Print

Please post once and this message will disappear! Introduce yourself, say hello, jump into a discussion...

[LosingNow]

He is developing into a fine commentator. Real breath of fresh air in the commentary booth.

His pitch report at Motera was spot on. Today not so .. but everyone (incl SRT, MSD etc) misread this pitch. SRT said that they were targeting 310-315 but had to continuously readjust the target as the ball started stopping.

His insights throughout the game were spot on .. and he was not backing away from openly calling out on some strategic mistakes.

I really look forward to his 30 mins in the booth!!
==
BTW, Atherton was great in the booth too.. specially liked his "winning ugly" point .. except that  he has a tendency to occassionally fallback to long ramblings on England related matters - "seriously Athers, no one cares about England anymore!"

I particularly enjoyed the discussion when Atherton, Akram and SG (the Lancashireans) were ON.

[12th_Man]

Yes.. He has been impressive. I think he made the right move.

[feverpitch]

Agreed. Though I wish, in an ideal world, that he'd move into administration... and bring in all the luminaries of his generation into it to clear up the mess... unfortunately, that won't happen.

[cricinfo]

He still needs to work a lot on the speech delivery - he needs to pronounce the words more clearly. Can take some classes from Akram / Manjrekar even Arun Lal!

[ruchir]

Contrary to the popular sentiment, I don't think he is any better than others, as a commentator. In fact, I believe he thinks of himself as a radio commentator more than a TV commentator.

While he is in the booth, he re-enacts every delivery bowled. Why? On the TV we can see what is happening so why does he have to re-enact it in words? On TV you have you don't have to say "That was a nice full length delivery out side the off stump, and the batsman drove it elegantly wide of long on where the fielder dove and stopped a certain boundary"... He doesn't have to say all that because we the TV viewers can see it happening. This is what makes him like any other TV commentator, not a breath of fresh air.

In fact, all Indian (read that as all asian) TV commentators make the same mistake. All of them comment as if they are on Radio. The reason behind this is that they feel the need to "talk" while being in the booth, rather than "comment". They forget that on TV, viewers can see all that they are re-enacting. So, what we are looking to hear from them is why certain shot was played, what was the thought behind bowling a certain delivery, why certain field placement is there, what should batting/fielding side be doing hence on... SG does that, but sporadically, as do other commentators too.

TV commentators should realize that it is okay for them to be silent for a while. They don't have to keep talking, to justify the money being paid to them.

Another thing I find is that SG seems a little uptight, a little formal while he is in the booth. There are a few commentators who are relaxed, in the booth. They may light, funny comments; they indulge in a little nagging with the fellow commentator. I find it pleasing because it breaks the monotony of just listening to cricketing stuff. Hearing an odd joke is a welcome break. SG could have been a breath of fresh air if he was relaxed in the booth, if he could let his hair down (so to speak) a bit. Unfortunately he isn't and he doesn't.

On top of that, I find SG's voice irritating. I find his use of cliches as irritating a Shastri's use of "Tracer Bullet". Anyone can re-enact in words what he sees, anyone can use cliches to describe an event, anyone can be ordinary in the booth. If SG is all that, then it doesn't make him a breath of fresh air.... unless your expectations from him were so low to begin with that him being ordinary feels great. I had high expectations. I expected him to be better that Shastri, Sunny G, Arun, Laxman, and other Lankan & Paki comentators.

The one advantage SG has in commenting is that he can bring in his own personal examples of his playing time as player and captain, in order to explain why certain things are happening or why he believes a captain should should be doing certain things. He can use incidents from his career as example. That would be perfect. It's just that he rarely does that. He should be used as an "expert" commentator, not a regular radio-like commentator.

[Cernunnos]

I agree with the loosening up part. In sharp contrast, in his Bengali shows, he comes across far more natural and relaxed, and even attempting humour.

Maybe the uptightness is because he is sharing the mike with people who have connived against him during his playing days.

[LosingNow]

He was on fire today.. sounded much more relaxed and I was totally enjoying his dry humor.

