Aussie cricket commentators...grrr!!!

[Devill]

I enjoy hopping between the commentary of Aus and SA.

Both have their +s and their -s.

 

[angela-dp]

today's 20 20 commentary

The Aussie commentators are truly the worst - except Shane Warne - soooo biased and they will persist in scoring the wrong way round from the rest of the world - and announcing that you have to score 60 off first 6 overs - so full of it - have to watch with sound turned off - lucky viewers in SA don't have to put up with it

 

[OzzieCapie]

The ABC commentators, which is led by Jim Maxwell and include the likes of Peter Roebuck and , for this series, Neil Manthorpe is the most professional and entertaining commentary team around. I always put the TV sound off and listen to the radio. Not to mention "The Skull"...Kerry O'Keefe.

Quite obviously, if you only listen in snapshots on the net, then you don't 'get them'.
Calling them the "Springboks" is as Boodles said a branding problem that SA Cricket have and a slip of the tongue on the commentator's behalf. If you ask the 'man in the Aussie street' what they were called many would get it wrong...so SA Cricket have not done enough to promote the Protea name, despite 17 yrs of having it.

The only whinge I have had this series with them is when Barry Richards was interviewed whilst Duminy was saving them in second test. He did not say one good word about Duminy, instead using the platform to 'lament' about days gone by and how they are the 'forgotten' Springboks (deliberate use) who don't get any credit today.

Credit for what? For growing up with good facilities and not standing up to a government who banished people like D' Oliveira (there were many other talented ones), because their cricket and lifestyle came first.

The interviewer allowed him to get away with it because he was not sufficiently clued up about it.

SA Cricket is in good hands today because there are less of the old 'when we' guard around.

cheers

 

[HypoThesis]

The ABC commentators, which is led by Jim Maxwell and include the likes of Peter Roebuck and , for this series, Neil Manthorpe is the most professional and entertaining commentary team around. I always put the TV sound off and listen to the radio. Not to mention "The Skull"...Kerry O'Keefe.

Quite obviously, if you only listen in snapshots on the net, then you don't 'get them'.
Calling them the "Springboks" is as Boodles said a branding problem that SA Cricket have and a slip of the tongue on the commentator's behalf. If you ask the 'man in the Aussie street' what they were called many would get it wrong...so SA Cricket have not done enough to promote the Protea name, despite 17 yrs of having it.

The only whinge I have had this series with them is when Barry Richards was interviewed whilst Duminy was saving them in second test. He did not say one good word about Duminy, instead using the platform to 'lament' about days gone by and how they are the 'forgotten' Springboks (deliberate use) who don't get any credit today.

Credit for what? For growing up with good facilities and not standing up to a government who banished people like D' Oliveira (there were many other talented ones), because their cricket and lifestyle came first.

The interviewer allowed him to get away with it because he was not sufficiently clued up about it.

SA Cricket is in good hands today because there are less of the old 'when we' guard around.

cheers

+1.

Although former international cricketers have their merits and can sometimes give invaluable insight into games, I much prefer the professionally trained commentators (i.e. Neil Manthorp is a professionally trained journo and writer, Jim Maxwell has commentated at 3 Olympics, in over 200 tests and other sports).

To hear about how you would have played that shot or how back in your day you did such and such can get a bit annoying. And yes you can be patriotic but not to the point where you blatantly spur your team on.

 

[werries2]

Your listing to Australian commentary from an Australian radio station? What did you expect? Tune in to the Radio 2000 feed if you want to hear the "unbiased" South African commentary...

I enjoy the Australian commentary, since it have much more cricket in it. The stories, the enthusiasm they show for their team and for the sport in general, is a breath of fresh air.
As for the Springbok comment, some of these guys actually played against the South African squad when they were still calling themselves Springboks (If you think back all sportsman referred to themselves as Springboks when they represented their country...). I can't imagine what political agenda the commentator could have from saying this, Politics in sport is a South African problem.

 

[HypoThesis]

I can't imagine what political agenda the commentator could have from saying this, Politics in sport is a South African problem.

You been watching the English game lately??
Maybe the Indian game with IPL/ ICL? Or how about the Pakistani's issues with all their players and coaches? Oh wait, what about the problem-free and trouble-free Windies? Ok ok, I'm sorry Australia never have any problem off the field of play either...racist fans, lovely Symonds/ Harbajan 'racist' conflicts, players binge drinking/ missing practices, the PM refusing to let the team tour other countries.

No no, of cause not. Only us South African's have political problems in our sport.

 

[Ou grote]

Aussie commentators are great, Although Tony Greig is not one of them.

BTW, calling the SA cricket team the Springboks is a branding issue that has nothing to do with the commentators, but rather SA cricket.

Greig is my favourite one.
What happened to Trevor Quirk? I actually miss him and Jackers together.

Other commentators I like are Henry Blofeld on the radio and Neil Manthorp.

