Chris 'Interesting' Froome

mfin

Back in the 80s, the snookerist Steve Davis was ironically labelled Steve 'Interesting' Davis by Spitting Image because he was so boring (brilliant at snooker of course).

Now, Steve Davis is a pundit and actually comes across quite well. Who'd have thunk it?

What are the odds that Chris Froome will become the second person in sporting history to achieve this transition?

desertman01

Obviously you have to be a doping scum bag to be considered interesting these days.

RichN95.

Steve Davis was never boring though. I saw him do an exhibition match in the 80s and he was brilliantly entertaining. It's just that we mostly saw him at work.

Same with Froome. Modern sportsmen these days have to be boring. The sports media are just interested in headlines, scandals and conflict - so they have to be as bland as possible to deter them. His book is really entertaining and he's apparently quite a bit different in private.

No_Ta_Doctor

mfin wrote:

Back in the 80s, the snookerist Steve Davis was ironically labelled Steve 'Interesting' Davis by Spitting Image because he was so boring (brilliant at snooker of course).

Now, Steve Davis is a pundit and actually comes across quite well. Who'd have thunk it?

What are the odds that Chris Froome will become the second person in sporting history to achieve this transition?

It was actually his snooker that was boring though. He was technically brilliant, but always played the percentages. He didn't take risks. He wasn't deliberately grinding like Thorburn, who would slow every frame down with extremely defensive play. But he didn't have the flair that his contemporaries Higgins and White had. One match between them had average frame times of six minutes!

Davis was quite interesting as a person. An avid vinyl collector with a love of Planet Gong https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8c-Nl_r9Zs

mfin

RichN95 wrote:

Modern sportsmen these days have to be boring. The sports media are just interested in headlines, scandals and conflict - so they have to be as bland as possible to deter them. His book is really entertaining and he's apparently quite a bit different in private.

See, I don't get this. Maybe in a book he can come across as entertaining, I don't know. But as soon as you hear him talk he comes across as dull, monotone, and void of personality. I just can't see how he can be radically different in private when he's so infuriatingly dull in interview.

Not every sports person comes across as dull at all, regardless of the content of what they say, he just doesn't seem to have any 'life' about him.

I wonder if he will become more interesting and engaging as he grows older. I doubt it.

I think proper sporting heroes have a lot more about them than results. If he gets the results at the moment he'll only ever be as interesting as his results and performances, but never as any form of personality.

RichN95.

mfin wrote:

See, I don't get this. Maybe in a book he can come across as entertaining, I don't know. But as soon as you hear him talk he comes across as dull, monotone, and void of personality. I just can't see how he can be radically different in private when he's so infuriatingly dull in interview.

Not every sports person comes across as dull at all, regardless of the content of what they say, he just doesn't seem to have any 'life' about him.

I wonder if he will become more interesting and engaging as he grows older. I doubt it.

Ok. Take someone entertaining - say Will Smith. Then put him on a chat show and rather than open up the conversation to let him be himself, the host grills him for 15 minutes about his tax affairs (even though they're in order). How entertaining do you think he'd be?

Every time Froome meets the press, the first questions are about doping or Wiggins. Instantly the shutters go down and the stock answers come out. The same with most sportsmen. The think is that they don't trust the media. With good reason.

I know a few people who have been interviewed on TV and they are always working when they are. And none of them come across as they are in real life.

thomthom

Watch NBA players being interviewed. Now, that's dull.

RichN95.

Out of interest mfin, which A-list cyclists would you say aren't boring and why?

Cavendish and Wiggins I'll give you, but they get sh*t thrown at them every time they say anything less than bland.

And why do you expect sportsmen to be great personalities? I don't see anyone criticising Ant and Dec for their lack of Olympic medals.

Macaloon

Think Rich is bang on with Froome. He's definitely made himself much more boring. Early interviews, before he'd backed-up the Vuelta breakthrough, were pretty interesting. Refreshingly arrogant and ambitious. It's a real pity they think he's more marketable as a muppet.

Steve Davis' radio show back in the day was awesome. His public perception made the whole thing more of a secret. I really think marketeers are making a mistake if they think we respond more to robots.

mfin

RichN95 wrote:

Out of interest mfin, which A-list cyclists would you say aren't boring and why?

Cavendish and Wiggins I'll give you, but they get sh*t thrown at them every time they say anything less than bland.

And why do you expect sportsmen to be great personalities? I don't see anyone criticising Ant and Dec for their lack of Olympic medals.

