Carlton Kirby

gsk82

markwb79 said:

I really struggle to listen to him. All the little puns and jokes, that I really dont find funny at all.

It really can't be an easy job in the slightest, long long hours, making it sound exciting.

It doesn't have to always sound exciting. That's the problem.

DeadCalm

takethehighroad said:

I actually listened to the French commentators yesterday, I've had enough of CK now

The way the French pronounce "Dyon Smiss" made me chuckle tho. Similar when they called the 2011 Tour winner "Cadelly Vans"

Much the same with me when people refer to the French team as ''Ay Gee Too Arrr!" Has me in stitches every time.

inseine

I would take Ned and Miller any day of the week though Dan Lloyd is good. I know it'll be an unpopular opinion but I don't find Kelly especially insightful and he's often barely literate. He mispronounces nearly every " foreign" word or name and his english is hardly better. Plus he constant repeats the same phrases.

DeVlaeminck

Each to their own, I find Carlton and Kelly infinitely preferable to the ITV combo though it's Ned that I find unlistenable rather than David.

It's not that I think Carlton is great - Eurosport has better - but he's decent enough on a long stage.

norvernrob

It’s not an easy job, talking for hours about a bike race where often not much is happening. I don’t really mind his inane chat and rubbish jokes only he laughs at, but it’s his complete lack of ability to read a race that constantly bamboozles me. He watches so much cycling, how can he come across as so clueless?

Matti66

Last two posts say what I think on the whole. - But he irritated me the last few k’s yesterday got it all wrong and confused Kelly ( who he rarely gets the best from) - It can’t be an easy gig talking for hours, and i imagine he is no fool and knows what the producers want , for all i know he might be commentating on speedway or something at 2 pm the very same day. Is it a case of Eurosport not being a wealthy organisation that can’t afford to have tons of specialist comms on tap and cycling here not a big financial pull.

Pross

norvernrob said:

It’s not an easy job, talking for hours about a bike race where often not much is happening. I don’t really mind his inane chat and rubbish jokes only he laughs at, but it’s his complete lack of ability to read a race that constantly bamboozles me. He watches so much cycling, how can he come across as so clueless?

I'm always amazed how rarely he picks the winner when he names about 20 possibles. The thing I don't get on the long days is his need to constantly talk about the race. He could get the pundits talking more generally about cycling (Dan Lloyd is good at this) or just take a breath and let the pictures talk for a bit. It certainly doesn't need the constant, out of breath, over-excited shouting when there is nothing going on to justify it.

bobmcstuff

norvernrob said:

It’s not an easy job, talking for hours about a bike race where often not much is happening. I don’t really mind his inane chat and rubbish jokes only he laughs at, but it’s his complete lack of ability to read a race that constantly bamboozles me. He watches so much cycling, how can he come across as so clueless?

Yeah, he can fill some time that's for sure - but like you say he can't read the race. He is often still talking rubbish when you can see a rider has dropped with a mechanical or is attacking. And he is terrible at identifying riders.

bobmcstuff

Pross said:

norvernrob said:

It’s not an easy job, talking for hours about a bike race where often not much is happening. I don’t really mind his inane chat and rubbish jokes only he laughs at, but it’s his complete lack of ability to read a race that constantly bamboozles me. He watches so much cycling, how can he come across as so clueless?

I'm always amazed how rarely he picks the winner when he names about 20 possibles. The thing I don't get on the long days is his need to constantly talk about the race. He could get the pundits talking more generally about cycling (Dan Lloyd is good at this) or just take a breath and let the pictures talk for a bit. It certainly doesn't need the constant, out of breath, over-excited shouting when there is nothing going on to justify it.

Mentioned this before - there was a really good quiet bit with Lloyd and Kelly where they had a chat about gear ratios in Kelly's time vs today and Lloyd's time riding on Kelly's team. Kirby would have been talking about a nice sandwich he once had.

webboo

Rob Hatch was commenting on the cyclocross Euros with Jeremy Powers. He insisted on pronouncing on the Belgians names differently from Powers who used to race against some of them. It was like he was talking Italian/ Flemish pigeon English.

sherer

markwb79 said:

Then again, not sure what his name is, but the commentator that always makes a point of pronouncing Italian names with an Italian accent, it always makes me think he is showing off! Now that annoys also.

Maybe I am just getting old.
It doesn't help me improve my Dutch and German though.

Ive been catching up on the cycling podcast at the moment, Daniel Friebe does this all the time, he also works for ITV so may be who you are referring too. The other day they were talking about Pozzovivo and his family and he started to list, in Italian, all the things the family were bringing in during the harvest. Definitely feels like he is just doing it to show off, rather than to add anything to the podcast.

Know he's English and a language student, not sure if he has any Italian roots in his family.

orraloon

I skipped quite a few of the later 'Grandest Tour' episodes of the Cycling Podcast. Too much waffle and slow pace from Moore and Birnie, if I want long (off topic) discussions Boulting and Millar are more interesting. I liked the contributions of Lizzy Banks and Ian Boswell, much more focused, concise and to the point.

Also gone back through a lot of Mitch Docker's Talking Luft episodes, they're entertaining, like it when he goes into rapid fire question and answer mode.

rick_chasey

The state of 2020 where people get annoyed at trying to pronounce people’s name right.

kingstongraham

I just think you risk ending saying Moikel Methews.

RichN95.

There's meant to be a click sound at the beginning of Qhebeka, but I've not heard anyone do that yet.

See: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0ted1U7n6k&ab&ab

bobmcstuff

Very interesting. I can't do it at all!

RichN95.

