Magnus Backstedt

rick_chasey

There's still not enough chat about the racing for either of them.

WIth Backstedt they get into little conversations about kit and riding technique, which is all well and good, but not really what the racing is about.

It'd be better, say, if there's a little thing they notice pro doing and then he can elaborate for a couple of sentences, rather than spending 15 minutes chatting about a particular gearset or chainring which is phenomenally expensive and only he uses while stuff is going on on the road.

As ever, the complaint is the same - more chat about the racing, less chat about stuff which is tangential at best.

oldwelshman

Cant believe some of the moans on here fs Harmon and Kirby are professional TV presenters and the ex pros side kicks to provide added info.
As some one above said you should know enough about racing not to need the commentary so just mute it. Most of the waffle is just to fill in for all the dead time when you normally have a break away which generally has a few minutes with 40km to go, and the peleton just plod along until they need to catch the break, so why not tune in see who is in the breal, then fast forward to last 10km when it gets interesting then you dont have to listen to all the "fill".

rick_chasey

oldwelshman wrote:

Cant believe some of the moans on here fs Harmon and Kirby are professional TV presenters and the ex pros side kicks to provide added info.
As some one above said you should know enough about racing not to need the commentary so just mute it. Most of the waffle is just to fill in for all the dead time when you normally have a break away which generally has a few minutes with 40km to go, and the peloton just plod along until they need to catch the break, so why not tune in see who is in the breal, then fast forward to last 10km when it gets interesting then you dont have to listen to all the "fill".

Some of us are fortunate (or unfortunate, depending on how you look at it) to be able to compare it to other commentaries. In my case - Flemish commentary, which is vastly superior to anything I've heard elsewhere. It's really that good.

Unfortunately, the best I get is a delayed feed from an illegal stream on the internet which is a little iritating, so I often cba to put that in whilst watching the TV on the big screen.

Dutch commentary isn't much better than English, though they do seem to be punchier somehow.

Even the difference between Eurosport and ITV4 is enormous. ITV4 has its problems no doubt > innaccuracies, focussing too much on English speaking riders, using too many cliches blah blah, but they do create a real sense of occasion (for the Tour at least) which I think any Eurosport commentary really lacks, bar Paris - Roubaix where Kelly sounds like he's just taking a big load of pot Belge.

mattshrops

if you ever do anything -someone will criticise you.
some people are only happy when theyre whinging :roll:

P_Tucker

mattshrops wrote:

if you ever do anything -someone will criticise you.
some people are only happy when theyre whinging :roll:

Are you familiar with irony?

Dgh

Having been a great rider does not mean that one will be a great commentator. Obviously Kelly was a far, far better rider than Magnus. But the latter is a better communicator.

Plus, a Paris-Roubaix and a Tour stage isn't too shabby, is it?

Super Domestique

Good pt.

Gazza was fairly talented on the footie pitch but I wouldn't want to him commentating on the CL final for eg!

yenrod

Sean Kelly isn't the most conversational person...around whereas Backstedt is.

MB seem's more awake, more alert...

MB for me over Kelly THAT doesnt mean I disrespect Kelly at all - a man of exceptional talent !

NOT keen on Brian Smith at all !

dawebbo

I prefer MB to SK - find his commentary more interesting. Don't really see how comparing their palmares is relevant for the role as a commentator.

cal_stewart

i like the bloke who did the tour on channel, John Anderson?

deejay

dawebbo wrote:

I prefer MB to SK - find his commentary more interesting. Don't really see how comparing their palmares is relevant for the role as a commentator.

Whoa you lot.
The Kelly you hear these days is because of Harman asking the same daft questions and not allowing him time.
Kelly was used in a correct capacity by Duffield who would "time fill" the boring bits and then ask Kelly what he sees going on.
Kelly's response would be very informative about the race previous and projected towards the finish.
Kelly these days is only allowed the answer sesions again and again and must be as bored with Harmon as I am but he can keep his sanity by chatting with REAL cyclists in the commentary van and being invited out with his peers in the evening.
Well he has tried to educate Harmon about cycle racing for some years and now Harmon has Backstedt for more cycle racing education.
Harmon now has much more information than I did and must be ready to race in a Bunch and have to lean on someone or use his elbows. (perhaps even hit the deck) No podium is needed for that education.

Maggie is only in his 2nd year now and already a bore because of Mrs David Harmon.

