POLL - Chris Waters: Art of commentators knowing when not to speak has been lost

THE thing that has struck me most while watching the cricket World Cup on television has had nothing to do with the cricket on view.
Richie Benaud, arguably the greatest cricketing commentator of all (Picture: Sean Dempsey/PA).Richie Benaud, arguably the greatest cricketing commentator of all (Picture: Sean Dempsey/PA).
Richie Benaud, arguably the greatest cricketing commentator of all (Picture: Sean Dempsey/PA).

It has had nothing to do with the switch hits, ramp shots and slower ball bouncers, nor anything to do with the players on the pitch.

It has had nothing to do with some quite comical attempts by spectators to catch sixes in the crowd, thereby giving themselves the opportunity to win up to $1m in a special promotion.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Nor has it had anything to do with some farcical umpiring and decision-making, culminating in the fact that the five men on duty for the Australia-England match in Melbourne did not know the rules which resulted in James Taylor being denied a century when James Anderson was adjudged run out.

No, it has had nothing to do with the above and everything to do with the fact that I can barely stand to watch the World Cup on television at all due to the standard of commentary on offer.

Indeed, I have found much of it so bad, so miserably puerile and so relentlessly incessant that I even caught myself resorting to the old Fred Trueman trick the other day of reaching for the remote control and turning down the sound.

Why, as I indignantly pressed the mute button and sat back in blissful peace and quiet to resume watching Afghanistan versus Bangladesh at four o’clock in the morning, I almost found myself muttering: “I don’t know what’s going off out there.”

Almost, but not quite.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

What is going off out there, I would suggest, is an insult to the proud traditions of television commentary that I remember from my childhood, when the likes of Richie Benaud, Tom Graveney and Jim Laker held court.

These great men of the game were devoid of the hype and hullabaloo that goes on today and, most significantly of all, knew not only when to speak but also when to shut the hell up.

Indeed, Benaud is widely regarded as the best television commentator of all time not simply because of what he said but because of what he did not say as he allowed the action to speak for itself.

Today, there are commentators who seem to think that it is written into their contracts that they must describe, in preposterous detail, every shot that we have just seen with our own eyes (come to think of it, it probably is written into their contracts by the dolts who employ them).

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

For example, if a batsman has just stepped away outside leg stump and crashed a cover drive to the boundary, the ball beating the outstretched dive of a fielder and travelling to the rope at a rate of knots, you can bet your bottom dollar that some excitable buffoon will scream: “He’s stepped away outside leg stump and lashed a cover drive to the boundary, the ball beating the outstretched dive of the fielder and travelling to the rope at a rate of knots”.

Inevitably, this shaft-of-light observation will be punctuated by exclamations such as “Wow!”, “Ripper!” and my own personal bugbear – “Great cricket shot!” – the ultimate in superfluous expression as if anyone thought the batsman had instead played a golf shot, a tennis shot or a snooker shot.

Looking on from thousands of miles away, I have found myself screaming at the TV: “Please stop telling me what I can see with my own eyes.” Or words to that effect.

Why, if you can bear it, just count for yourself the number of times that a commentator describes exactly what you have just seen, instead of providing some sort of accompanying insight or saying nothing at all until he has something meaningful to inject. It will not be long before you run out of fingers.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Truly, there are some desperately poor commentators out there and, being a nice chap, I am not going to say who I think they are.

There are some mighty fines ones too, men such as Ian Chappell, Jeremy Coney, Mike Atherton and a certain G Boycott, who offer journalistic style as well as insight and opinion, whether you agree with them or not. But they are in a shrinking minority.

I wondered what the great Richie Benaud had to say about the art of commentary and found these tips he offered back in 2003. “Everyone should develop a distinctive style, but a few pieces of advice might be: Put your brain into gear before opening your mouth. Never say “we” if referring to a team. Discipline is essential; fierce concentration is needed at all times.

“Then try to avoid allowing past your lips: “Of course”... “As you can see on the screen”... “You know...” or “I tell you what”. “That’s a tragedy...” or “a disaster...”. (The Titanic was a tragedy, the Ethiopian drought a disaster, but neither bears any relation to a dropped catch). Above all: when commentating, don’t take yourself too seriously, and have fun.”

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The “have fun” bit is perhaps the only thing that many of today’s commentators can do – usually at the expense of the poor people who are listening to them.

Of course, the game moves on and commentary styles with it.

The razzmatazz of the T20 era does call for something a little more expressive than a quietly purred “shot” if a batsman improvises a 100m ramp off a 90mph yorker.

But the style, the clever use of language, the ability to paint pictures and elevate the coverage beyond cliche and technical analysis, has almost completely disappeared.

The likes of John Arlott, for instance, painted pictures with words; Arlott would never repeat what the viewer had just seen for himself or prattle on about “executing plans”, the ultimate in scraping-the-barrel coach-speak.

So what should the ideal cricket commentator be like?

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

He should have a good voice, obviously. He should know when to speak and when to say nothing. He should be able to describe what is happening on the field but also what is happening off it – the colour, the surroundings, the things that escape the viewer and very often the ex-player, who might not see beyond technical aspects.

He should avoid cliche and coaching jargon. He should not shout, scream or holler and should realise that words and language are the tools of the trade. He should give insight and opinion and complement the pictures rather than overwhelm them with constant chat, allowing the game to breathe and develop in the viewer’s mind.

Alas, the standards are abysmal, and the real sadness is that an entire generation of cricket lovers are being raised on commentary so far removed from the genius of Arlott and Benaud it is ridiculous.

Like everything else in life, the art of television cricket commentary has been reduced to the lowest common denominator.

Vote with our feet for lower football prices

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

ON the subject of television, the Premier League’s latest rights deal is yet another slap in the face to football fans forced to pay extortionate ticket prices.

Sky and BT Sport have paid £5.13bn to cover seasons 2016-19, a 70 per cent increase on the current £3.01bn sum.

It has led to suggestions that top players could earn £500,000 a week by 2020.

Richard Scudamore, the Premier League chief executive, has reacted indignantly to calls that some of this new television money be used to raise funds for grass-roots football, slash ticket prices and assist Football League clubs.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

“We’re not set up for charitable purposes,” said Scudamore. “We are set up to be the best football competition.

“Just like in the film industry or pop industry, or any talent industry, the talent gets paid a disproportionately high amount compared to other people in the business.”

In other words, get stuffed.

So what is the poor old football fan to do?

Simple. Boycott the games.

Let’s have a co-ordinated campaign of staying away from Premier League matches until ticket prices are cut and funds better distributed.

It might not cure everything, but the best way to vote is to vote with the feet.

Related topics: