rubbish Olympic cycling commentating
Comments
-
I can't believe some of the negative comments on here either.
Why not focus on the achievements of the cyclists rather than slating the commentators. better still if you think you could do better try it!!
I would like to see some eurostar and wildmoustache turn up at an event and commentate on 80 riders they have never seen!!
It is easy to commentate on professional road events as they know the pro temas and riders, not so easy when you do not know or have never seen half the field and no numbers to see.
I think Hugh Porter is actually very good and very knowledgable, especiall on track events.
Today he was spot on with the commentary of the points event all through the race.
One thing I did not like was the actual bbc coverage, on the main BBC channel there was the medal ceremony for the womens steeple chase while the mens 4k pursuit ceremony was on interactive screen 4 !! Thats worse than the commentary surely?
Anyway congrats to all riders but so far most impressive to me is the performance of Jason Kenny and Steve Burke.
Maybe if Hoy could have held the wheel closer in the sprint final they could have gone close to the world record?
0 -
Eurostar wrote:I could forgive Porter the odd inaccuracy, but he's hopeless at trying to get joe public engaged in cycling. He had almost nothing to say in the men's sprint. Why not at least tell people how fast the riders are going, and make some attempt to compare their power output with the sprinters in athletics? There's plenty to be said about the bikes too - their cost and weight and so on, and the wind tunnel training and the special clothing. Given that the BBC have known for years that most of our gold medals were going to be in cycling you'd think the penny would have dropped that the the vast majority of the TV audience need some help to get into it. God helps us when Porter tries to explain what's happening in the Madison.
Sorry but you are talking utter bilge in my opinion.
- The speeds appear on screen at the same time as the result. Porter mentioned several times during the Keirin what sort of speeds they were going, including explaining that the Derny gradually builds to 50kmh and that when Chiappa was leaning on Ng which allowed Ross Edgar underneath they were doing around 42 miles per hour. The team sprint lasts 40 odd seconds, he called the race pretty darn well in the final. You want to query that Hoy was in trouble on lap two and had a lot to do from off the back which Porter called correctly? Hoy said as much in his Jill Douglas interview.
- The cost and weight and cost has been covered in extensive detail in the build up to the track cycling and in the video inserts between events by Jill Douglas, Chris Boardman and various others. I'm not sure how you've managed to miss that but maybe you were watching a different channel to the rest of us. Boardman's been on pretty much every BBC output in the last few days talking about the performance gains and tech.
- The events and how they work were explained in the two-way conversation with Clare Balding and the handover to Porter on pretty much every event on the network channels. People aren't idiots and a lot of sport can be worked out from watching - Porter explains the 5-1 points and points for gaining a lap at exactly the right times in the points race.
- Why on earth do you think that meaningless stats about power output are useful? They aren't, they are confusing and detract from the action.
- Great commentary is often allowing the action to describe and speak for itself. How much of the action on the pitch does Ken Wolstenholme describe in the most played piece of football commentary in British history? The answer is that he doesn't say anything much about Hurst after he is passed the ball.
Every commentator calls it wrong now and again. It happens when you are trying to watch the event on a 10 inch monitor in the deafening velodrome with a producer yelling in your ear and your wife trying to hand you the stats on paper and you trying to make sense. I've heard Harmon being corrected by Backstedt for calling it wrong and by Kelly this year on occasion so it's not like Porter is alone.0 -
I agree Leguape.
Also for non cycl;ists if you droll on about the technology of the bikes and skinsuits and things like that it detracts from the performance of the athletes. Ok each little bit helps to give you a very small advanteg over other teams, but most of them have either the same or similar technology and nothing should be taken away from the performance of the cyclists becuase if 99.99% of the world population had the same equipment and raced our winners, the result would be exaclty the same.
The other 0.01% would even then have to put in the same or more effort as our riders, have the same backing and team spirit to be able to match them.
As you say, keep ithe commentry simple and informative and enjoy the perofomances.