I wish you all "Happy Zapping" and enjoy the pictures.

dawebbo

Fair point.

Perhaps I should have qualified it by saying, I prefer MB paired with DH to SK paired with him. Not arguing who would be better to chat with about cycling, or even who could be the better commentator given the appropriate pairing.

dougzz

deejay wrote:

dawebbo wrote:

I prefer MB to SK - find his commentary more interesting. Don't really see how comparing their palmares is relevant for the role as a commentator.

Whoa you lot.
The Kelly you hear these days is because of Harman asking the same daft questions and not allowing him time.
Kelly was used in a correct capacity by Duffield who would "time fill" the boring bits and then ask Kelly what he sees going on.
Kelly's response would be very informative about the race previous and projected towards the finish.
Kelly these days is only allowed the answer sesions again and again and must be as bored with Harmon as I am but he can keep his sanity by chatting with REAL cyclists in the commentary van and being invited out with his peers in the evening.
Well he has tried to educate Harmon about cycle racing for some years and now Harmon has Backstedt for more cycle racing education.
Harmon now has much more information than I did and must be ready to race in a Bunch and have to lean on someone or use his elbows. (perhaps even hit the deck) No podium is needed for that education.

Maggie is only in his 2nd year now and already a bore because of Mrs David Harmon.

I wish you all "Happy Zapping" and enjoy the pictures.

What complete twaddle. Are you his agent or something? Why does anyone watching Eurosport care what Sean Kelly does in the evening. If he's bored with the job and thinks Harmon is a tw*t he should move on. Chatting with other commentators when he's supposed to be adding insight for the audience is hardly an argument in his favour is it? Your view seems to be that Kelly can do as he wishes and the audience doesn't matter because SK deems DH and the Eurosport audience unworthy of his time and concentration.

brucey72

Eidhur Gudjonnsen (sp) is a guest pundit on tonights Barca v Real match and his voice is very similar to MB's. I was in the other room listening to thier pre-match chat and thought what the hell is Magnus doing on the football

mroli

I think Maggy is great - but I love "naturalised foreigners". Tickled me pink when Jan Molby used to be interviewed.

I think people are a little harsh. As long as they're commentating on cycling which is ON MY TV and I'm watching it, generally, I'm happy.

Hell, I even really enjoy ned boulting's character pieces!

cogidubnus

I can't believe the can of worms I opened by saying I prefered Maggy right back at the beginning of the thread...

ah well

shipley

Me neither ... and I started the thread

I like Mr Kelly, I grew up in Ireland racing in a class behind Stephen Roche and Sean Kelly was a hero to us all because he'd made it to the continent.

His has great knowledge of both the sport and the general techniques in racing, but also has up to date experience due to his running the An Post cycling team.

I also like Magnus though, he has a different perspective and compliments the commentary I enjoy from Eurosport. That coupled with HD makes me a very happy bunny !

shipley

Me neither ... and I started the thread

I like Mr Kelly, I grew up in Ireland racing in a class behind Stephen Roche and Sean Kelly was a hero to us all because he'd made it to the continent.

His has great knowledge of both the sport and the general techniques in racing, but also has up to date experience due to his running the An Post cycling team.

I also like Magnus though, he has a different perspective and compliments the commentary I enjoy from Eurosport. That coupled with HD makes me a very happy bunny !

Tom Butcher

Dgh wrote:

Having been a great rider does not mean that one will be a great commentator. Obviously Kelly was a far, far better rider than Magnus. But the latter is a better communicator.

Again it's all subjective - for me Kelly is the better communicator. MB talks a lot but doesn't really give any insight into the racing I wouldn't have myself just from watching it. SK can spot things that I wouldn't have thought about but so often turn out to be bang on the money. For example he picked Nuyens as a good outside bet at Flanders. When MB talks it's opinion - when Kelly says something it's fact.

I think he's better connected than MB too - he seems to know more about the current pro scene even though he's longer retired - involvement in An Post and probably knowing many of the DSs must give him access to a bit more insider knowledge than MB and his UK based team.

afx237vi

^ I agree with Tom.

Nothing against Magnus or Brian Smith, both of whom are good, but I would rather listen to Kelly in the big races. He talks less but says more.

emadden

For me its King Kelly... and as the years go on he is getting better and better... certaintly! I too grew up following Kelly, but that bias aside, he knows what he is talking about and because he rode in an era when riders rode from February to November, he has actual experience of having ridden in almost all the main races. On top of all that, he was a contender. I wont say he has unique insight, but he has the insight of a champion that was at the top of his game for a long time.