Delete

rick_chasey

FWIW, if anyone speaks another language, when you say the names of people from that country it feels really very odd to deliberately say their name wrong to appease the monoglots.

dish_dash

orraloon said:

I skipped quite a few of the later 'Grandest Tour' episodes of the Cycling Podcast. Too much waffle and slow pace from Moore and Birnie, if I want long (off topic) discussions Boulting and Millar are more interesting. I liked the contributions of Lizzy Banks and Ian Boswell, much more focused, concise and to the point.

Also gone back through a lot of Mitch Docker's Talking Luft episodes, they're entertaining, like it when he goes into rapid fire question and answer mode.

Yeah. It did get an end of season vibe... They miss Daniel when he's not about.

Thought Boswell was alright, though I found Lizzie too enthusiastic. She seemed to suggest that everything was meant to be exciting and attacking... which is fine, just not a reflection of what cycling it like a lot of the time.

bobmcstuff

dish_dash said:

orraloon said:

I skipped quite a few of the later 'Grandest Tour' episodes of the Cycling Podcast. Too much waffle and slow pace from Moore and Birnie, if I want long (off topic) discussions Boulting and Millar are more interesting. I liked the contributions of Lizzy Banks and Ian Boswell, much more focused, concise and to the point.

Also gone back through a lot of Mitch Docker's Talking Luft episodes, they're entertaining, like it when he goes into rapid fire question and answer mode.

Yeah. It did get an end of season vibe... They miss Daniel when he's not about.

Thought Boswell was alright, though I found Lizzie too enthusiastic. She seemed to suggest that everything was meant to be exciting and attacking... which is fine, just not a reflection of what cycling it like a lot of the time.

Yeah I found myself disagreeing with Lizzie quite a lot. Not that that's necessarily a problem though, especially if she is just on a few episodes.

I agree it misses something without Daniel, but this year they seem to have made an effort to make sure they have different guest hosts to somewhat fill the gap. At least you get some variety.

I don't mind the weekly episodes being a bit waffly but if I am going to be listening to the daily ones they need to be fairly tight.

The other thing they have done more this year is get more input from actual pros in terms of the audio diaries and guest presenters which I think adds.

orraloon

Bzzzt. Lizzy B, not Lizzie D. She'll be on ya!

Not about views pro or con, just find her style rather more energised than the wombling ramblers. When one has had 5-10 minutes of the style of discussion more usually conducted by a couple of old f4rts over a beer in the pub, Lizzy is a breeze of audio fresh air.

rick_chasey

I'll come across as a fanboi, and I think it's great so hopefully it doesn't come across as sour grapes but Friebe is the x factor on the podcast and it's a lot better when he's on it.

RichN95.

bobmcstuff said:

Yeah I found myself disagreeing with Lizzie quite a lot. Not that that's necessarily a problem though, especially if she is just on a few episodes.

Me as well. I think she to readily equates the women's peloton to the men's and what happens in one happens in the other. And that's not always the case.

sherer

rick_chasey said:

FWIW, if anyone speaks another language, when you say the names of people from that country it feels really very odd to deliberately say their name wrong to appease the monoglots.

I think you've hit the nail on the head there. Sometimes it comes across as if he's showing off, but maybe that's because I struggle with my native tongue.

I enjoyed Francois Thomazeau on the tour coverage.

It's very interesting catching up on these so far behind to see how they thought the races would pan out etc. Still they know way more than me.

Decent pod cast and only cycling one I listen to at the moment

rick_chasey

Whilst on the topic - Brits, don’t correct pronunciation of names to the Anglo version when speaking to native speakers.

The amount of times I’ve had people “correct” me on my Boonen pronunciation jfc

RichN95.

rick_chasey said:

Whilst on the topic - Brits, don’t correct pronunciation of names to the Anglo version when speaking to native speakers.

The amount of times I’ve had people “correct” me on my Boonen pronunciation jfc

Would you expect Boonen and Boon (as a Flemish surname, not the English word boon) to be pronounced in generally the same way?

rick_chasey

Yeah just with en at the end.

Best way to pronounce as a Brit it is as bone, like the things that make up skeletons, with en at the end.

shirley_basso

The quins stadium is named after a direct relative of mine. It's pronounced stope.

RichN95.

rick_chasey said:

Yeah just with en at the end.

Best way to pronounce as a Brit it is as bone, like the things that make up skeletons, with en at the end.

I ask because this is Tom Boon, Belgium's best ever hockey player, who says his name a little different at the beginning of this interview. Maybe it's an accent thing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEHWReE6HRw

rick_chasey

RichN95. said:

rick_chasey said:

Yeah just with en at the end.

Best way to pronounce as a Brit it is as bone, like the things that make up skeletons, with en at the end.

I ask because this is Tom Boon, Belgium's best ever hockey player, who says his name a little different at the beginning of this interview. Maybe it's an accent thing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PEHWReE6HRw

So I'd hazard a guess he's saying like that as that's what everyone calls him in the UK.

Double vowel means a longer sound of the vowel, so rather than o as in stop it becoming oo as in "oooh, I see".

Normally in Dutch when there is a second vowel sound in a word like "molen", if the first vowel sound is followed by only one consonant, so in this instance only one l, the sound become long (as if there were a double). If you wanted to shorten to the O in stop, it you'd have to add in a double constanant (ll in this instance to make it "mollen", which is not word).

Because there is no vowel sound after the final en in molen word, the en is shortened. If you wanted to make that sound longer (eeey as in the fonz as oppose to e as in net) you'd have to add in a double consonant (i.e. moleen, which isn't a word). The same has to happen if for whatever reason the vowel sound you want to be long is followed by two consonants.

That Boonen has the double o is presumably because it's a name and back in the day you didn't have that kind of shortening of letters.

Does this make any sense?