commentary box.

Brayshaw is a blokey mug but that is exactly what the great unwashed want. Healy is such a biased cheerleader he should just sit with the fanatics and wear green and gold face paint. Slater is the helium balloon of the crew. Nicholas is the token sycophantic arse licker - the Andy Maher of Channel 9 if you will. A truly horrible bunch of commentators.

The appalling state of cricket and footy commentary today reminds me of quote from Frontline over 20 years ago. One if Mike Moore's executive producers once said "no EP has ever been sacked for under-estimating the intelligence of the viewing public"

Prowesy I think.