Oh I dunno, Cancellara comes across like a good bloke for example, Thomas comes across well. I know it's all personal, but I think a lot of people find Froome boring. You mention Cav and Wiggins for example, personally I find Cav boring to listen to too although I know some don't think this. I don't expect sports people to be entertaining dynamic personalities, don't get me wrong, I'm just saying I think Froome isn't one, not many people seem to say otherwise either.

Chris 'Dishwater' Froome, that might be a good name for him.

('Dishwater' has got to be a better nickname than 'Froomey' or 'Froomedog').

RichN95.

mfin wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

Out of interest mfin, which A-list cyclists would you say aren't boring and why?

Cavendish and Wiggins I'll give you, but they get sh*t thrown at them every time they say anything less than bland.

And why do you expect sportsmen to be great personalities? I don't see anyone criticising Ant and Dec for their lack of Olympic medals.

Oh I dunno, Cancellara comes across like a good bloke for example, Thomas comes across well. I know it's all personal, but I think a lot of people find Froome boring. You mention Cav and Wiggins for example, personally I find Cav boring to listen to too although I know some don't think this. I don't expect sports people to be entertaining dynamic personalities, don't get me wrong, I'm just saying I think Froome isn't one, not many people seem to say otherwise either.

Chris 'Dishwater' Froome, that might be a good name for him.

('Dishwater' has got to be a better nickname than 'Froomey' or 'Froomedog').

Ok. That's your opinion.

I would add though that after seven years and 4000 posts I would struggle to ascribe a single adjective to you. You're one of those posters that just doesn't register with me at all.

Art Vandelay

Miaow

Macaloon

Yeah. FFS, mfin. Show a bit of personality. Bring an obsession or two to the party. Make it your mission to balance every FF pro-Contador post with a blast from the past.

If Froome was actually dull and uninteresting it wouldn't appear so bad. He's crippled by putting on a bland act. He's a bad actor.

andy_wrx

mfin wrote:

Thomas comes across well. I know it's all personal, but I think a lot of people find Froome boring. You mention Cav and Wiggins for example, personally I find Cav boring to listen to too although I know some don't think this.

Obviously it is personal, as you say.

To me personally Thomas just comes over as extemely thick and really dull to listen to, whereas Cav I find interesting and entertaining.

dolan_driver

Put most sports people in front of the media and a microphone and the shutters will probably come down. Chris Froome wants to ride his bike and win races, not talk to the media or be popular with us on bike forums.

Kelly comes in for a bit of flak for his commentary style but here he is having a bit of craic with some riders back in Ireland. He probably is unaware of the presence of the camera. I guess a lot of riders are very different when their guard comes down.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDGn_-Nr7Vg

DD.

mfin

Dolan Driver wrote:

Chris Froome wants to ride his bike and win races.

Absolutely agree, that's his ambition and his job and very good he is at it too. I've got every bit of respect for what any pro rider does on the bike that competes fairly. It would also be fair that a lot of people couldn't care less how they come across in interview as well. I'm not anti him as a rider at all.

RoadPainter

G and OGE come across as likeable because they do their own stuff and talk about stuff that interests them (combination makes them engaged rather than wary)

If Froome did his own videos he probably still wouldn't seem interesting - he'd be wary of saying the wrong thing to incur the wrath of his other half.

BelgianBeerGeek

What do you want him to say?

blackpoolkev

mfin wrote:

Back in the 80s, the snookerist Steve Davis was ironically labelled Steve 'Interesting' Davis by Spitting Image because he was so boring (brilliant at snooker of course).

I recall Davis being questioned about his lack of character, he replied
"They don't call me Steve for nothing you know" Class!

Rigga

Listen to any footballer being interviewed after a match, its enough to make you fall into a coma!

ocdupalais

RichN95 wrote:

Steve Davis was never boring though. I saw him do an exhibition match in the 80s and he was brilliantly entertaining. It's just that we mostly saw him at work.

Same with Froome. Modern sportsmen these days have to be boring. The sports media are just interested in headlines, scandals and conflict - so they have to be as bland as possible to deter them. His book is really entertaining and he's apparently quite a bit different in private.

Great post. Cuts to the chase.

Cancellara
T. Martin
Contador... Legends of the sport: all pretty dull. Except if you're a fan....
"Favourite music?... Dire Straights... Queen... Chris De Burgh..." Lovely.

Elfed

mfin wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

Out of interest mfin, which A-list cyclists would you say aren't boring and why?

Cavendish and Wiggins I'll give you, but they get sh*t thrown at them every time they say anything less than bland.

And why do you expect sportsmen to be great personalities? I don't see anyone criticising Ant and Dec for their lack of Olympic medals.