MB is good and I like him - but find myself "believing" more of what Kelly says.

I dont want to knock eurosport as I feel they provide amazing coverage ... I'd hate to have to go back to the late eighties and early nineties when the only TV coverage was 30 mins on a saturday...

For Harmon, Kirby, Smith and others... kudos also.

andytown

To the land of "Sportives" perhaps ? 8)
[/url]

moray_gub

deejay wrote:

Who cares about those long TDF stages because real cyclists will be asleep or doing other things. (perhaps being out on their bikes) and then watch a Highlight program that evening.

I care about those long TDF or any other stages for that matter and always find this real cyclist thing slightly amusing .......i mean who decides what a real cyclist is ? is there a set amount of miles you have to cycle to be one or a set amount of bikes you have to have. maybe you have to know who came 33rd in last year TDF or something..........or maybe there is no such mythical beast and to presume that you are one over other cyclists who are not is just plain old arrogance.

As far as the commentators go i like Big Mags over Sean mainly due to his ability to communicate slightly better .

moray_gub

dougzz wrote:

What complete twaddle.

+1

dulldave

I like both of them. I also like Brian Smith. They all know a lot. In a grand tour I'd prefer to hear Kelly because he was a GC rider in the grand tours. But in other races I've enjoyed Maggy gives some anecdotes about the riders I'm watching from when he rode with them. Kelly wouldn't is less able to do that and it's not really his style either.

I actually don't mind David Harmon either. I think he's better than Liggett, Porter, Duffers, Rendell and Kirby. OK he asks the odd stupid question but I enjoy hearing Kelly correcting him. I like the fact that you know he has an opinion on the subject of doping even if you don't agree with him. He doesn't brush it aside and pretend it doesn't exist. He can also identify riders pretty well even if he sometimes gets it wrong. I wish he'd stop saying 'chapeau' though.

Here's my beef with the other commentators:

- Liggett is an omerta devotee and his devotion to Armstrong became intolerable after LA retired the first time. If all you do is watch a couple of stages of the Tour a year he's probably still great, but when you're watching as many races a year as you can and you understand a bit more about what's going on then it's pretty hard to listen to him

- Porter doesn't appear to really follow continental cycling. Can't recognise most of the riders, knows very little about them and doesn't demonstrate an understanding of even the most basic of tactical moves.

- Duffers, while it's mildly entertaining hearing him prattle on about incidental moments in his life that have no relation to anything we're watching, I'd prefer if he shut up when something actually happens in the race. But instead he continues on about the particularly fine sausages his local butcher makes while the race is kicking off.

- Rendell knows more about the riders past and present than many of us have forgotten. I reckon he could become really good through time but just now he seems to be at a loss what to say. This to me shows just how hard the job is.

- Kirby, sometimes you wonder if he's ever seen a cycle race before.

Gingerflash

I really like Backstedt too, though enjoy Kelly as well.

However, did anyone hear Backstedt claim a few weeks ago that no-one had heard of Bianchi until he won P-R on one? Obviously his win was more important than anything acheived by Copi, Pantani, Gimondi, Geminiani or Ullrich.

Seems a nice guy though and makes the racing more interesting.

Gazzaputt

Like them all to be honest and I have mute button if I don't.

andyrr

agree with dulldave's comments above.
If Backsted is on then I certainly don't reach for the mute button as I am tempted with for some of the others but I find the Kelly/Harmon partnership is the best for clear race-action info/chatty stuff. Other guys seem to witter on needlessly with action kicking-off whilst they talk about something less relevant. Liggett/Sherwen probably the pairing I find the least listenable but each to their own !

inkyfingers

I know it's heresy here but for the tour I don't mind Phil and Paul...probably because it takes me back to my youth and watching the tour round a friends house. The Armstrong love is a bit sickening but I can get over it. If I had to listen to them all year though they would my head in though.

For Eurosport Harmon and Kelly win for me, but I like a bit of variety.

andyrr

Fro me it's as much Sherwan repeatedly coming out with "The Bike race" and "This great Bike race" as if it might be some other race, skateboards maybe ?! It's more than bleedin' obvious Paul, it is a bicycle race, no doubting what we are watching.