I wonder if we had not won so many medals would the same people moan about the commentary? Still there has to be some thiong for them to moan about
By the way, even my son and Mrs understood the keiran after Porter's description though my wife did initially comment it was unfair the little chineese man was allowed a motorbike :shock:0 -
For what it's worth I thought that Hugh Porter's commentary was pretty abysmal on the men's road race, and not much better on the womens. I watched the men's race from the start to see the roll out through Beijng. During this first couple of hours Liang Zhang from China was at the front of the peloton doing a lot of work and Porter kept on saying stuff like "that's not a sensible strategy", when clearly he was never even a contender and merely wanted to be at the front of the peloton for the roll out through the host city as the only Chinese representative (apart from a guy from Hong Kong). Porter kept on refering to Zhang as "one of the Chinese team" as well, as if there were half a dozen racers from China. You'd have thought he'd never watched a stage of the TDF, where, for example, a domestique French rider from a local town will try go to the front or get in a break for the prestige, even if they maybe haven't a hope of the win.
On the women's race again he was very critical of Nicole Cooke and the rest of the final break's tactics, saying that they weren't trying hard enough, were going to get caught etc. regardless of the treacherous road conditions: they were all doing their best just to keep the bikes upright down a descent that looked like a river.
For what it's worth the road races were pretty devoid of atmosphere, despite a great looking course. What a finish from Cooke though, will never forget her race-face as she powered over the line.0 -
Richard891 wrote:For what it's worth I thought that Hugh Porter's commentary was pretty abysmal on the men's road race, and not much better on the womens. I watched the men's race from the start to see the roll out through Beijng. During this first couple of hours Liang Zhang from China was at the front of the peloton doing a lot of work and Porter kept on saying stuff like "that's not a sensible strategy", when clearly he was never even a contender and merely wanted to be at the front of the peloton for the roll out through the host city as the only Chinese representative (apart from a guy from Hong Kong). Porter kept on refering to Zhang as "one of the Chinese team" as well, as if there were half a dozen racers from China. You'd have thought he'd never watched a stage of the TDF, where, for example, a domestique French rider from a local town will try go to the front or get in a break for the prestige, even if they maybe haven't a hope of the win.
On the women's race again he was very critical of Nicole Cooke and the rest of the final break's tactics, saying that they weren't trying hard enough, were going to get caught etc. regardless of the treacherous road conditions: they were all doing their best just to keep the bikes upright down a descent that looked like a river.
For what it's worth the road races were pretty devoid of atmosphere, despite a great looking course. What a finish from Cooke though, will never forget her race-face as she powered over the line.
Dotn't agree with your comment about the breakaway in womens race. He got it sopt on. There was a point where they were not working hard and Cooke twice had to get them going harder as she had the most to gain.They were pegged at about 11 seconds until they pushed harder then after the German team did a few hard stints at the front of the race and did not make any headway, the bunch eased a bit and the gap went up straight away to about 16 secinds. I think he read it correctly.
The conditions were bad, but not that bad on the decent which was mostly straight so not many bends or roadmarkings to contend with. The biggest danger is spray from riders wheel but that would have been much worse in the bunch.
As for the atmpsphere, read some posts on here, spectators were not allowed within 10m of the course so no wonder there was no atmosphere.0 -
leguape wrote:.
Sorry but you are talking utter bilge in my opinion.
- The speeds appear on screen at the same time as the result. Porter mentioned several times during the Keirin what sort of speeds they were going, including explaining that the Derny gradually builds to 50kmh and that when Chiappa was leaning on Ng which allowed Ross Edgar underneath they were doing around 42 miles per hour. The team sprint lasts 40 odd seconds, he called the race pretty darn well in the final. You want to query that Hoy was in trouble on lap two and had a lot to do from off the back which Porter called correctly? Hoy said as much in his Jill Douglas interview.
- The cost and weight and cost has been covered in extensive detail in the build up to the track cycling and in the video inserts between events by Jill Douglas, Chris Boardman and various others. I'm not sure how you've managed to miss that but maybe you were watching a different channel to the rest of us. Boardman's been on pretty much every BBC output in the last few days talking about the performance gains and tech.
- The events and how they work were explained in the two-way conversation with Clare Balding and the handover to Porter on pretty much every event on the network channels. People aren't idiots and a lot of sport can be worked out from watching - Porter explains the 5-1 points and points for gaining a lap at exactly the right times in the points race.
- Why on earth do you think that meaningless stats about power output are useful? They aren't, they are confusing and detract from the action.
.