Oh I dunno, Cancellara comes across like a good bloke for example, Thomas comes across well. I know it's all personal, but I think a lot of people find Froome boring. You mention Cav and Wiggins for example, personally I find Cav boring to listen to too although I know some don't think this. I don't expect sports people to be entertaining dynamic personalities, don't get me wrong, I'm just saying I think Froome isn't one, not many people seem to say otherwise either.

Chris 'Dishwater' Froome, that might be a good name for him.

('Dishwater' has got to be a better nickname than 'Froomey' or 'Froomedog').

Not everyone has the gift of being media friendly, some have it, some don't.

RideOnTime

Why is ditchwater dull?

No_Ta_Doctor

RideOnTime wrote:

Why is ditchwater dull?

It's literally dull, as in not bright and clear. Because it's full of mud and gunk.

Get it under a microscope and it's chock full of interesting stuff, if you find micro-organisms and the like interesting.

No_Ta_Doctor

There are two or three ways an athlete can be interesting when not doing their sport.

They can provide valuable insight into their sport, they can go a bit mad rock-star (see Balotelli) or they can be entertainers, raconteurs.

Unfortunately, many athletes appear to have less insight into their sport than the average bloke down the pub (see countless Football pundits, for example), and being an entertainer is something of a gift. That leaves the mad rock star angle...

milton50

It is interesting how some fans and the media are obsessed with pinning a personality trait on sportsmen and women, much of the time based on little more than 30 second interviews or second-hand "reports."

It's like a collective neurosis.

For what it's worth I haven't seen or heard anything to suggest that Froome is any more dull than most of his contemporaries such as Contador and Quintana. Just as I doubt Steve Davies or Gary Lineker were any more boring than their peers in reality.

No_Ta_Doctor

Milton50 wrote:

It is interesting how some fans and the media are obsessed with pinning a personality trait on sportsmen and women, much of the time based on little more than 30 second interviews or second-hand "reports."

It's like a collective neurosis.

It's quite simple really, sport is about narrative, storyline. The athletes are the actors. Why else would anyone care who rode their bike fastest over a couple of hundred km? The tactics can be interesting, and the technique on show in top level football breathtaking, but without the narrative there's no real emotional connect.

Of course the sport itself can provide the bulk of the story, the rider who just gets unlucky every time finally winning a race, for example. But when we want the break to stay away, why? Because we know the guys in it probably have very limited chances of ever getting the big win and they've worked their arses off - that's about character, and character needs a narrative.

josame

Dull???

That'll be this thread

jawooga

Milton50 wrote:

It is interesting how some fans and the media are obsessed with pinning a personality trait on sportsmen and women, much of the time based on little more than 30 second interviews or second-hand "reports."

It's like a collective neurosis.

For what it's worth I haven't seen or heard anything to suggest that Froome is any more dull than most of his contemporaries such as Contador and Quintana. Just as I doubt Steve Davies or Gary Lineker were any more boring than their peers in reality.

+1 this is like the Beckham thread in BB. People may look around their own work places and wonder how many of their colleagues are really good at public speaking, let alone doing it on telly. A certain amount of responsibility lies with the interviewer as well- ask a dull question, get a dull answer.

awavey

jawooga wrote:

Milton50 wrote:

It is interesting how some fans and the media are obsessed with pinning a personality trait on sportsmen and women, much of the time based on little more than 30 second interviews or second-hand "reports."

It's like a collective neurosis.

For what it's worth I haven't seen or heard anything to suggest that Froome is any more dull than most of his contemporaries such as Contador and Quintana. Just as I doubt Steve Davies or Gary Lineker were any more boring than their peers in reality.

+1 this is like the Beckham thread in BB. People may look around their own work places and wonder how many of their colleagues are really good at public speaking, let alone doing it on telly. A certain amount of responsibility lies with the interviewer as well- ask a dull question, get a dull answer.

they also forget especially during the Tour, the top riders are subject to a lot of interviews,where the same banal dull questions are all repeatedly asked just so the reporter can have their own 30second vox pop fill footage, and after the 38th interview most peoples patience would be sorely tested,let alone having to repeat it every day over 3 weeks, that the poor guy answers every question every time unfailingly politely and doesnt drop the occasional f bomb in, or throws a strop about it, he gets labelled boring :roll:

rick_chasey

I basically judge how interesting a rider is on how they race & ride.

For a GC rider Froome's quite good. Blistering attacks with flailing limbs everywhere. Peer through your fingers when he goes downhill.

Runs out of food etc. s'ok.
Even as a teammate he could generate some interesting stuff. His hurry up gesture was probably the most interesting event in the otherwise mega dull 2012 tour.