In fairness mate, TMS is top draw.
Cricket
- Thread starter summerisle
- Start date
In fairness mate, TMS is top draw.
Chris O'Connor
Player Valuation: £35m
I would qualify that and say it once was top drawer. There's Agnew who's good and one or two others but a lot of the time it's pretty boring and banal imo. A few are sports reporters rather than anything else and just bland, they do well to identify the players half the time
Chris O'Connor
Player Valuation: £35m
Who can forget missing the morning session every year in favour of the BBC wanting to prioritise Trooping of the Colour?
Cricket wasn't even treated as a second best by the broadcaster, it was last behind everything else all of the time, a neglected afterthought that they wouldn't modernise or update. They were still covering every ball via a camera from one end only, so every alternate over you had the wicketkeeper's arse getting in the way. Channel 4 took over and thrr coverage was lightyears better than the BBC's and confirmed just how cricket was looked upon by the national broadcaster.
Shocking coverage and highlights shown so late in the 'graveyard' slot - very late when most had gone to bed.
I’ll always love TMS but I have to say it’s not as good as it was. Aggers and vic marks are great, and I quite like isa guha, but a lot of the newer people just aren’t as good as the old ones. I get that they’ve tried to move away from the old etonians image but that was kind of the appeal of it. I don’t find Tufnell, Vaughan, Swann etc particularly engaging personally.
neil999
Player Valuation: £80m
In umpires defence if somone gets hurt in poor conditions they would be too blame, but the system is not right and needs to change, I don't know why test cricket can't be played under flood lights... Yes it might be harder for the batting team but sport often has these unfair moments
Test cricket ius clearly quite a unique sport with archaic rules. There are some that seem to assume any sort of progress or common sense needs to be avoided in order to preserve the game, They even treat those who want change as the almost ultimate enemy and sucscribe to the view it's the best form of the game and won't die off.
I love test cricket (as I love county cricket) but county cricket has essential died off, and Test cricket will follow if it doesn't make some changes. That is ridiculous today. Not starting any earlier even though no fans, The full lunch break when it's light. Then going off, in mid afternoon with fast medium bowlers playing. It's a farce.
Chris O'Connor
Player Valuation: £35m
The officials are lucky this is all happening behind closed doors given how angry the crowd would have been to see players troop off with the floodlights on full beam and the Pakistan one-day players playing on the adjacent practice ground without any lights at all.
Duty of care to players and officials is obviously important, and there are concerns over litigation in the modern world, but there is a responsibility to the game too. Sky and the BBC have been enjoying record viewing figures as a sport-starved public lap up the game, giving Test cricket vital exposure. Many would have switched off yesterday and done something else instead, fed up with the arcane way cricket can be ruled.
The umpires take a light meter reading on the first day, setting the precedent for the levels for the rest of the match. It meant only 41 overs were possible despite not a drop of rain falling at the Ageas Bowl after 10am. With heavy cloud forecast for the whole week, being conservative with the light reading was always going to create stoppages. The game is paying for it
summerisle
The rain, it raineth every day
One match live on the BBC.
www.bbc.co.uk
England-Australia matches confirmed
England will play three Twenty20s and three one-day internationals against Australia next month.
www.bbc.co.uk
gonetomorrow
Player Valuation: £80m
I'm sorry to slate the current TMS because they are doing their best in exceptional circumstances. They're trying to be a bit laddish with Tuffers who's obviously a good old guy and Vaughan whose knowledgeable but has a boring voice. Agnew and Marks give us a whiff of the old days but I can't warm to anyone else to be honest.
One plus point for me is the absence of Boycott - a relic of former days I never took to. Let's face it, those of us who are "a certain age" were spoilt rotten by listening to the likes of Arlott, Bailey, Johnson, Laker, Benaud et al in those endless summers of the 60s and 70s
By contrast, Sky are in your face professional and the complete opposite of TMS but I think they tend to over-analyse the action. There's little humour there.
I'll stick with TMS and Tuffers and his fags!
Yeah I probably wasn’t fair there. Tuffnell is hilarious at times and a good natural speaker, I just think he’s better suited to the podcast etc than actually commentating. He often sounds like he’s just done no research at all about things, and that’s a bit annoying when you’re looking for analysis. I’ve met Vaughan a few times and he’s a really nice bloke, but I feel like he’s trying to become boycott lite, just being controversial for the sake of it. A lot depends on who their guest comms are too, Jim maxwell and Glenn McGrath were great last year.
Chris O'Connor
Player Valuation: £35m
Tufnell to me just provides light-hearted entertainment, more in a laddish sort of way, not too serious except when it comes to spin, then his expertise and knowledge shows through. He's less of an authority on batting or fielding but at least he's played at the top level and speaks from experience. Vaughan was a brilliant captain and stylish bat but he has unfortunate tone for me, agree he does seem to want to be a bit edgy and controversial - supporting 4 day tests no matter how qualified - a case in point.
Geoff Boycott for all his predictability and trenchant views provided batting knowledge and expertise. He could relate to the patience and mentality required of an opener in the more careful mode needed in this country. Most of all though he provided the perfect stooge and foil for Aggers, for me he's sorely missed. (I know Vaughan was an opener for much of his career but more of a strokemaker and could play number three or four too).
The rest are a waste of space to be quite honest, Isa Guha is a decent anchor for the highlights and the best of the rest but It is going downhill for me and not something I'd readily choose to listen to anymore.