 

[Getafix]

The only whinge I have had this series with them is when Barry Richards was interviewed whilst Duminy was saving them in second test. He did not say one good word about Duminy, instead using the platform to 'lament' about days gone by and how they are the 'forgotten' Springboks (deliberate use) who don't get any credit today.

Credit for what? For growing up with good facilities and not standing up to a government who banished people like D' Oliveira (there were many other talented ones), because their cricket and lifestyle came first.

Ozzie, I hope you can sit on a toilet without holding on.

This is a sport thread. If you want to derail this with your perpetually whining about facilities and what not, let go and fall in your own excrement.

Not only is Barry a gentleman, he is a wonderful sportsman, commentator and sports ambassador for this country.

Can you claim 1/1000 of it?!!!

 

[Genius.]

I watched the Pro 20 today on tv and i must just say that the biased commentary really spoils the game for me.

The Aussie commentators ALWAYS take cheap shots at the South Africans. Always commenting on how much dot balls the Aussies are bowling and how the SA team are struggling against the bowling attack.

Saying they going to struggle with Warner cos he is going to thrash the SA bowling attack around the park. Im so glad he only scored 7.

Another example was when Amla hit the ball to Warner and he stopped it and threw it in one motion. He missed but even if he hit, the batsman was safely home.

The commentary box blew up with praise saying WOW, THIS BOY IS AMAZING!!!!!!!!!!

I was like WTF???

 

[maestro_za]

Aussies are tossers ... to put it lightly. Arrogant gits ... /RANT OFF.

I hope the ODI side actually pull their socks up for the 50 over games. Conventional cricket might see them play properly for a change.

Warner played well so far, but with the poor bowling of the SA bowlers - even I would've whacked 6's all over the place

O the days of playing back @ school ... good times ...

 

[.Froot.]

If you look at the first 20-20 against Australia we actually didn't do to poorly, considering that some of the umpire decisions weren't too good and the effect that had on us. Sure, we need to do some work...
Today was a bit of a closer match. Wasn't home to watch it myself, but I must say that Duminy did pretty well.

On-topic. The Aussie commentators are in the majority a bunch of arrogant <insert crude word here>. They are full of themselves and people don't appreciate that at all.

 

[OzzieCapie]

Ozzie, I hope you can sit on a toilet without holding on.

This is a sport thread. If you want to derail this with your perpetually whining about facilities and what not, let go and fall in your own excrement.

Not only is Barry a gentleman, he is a wonderful sportsman, commentator and sports ambassador for this country.

Can you claim 1/1000 of it?!!!

You are entitled to your response, but keep it clean and hit above the belt....otherwise your post has no value.

My comments were on topic as it related to ABC Radio commentary, and the interview with Richards. He was invited to comment on the game and South Africa's performance, yet he used this to whinge about the lack of recognition given to him and his peers today.
And my gripe with the ABC interviewer/commentator (which is what this thread was about) is that he allowed Richards to stray off topic on a personal crusade. I believed this was unprofessional.

If Richards is a good ambassador he could have done the right thing, or used his influence, 40 yrs ago. I didn't see him being that ambassador, or helping SA's cause, during his times in leadership of Queensland and WA cricket here. I guess a man's got to do what he has to to put food on tha table, but then don't take the moral high ground when SA Cricket is successful again.

For the record, SA Cricket was suspended by the ICC in 1960. This suspension was defied by England, NZ and Aus who continued to play test cricket against SA. The test players of that decade halted progress by this action.

cheers and have a good day.

 

[chiskop]

I prefer the Aussie commentary - there's a lot of cricket cricket knowledge there (Warne vs Mbangwa, who knows more about cricket?) and also, I guess because it's different, not the same old voices we always hear.

Other commentators I like are Henry Blofeld on the radio and Neil Manthorp.

Blofeld and Bumbles are the best, but only for the matches against England.

 

[brixton tower]

If Richards is a good ambassador he could have done the right thing, or used his influence, 40 yrs ago. I didn't see him being that ambassador, or helping SA's cause, during his times in leadership of Queensland and WA cricket here. I guess a man's got to do what he has to to put food on tha table, but then don't take the moral high ground when SA Cricket is successful again.

For the record, SA Cricket was suspended by the ICC in 1960. This suspension was defied by England, NZ and Aus who continued to play test cricket against SA. The test players of that decade halted progress by this action.

cheers and have a good day.

It was not in his interest to say anything bad about the South African government...he was still playing for Natal in the 70s.

 

[w1z4rd]

How is this a branding issue? I mean FFS, they don't call themselves Springboks, they haven't done since re-admission. So how does a commentator who works for the ABC(one of the more professional broadcasting outfits) still call the visiting South Africans Springboks?

If Hugh Bladen and his gang called the Wallabies by another name they would be vilified from here to eternity.

Call me a conspiracy theorist but I can only come to the conclusion that its deliberate attempt at driving some sort of political message.