Sadly I've missed every one of those extra titbits you mention, except for the speed of the Derny. And I haven't noticed the speed on the screen either. Must try to spend more time in front of the telly, although I thought I was already pretty much glued to it. :roll:
I think power stats could be one way to get the public interested. Why not compare Hoy's power output to that of a 100m runner, or to Michael Phelps? Why not build Hoy up as one of the best athletes of modern times? After all, the 100m sprint is billed as a huge 'must watch' event, as are Phelps' wins, even though there's no British interest in them. I think the Beeb should try to get the public to take as much interest in the simpler cycling events as they do in the athletics. After all, that's where most of our medals are being won. And the BBC knew this was going to be the case years ago. They've got no imagination. Just look at how much the coverage of cricket improved when the BBC lost it to C4, or F1 when the BBC lost it to ITV. If C4 or ITV were presenting the cycling events I guarantee they would think of ways to hook a bigger audience, and eventually we would all benefit, not just in investment in road racing but in improved relations between car drivers and cyclists on the roads. The Beijing Olympics could be the best advert cycling has had for decades if the BBC had a clue what to do with them.<hr>
<h6>What\'s the point of going out? We\'re just going to end up back here anyway</h6>0 -
The BBC have no clue what to do with any sport though. Look at Match of the Day as an example with Gary Lineker mugging to the camera at every opportunity and Alan Shearer offering 'expert' analysis that even my mother would be ashamed to take a wage for. This old boys (with the odd woman but only if she'll play along with the patronising sexism) club mentality prevails throughout their coverage with ex-athletes presenting none of whom are prepared to ask an awkward question for fear of upsetting a friend. It's terrible. Even when they get someone decent, Hansen in his early days and Michael Johnson now, they slowly get dragged into the saccharine sweet world and mellow.Eurostar wrote:They've got no imagination. Just look at how much the coverage of cricket improved when the BBC lost it to C4, or F1 when the BBC lost it to ITV. If C4 or ITV were presenting the cycling events I guarantee they would think of ways to hook a bigger audience, and eventually we would all benefit, not just in investment in road racing but in improved relations between car drivers and cyclists on the roads. The Beijing Olympics could be the best advert cycling has had for decades if the BBC had a clue what to do with them.
Hopefully the Sky deal with British Cycling will lead to improvements in the coverage of cycling.0 -
As I said on another post I don't find Hugh Porter's commentary on road events as good as david Harmon's. The difference being that Harmon can recognise 80% of the pro peleton. However on the track Hugh Porter is superb - his commentary on the points race today didn't miss a trick.
Drenkrom from Canada on his post talks about Phil Liggett commentating on the men's road race - it was Hugh Porter and Gary Sutton not Phil Liggett (and Paul Sherwen)T Farr0 -
andyp wrote:
The BBC have no clue what to do with any sport though. Look at Match of the Day as an example with Gary Lineker mugging to the camera at every opportunity and Alan Shearer offering 'expert' analysis that even my mother would be ashamed to take a wage for. This old boys (with the odd woman but only if she'll play along with the patronising sexism) club mentality prevails throughout their coverage with ex-athletes presenting none of whom are prepared to ask an awkward question for fear of upsetting a friend. It's terrible. Even when they get someone decent, Hansen in his early days and Michael Johnson now, they slowly get dragged into the saccharine sweet world and mellow.Eurostar wrote:They've got no imagination. Just look at how much the coverage of cricket improved when the BBC lost it to C4, or F1 when the BBC lost it to ITV. If C4 or ITV were presenting the cycling events I guarantee they would think of ways to hook a bigger audience, and eventually we would all benefit, not just in investment in road racing but in improved relations between car drivers and cyclists on the roads. The Beijing Olympics could be the best advert cycling has had for decades if the BBC had a clue what to do with them.
Hopefully the Sky deal with British Cycling will lead to improvements in the coverage of cycling.
very well put andyp. i stand by my criticisms of porter's road commentary and logan's efforts at presenting the phelpsolympics0 -
Hi there.
Porter's area of expertise is not road racing... On the other hand his track knowledge is second to no other commentator.