He should become a regular in the booth. Overtime, he will get more polished .. he already has the insights and surprisingly, an awesome sense for dry wit.

[natty]

All due respect: I dont think SG is cut out to shine in this department..  That doesn't mean that RS and SM and SMG are great;  But I doubt SG will even get to this modest level.   We just don't have any great Indian commentators these days.  This niche is completely occupied by ex-test cricketers.  Why cannot non-international cricketers get a fair shake?  Shastri also came off as very rude when speaking with MSD (Dhoni deflected his suggestion of telling people to get lost or something like that by saying that we are not rude in India).   Some of the cricinfo writers seem to have much more insight about the game than these ex-cricketers.  Part of the problem is that with UDRS, replays etc. we can only appreciate highly skilled commentators who add value beyond what we can see on screen.  Sports journalism in cricket is primitive, at least on TV in India.

Why doesn't someone give Aakash Chopra  a break? I have no idea of what he sounds like, but based on his writing ability, he could do quite well as expert commentator.

[ramshorns]

From what I heard of SG yesterday there is nothing special on offer or insightful that I could pick up on.  He was alright for most part but he does not give me an impression of someone you could count on to be great down the road even if given time.

Not to sound arrogant but usually I watch the games for most part on mute having shocking experiences of listening to the likes of SMG, Shastri etc over the past few years.  It is akin to listening to a broken record with no context to what they are speaking to what is actually going on in the field of play.

Loved the 80's and 90's version of the Channel Nine telecast and learned everything there is to be learned about cricket then and also the TMS(Test Match Special by BBC on Radio- Chris Martin Jenkins and company) of the 80's.

[suraj]

I don't know about SG- he is too new and I have not heard enough but I certainly think that SRT has made SMG a worse commentator than he is capable of; he relentlessly goes on and on about Sachin- I think he has spoken less about Rohan in his life than Sachin & it is really really tiresome

I remember the time when he was actually a decent commentator & used to advise his fellow commentators that unlike radio the audience is already seeing the action so our job is to provide additional expert insight which is the real value add for a TV commentator

[ramshorns]

but I certainly think that SRT has made SMG a worse commentator than he is capable of; he relentlessly goes on and on about Sachin-

That's what the job of a pimp is.

This morning he was on NDTV live and was saying along the lines of a 90 or a 100 for SRT in the finals would have meant this WC to be even more special for him.  Then I was saying to myself - ok.

[kban1]

SG is too new and still a little raw -perhaps self conscious and tight. His voice is also not the booming type that is made for commentary but that might be a function of the above too.

However, I thought he has a great sense of timing for humor --yesterday he was awsome, whether he was talking of Mahela's coach (wife) or about Mumbai celebrities. So maybe he is lightening up.

As far as insight, far far ahead of the 2 useless idjets -- the cliche idden and often dishonest Shastri and the equally cliche ridden but clannish and communal Manjerekar. Gavaskar has a lot of insights but his Tendulkar puja is beginning to grate even on me, and Ive always been a great supporter of SMG.

His comments about field placings in the group games were on the money as were his calls about Zaheer's bowling and the length he should be bowling yesterday. Similar insights were there during some of the other matches.

Right now his commentary is neither as incisive as say Ian Chapell or as fluently soothing as Nasser Hussain, but early days so far. He does have the promise, IMO, the voice and uptightness notwithstanding.

[suraj]

but I certainly think that SRT has made SMG a worse commentator than he is capable of; he relentlessly goes on and on about Sachin-

That's what the job of a pimp is.

This morning he was on NDTV live and was saying along the lines of a 90 or a 100 for SRT in the finals would have meant this WC to be even more special for him.  Then I was saying to myself - ok.

Rams, I really think SMG overdoes some of that deliberatley or maybe Sachin is the cricketer son he never had- I dunno

I have also heard the theory that he is envious of SRT & tries to jinx him 

anyway like I said he does annoy with this trait;  "pimp" might be too strong a description for that but anything milder would not have defined good old Rams' posts

[dave_dj]

Interesting how people see things differently!

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20110330115138AAZK38o