PS: I see Neil Manthorpe is also part of the commentary team. Hopefully he reverses some of the retardation in the commentary box.

Sure.. you are a conspiracy theorist. Now stand in line for a tin foil hat. Im guessing you were drunk or something when you posted this

 

[Ou grote]

You are entitled to your response, but keep it clean and hit above the belt....otherwise your post has no value.

My comments were on topic as it related to ABC Radio commentary, and the interview with Richards. He was invited to comment on the game and South Africa's performance, yet he used this to whinge about the lack of recognition given to him and his peers today.
And my gripe with the ABC interviewer/commentator (which is what this thread was about) is that he allowed Richards to stray off topic on a personal crusade. I believed this was unprofessional.

If Richards is a good ambassador he could have done the right thing, or used his influence, 40 yrs ago. I didn't see him being that ambassador, or helping SA's cause, during his times in leadership of Queensland and WA cricket here. I guess a man's got to do what he has to to put food on tha table, but then don't take the moral high ground when SA Cricket is successful again.

For the record, SA Cricket was suspended by the ICC in 1960. This suspension was defied by England, NZ and Aus who continued to play test cricket against SA. The test players of that decade halted progress by this action.

cheers and have a good day.

As one example...
If you look at the caps that the Proteas are given, you'll see that they have numbers on them to show when they made their debut.
The numbers only go back to 1992/1993 when we were readmitted to test cricket.
I.E. The players who played in that 1st test against the WI would have gotten numbers 1 -11. The next debutant would've gotten 12, etc.

So Pollock, Richards, Bacher etc did not get a number.
Wonder how that makes them feel?

 

[HypoThesis]

As one example...
If you look at the caps that the Proteas are given, you'll see that they have numbers on them to show when they made their debut.
The numbers only go back to 1992/1993 when we were readmitted to test cricket.
I.E. The players who played in that 1st test against the WI would have gotten numbers 1 -11. The next debutant would've gotten 12, etc.

So Pollock, Richards, Bacher etc did not get a number.
Wonder how that makes them feel?

Well out of no fault of their own they weren't representing South Africa as a whole but a select part of South Africa's society. Plus their caps would been for being Springboks...not Proteas. So either way it makes sense.

The current test cap process is a fair and just one IMO.

 

[stefan9]

I prefer the Aussie commentary - there's a lot of cricket cricket knowledge there (Warne vs Mbangwa, who knows more about cricket?) and also, I guess because it's different, not the same old voices we always hear.



Blofeld and Bumbles are the best, but only for the matches against England.

I agree here. I actually tune into the aussie commentators as biased as they are. The SA commentators just generally either don't know what they are talked or are just way too dull. My preference is still the sky commentary team but the channel 9 one and the indian one are also very good. The SA one is the worst of the major ones I get to listen to on a regular basis.

 

[Getafix]

You are entitled to your response, but keep it clean and hit above the belt....otherwise your post has no value.

My comments were on topic as it related to ABC Radio commentary, and the interview with Richards. He was invited to comment on the game and South Africa's performance, yet he used this to whinge about the lack of recognition given to him and his peers today.
And my gripe with the ABC interviewer/commentator (which is what this thread was about) is that he allowed Richards to stray off topic on a personal crusade. I believed this was unprofessional.

If Richards is a good ambassador he could have done the right thing, or used his influence, 40 yrs ago. I didn't see him being that ambassador, or helping SA's cause, during his times in leadership of Queensland and WA cricket here. I guess a man's got to do what he has to to put food on tha table, but then don't take the moral high ground when SA Cricket is successful again.

For the record, SA Cricket was suspended by the ICC in 1960. This suspension was defied by England, NZ and Aus who continued to play test cricket against SA. The test players of that decade halted progress by this action.

cheers and have a good day.

And the lights went on.

Shame. Another unbeatable Ausie who saw his ass.

Cheers mate. Whinge to your hearts content. Nothing is going to change the scoreboard.

Oh! Congratulations will graciously be accepted.

 

[brixton tower]

Sure.. you are a conspiracy theorist. Now stand in line for a tin foil hat. Im guessing you were drunk or something when you posted this

No, I was not drunk but like OzzieCapie mentioned there seems to be a level of ignorance from some of the commentators when it comes to post-apartheid South Africa...One of these was Mark Nicholas when, during the opening session of the first test mentioned quotas and how they had weakened SA cricket without mentioning that the recent form of the Proteas had been excellent with basically the same team.

So Pollock, Richards, Bacher etc did not get a number.
Wonder how that makes them feel?

I wonder how the rest of South Africa who were prevented from representing their country felt due to apartheid?

Well out of no fault of their own they weren't representing South Africa as a whole but a select part of South Africa's society. Plus their caps would been for being Springboks...not Proteas. So either way it makes sense.

The current test cap process is a fair and just one IMO.

+1