Rob Key for me is the best analyst on Sky's coverage. I feel it strikes the right balance between bumble's light hearted clowning and the brilliant analysis from Atherton, Holding, Nasser with Rob Key the promising new boy. Most of all though they're so thorough and in depth, bringing huge insight and informing, even the more knowledgeable viewer on the action. It benefits from having a specialised channel, and the time and budget to get the best possible coverage of the game.
Last edited:
Yeah I’d agree with all of that. That balance of being knowledgeable but not boring is a fine one, but I think sky have really nailed it and TMS have struggled recently. Obviously sky have got the money where bbc haven’t, but it’s a shame they haven’t unearthed anyone because I’d love it to get back to what it was.
Sky's cricket coverage is light years ahead of what was served up on BBC, and I still see it from time as I've still got highlights on old VHS tapes of Test matches from the 90s which I dig out and watch every now and then. Their output was bang average at best.
The BBC famously went to horse racing when Graham Gooch was 299 not out in a Test match at Lords. Even when Channel Four had the cricket you had to share it with bloody horse racing every Saturday. No such problems since Sky had it.
I still would like to see Geoff Boycott back in some capacity somewhere. Love him or hate him I think he's an excellent pundit.
The BBC famously went to horse racing when Graham Gooch was 299 not out in a Test match at Lords. Even when Channel Four had the cricket you had to share it with bloody horse racing every Saturday. No such problems since Sky had it.
I still would like to see Geoff Boycott back in some capacity somewhere. Love him or hate him I think he's an excellent pundit.
Last edited:
Chris O'Connor
Player Valuation: £35m
With the BBC of the 1990's it was everything before cricket, so interruptions for horse racing, tennis and even a whole morning missed for Trooping of the Colour. It was exacerbated by their extreme parsimony and refusal to increase the budget as they had with virtually every other sport. In the 1990's they were still using a method of covering tests pioneered in the late 1950's, the viewer always watching from one fixed position at only one end ffs. What's so informative about having the wicketkeeper, stumps and batsman in your way every alternate over, as the ball comes down?
Let's face it their coverage was dark ages stuff, beyond belief really, a second class sport kept down and impoverished, bare minimum spend and only covered when nothing more 'important' was happening. It was treated almost as wallpaper in the background - an afterthought, consigning any highlights package to the late night graveyard slot. Their sole saving grace was the loyalty of one of the all time great commentators Richie Benaud who came back every summer and single handedly tried to give the much needed expertise and insight. The cricket itself was often unmissable when they deigned to cover it.
For so long they were the only broadcaster available and must have thought nothing would change, they neglected it, refused to contemplate an increased number of cameras or better analysis, grew lazy, complacent, and at times to be quite frank, incompetent. They got a really nasty shock when at the first opportunity cricket, tired of getting buttons for coverage, responded by giving Channel 4 the contract and Benaud jumped ship. Channel 4 was light years ahead and the difference startling. Aussie channel 9 had been showing them how to do for a decade, since Kerry Packer's started his ashes down under coverage (we had the highlights), it wasn't rocket science or a breaking new way of working.
Sky have just taken it on again and kept on improving, it's no longer neglected and the coverage first class. There are however huge disadvantages to having it solely covered by a pay TV channel where the audience has to be tiny relative to free to air as it's necessarily limited to subscribers. The disadvantages then are great to the popularity and exposure of the sport, so that it needs free to air coverage to grow properly and prosper, or you risk losing whole generations to the sport.
If it was solely about coverage then Sky are a 10, Channel 4 a 7 or 8 and the BBC of the nineties a minus number perhaps -5, but it's not, any test the BBC gets now, they will have to improve a hundred fold and give the sport some respect, at least be in the same ballpark even if it's still inferior.
Last edited:
Its funny really, I go a bit the other way. I've never really liked Agnew that much and I find Isa Guha a bit dull. Of the anchors JIm Maxwell is probably my favourite. Last summer, I thought MIthell Johnson came across very well as well.
As for Tufnell, I find him very listenable actually. I don't think you always get a lot of incite from him, but he has a very natural conversation style, deos it with a humour etc.Vaughan seems to be disliked but I find him quite clinical and critical whihc is a positive. I miss Boycott and obviously Richie Benaud. However the TMS team to me are quite well balanced, and you always feel the new person who comes in has a different style, approach and overview which helps pass the time.
On the flip side Sky are good too, in a different way and ultimately a way whereby there is more uniformity. I think Atherton and Hussein are the two best broadcasters to be honest, and have done for years. Both incredibly thougtful, analytical, reflexive. They have always been my favourite broadcasters when listening to cricket, I always feel I get a unique intepretation from both. I mean even in that slot, Hussein is rightly highlighting the conunrum of what we do medium term with this attack. Most broadcasters are just going to tell you Broad is world class, has to be picked etc, but there is precious little longer term thinking and questioning. Sky are lucky to have those 2.
Warne is very good as well. Outside of that stable though I'm not sure about the rest. People go on about Ian Ward, and I just don't see it as much, I see a county player. Nick Knight, again I don't get a great deal from him. Probably controversially, I never got the appeal with Botham and Gower so I am glad they are moved on, I never thought Botham was massively inciteful. I do like David Lloyd, I think he adds a bit of colour and flavour to the proceedings
They both fulfil different functions to me. However on TMS you do ofte get some really interesting discussions and if I was just listening to either in the background Id take TMS over Sky.