I watched the points race this morning, and the first 15 minutes or so had no commentary at all, just the live feed on the interactive channel. Even though I've watched many points races I found it hard to follow, trying to watch who was attacking off the front, who was responding, who was off the back and who was just about to rejoin the back of the string having taken a lap. How many points did each rider have, and who should be marking who...
It was starting to melt my brain, then the commentary started and within 5 minutes Hugh Porter had summarised everything that had happened and guided me all the way through every sprint and gained lap to the end, expertly.
The madison will be an even better test of his skills - watch that one.
Cheers, Andy0 -
Track cycling is pretty complicated (not just the madison. if it's unfamiliar, every event except the scratch race can seem weird), and the best guide we're gonna get is Hugh Porter.
I agree that him and Sutton didn't exactly cover themselves with glory with their road race commentary (e.g. calling everything - peloton, breakaway, people off the back, the team cars - the "main group".) But on the track they are pretty excellent guides. Whenever I have been in a "WTF is going on?" situation watching track events, Hugh Porter has rescued me.
The best way to enthuse people about the track events is simply to make sure they understand what is going on. Then the action can speak for itself. Porter does that better than anyone, - I defy you critics to watch the madison with the sound off! If you think that he should be telling us about power outputs then you've lost the plot to be honest. Maybe you should try watching baseball instead?0 -
drenkrom wrote:Liggett did not identify one attacking rider in the road race. Not a single, bloody one of them all! His co-commentator could be heard telling him who was in there and puffing in exasperation when Phil went with his (wrong) personal idea. "Oh, that's Pfannberger. It doesn't look like Pfannberger, though." erm... it did to the 6 of us shouting at you in my living room, Phil.
Mind you, it still beats the Canadian road race commentary. Way beyond clueless, that was.
Out of interest, in the UK who was the co-commentator/summariser working with Liggett? In Oz it was an Australian (naturally) Mike Turtur - organiser of the TDU and former Olympian. I watched the entire race live and I'm just now wondering if Liggett has to interact with several people from differing countries, independantly. If so,a difficult job.0 -
Top Bhoy - Hugh Porter and your own (I assume you are an ozzie) Gary Sutton, at least once World Points Race Champion, have been the commentators for all the BBC cycling at this year's Olympics.T Farr0
-
Porter's area of expertise is not road racing... On the other hand his track knowledge is second to no other commentator
I agree
I was sad enough to sky plus the points race on Eurosport and BBC and watched it twice
Hugh Porter's commentary was superb
Dave Harman and Emma Davies on Eurosport completely missed Chris Newton and LLaneras (sp?) gaining a lap and spent ages trying to work out how they had so many points
In the end they just admitted they must have not noticed it
Having said that I think Dave Haemon is the best road commentator by a mile and I think Emma has a sexy voice 0 -
Been following the postings on the points racing.
Pity for us 'non-experts' that there was not more commentary on exactly how it works.
Can anyone help us here.
The sprints for example - every ten laps I think.
Points go to the top 5 riders. Now, if you've got a break-away group of say three riders - like we had yesterday, surely these three are always going to grab the main points for the sprints as they are so far ahead. Have we understood this right, or is it more complicated?
Also, when are lap points awarded - when the breakaway group pass the slowest rider, or again, is it more involved than this.
thanks !0 -
I may be wrong here, but I think they are using Porter's commentary actually in the velodrome (minus his sidekick's comments, if he has one). It certainly sounds like him. Non-cycling fans have commented that he was really good and gave them all the information they needed (like understanding the keirin and points)Twitter: @RichN950
-
cloversmate wrote:Been following the postings on the points racing.
Pity for us 'non-experts' that there was not more commentary on exactly how it works.
Can anyone help us here.
The sprints for example - every ten laps I think.
Points go to the top 5 riders. Now, if you've got a break-away group of say three riders - like we had yesterday, surely these three are always going to grab the main points for the sprints as they are so far ahead. Have we understood this right, or is it more complicated?
Also, when are lap points awarded - when the breakaway group pass the slowest rider, or again, is it more involved than this.
thanks !
Yup - you have that right. If you attack alone or in a small group you can generally pick up some sprint points on the way to gaining a lap. You'll sometimes see riders hanging back and avoid re-joining the back of the field in order to pick up sprint points before getting the 20 for the lap too.
The commaissaires keep an eye on what they consider to be the head of the main bunch. Often they'll actually point at the lead riders to indicate where they are. The lapping riders need to join the back of this string of riders. If a gap opens in the main field, then the lapping riders will not get their points until this gap is closed.
Cheers, Andy0 -
Gabby Logan's given up trying to conceal her disdain for cycling. The Sky/British Cycling deal obviously went down like a cup of cold sick.<hr>
<h6>What\'s the point of going out? We\'re just going to end up back here anyway</h6>0 -
andrewgturnbull wrote:cloversmate wrote:Been following the postings on the points racing.
Pity for us 'non-experts' that there was not more commentary on exactly how it works.
Can anyone help us here.
The sprints for example - every ten laps I think.
Points go to the top 5 riders. Now, if you've got a break-away group of say three riders - like we had yesterday, surely these three are always going to grab the main points for the sprints as they are so far ahead. Have we understood this right, or is it more complicated?
Also, when are lap points awarded - when the breakaway group pass the slowest rider, or again, is it more involved than this.
thanks !
Yup - you have that right. If you attack alone or in a small group you can generally pick up some sprint points on the way to gaining a lap. You'll sometimes see riders hanging back and avoid re-joining the back of the field in order to pick up sprint points before getting the 20 for the lap too.
Ah, now that's the bit we don't quite understand. You say that the riders are hanging back in order to pick up sprint points - does this mean that once they gain the lap, they are effectively counted as part of the 'main group' as far as the sprint is concerned?
(even though they are actually one/two laps ahead). If not, then still confused !!
cheers0 -
cloversmate wrote:andrewgturnbull wrote:cloversmate wrote:Been following the postings on the points racing.
Pity for us 'non-experts' that there was not more commentary on exactly how it works.
Can anyone help us here.
The sprints for example - every ten laps I think.
Points go to the top 5 riders. Now, if you've got a break-away group of say three riders - like we had yesterday, surely these three are always going to grab the main points for the sprints as they are so far ahead. Have we understood this right, or is it more complicated?
Also, when are lap points awarded - when the breakaway group pass the slowest rider, or again, is it more involved than this.
thanks !
Yup - you have that right. If you attack alone or in a small group you can generally pick up some sprint points on the way to gaining a lap. You'll sometimes see riders hanging back and avoid re-joining the back of the field in order to pick up sprint points before getting the 20 for the lap too.
Ah, now that's the bit we don't quite understand. You say that the riders are hanging back in order to pick up sprint points - does this mean that once they gain the lap, they are effectively counted as part of the 'main group' as far as the sprint is concerned?
(even though they are actually one/two laps ahead). If not, then still confused !!
cheers
no need to be confused you are correct 0 -
Instead of being one lap up they get a bonus of 20 points fir each lap gained. So Llaneras, Kluge and Newton all had 40 points on Saturday for the two laps they'd gained plus additional points they'd won in sprints.cloversmate wrote:Ah, now that's the bit we don't quite understand. You say that the riders are hanging back in order to pick up sprint points - does this mean that once they gain the lap, they are effectively counted as part of the 'main group' as far as the sprint is concerned?
(even though they are actually one/two laps ahead). If not, then still confused !!
cheers0 -
Tim Farr wrote:Top Bhoy - Hugh Porter and your own (I assume you are an ozzie) Gary Sutton, at least once World Points Race Champion, have been the commentators for all the BBC cycling at this year's Olympics.
Ha..I've been working away for 1 week and find this is now on page 3. I guess a lot has happened in that time
I'm not aussie but from Glasgow and been here 2 and 1/2 years. Sadly I missed most of the track cycling as I was working away but the bits I did see wasn't covered very well by Ch7 here. I think Ligget did the track commentary stuff also - though he wasn't the reason the coverage was poor.
Even the lone Aussie cycle medal winner, Anna Mears bronze races were all recorded and fitted in around other events. Good to see her get a medal though - the fall she suffered early in the year at a world cup event (i believe) was horrendous and to come back the way she has does her a real credit. She also comes across really well and genuinely appreciative of what she achieved.0 -
After the slow start in the road race i think the commentating has been quite good. Live commentating isnt always the easiest job as you may have producers talking in your ear and they arent necessarily looking at the same thing as you.0
