Define the line between commentary and ridicule

[Donnaracer]

This forum was just starting to get fired up about commentary and it was pulled twice - now can it please resume without the risk of it disappearing before anyone has had a read? Charliesangels - we need the entertainment!

[DAVID PATERSON]

In answer to your question, i believe a commentator should never say anything derogatory, if you can't say something nice, say nothing.

[SSbaby]

Originally Posted by DAVID PATERSON

In answer to your question, i believe a commentator should never say anything derogatory, if you can't say something nice, say nothing.

That I agree with.

Cannot say "now that was a bit silly by driver A".

But let's not discourage opinions like, "I don't agree with that decision".

[William Dale Jr]

Originally Posted by SSbaby

Cannot say "now that was a bit silly by driver A".

But what if it really was silly? If the analyst believes that a driver made a move that was silly - like some of the incidents at Winton were - why shouldn't they be entitled to say so?

Sure, a line needs to be drawn at how negative they can be, but the analyst still needs to be able to analyse situations as they see fit. Positively or negatively.

[Crash Test]

I've commentated a situation where somebody has crashed, got out and walked back up the race track to stand pretty much in the middle of the circuit so he could hurl abuse at other competitors, whilst they still circulated at speed.

I don't think I called him an fwit, but he was very deserving!

[SSbaby]

Originally Posted by William Dale Jr

But what if it really was silly? If the analyst believes that a driver made a move that was silly - like some of the incidents at Winton were - why shouldn't they be entitled to say so?

Sure, a line needs to be drawn at how negative they can be, but the analyst still needs to be able to analyse situations as they see fit. Positively or negatively.

That's for us, the viewers and forum contributors to judge and very few of us keyboard warriors are backward in offering opinion.

The commentators could stick to technical or analytical viewpoints without getting personal. Personal comments tend to offend some viewers... and we all know how precious some viewers can be.

There is a big difference between me calling driver A silly and Neil Crompton calling driver A silly. Case in point: The TV media plays host to a huge, judgemental audience and generally what Neil Crompton says generally carries weight.

[Holly Wood]

So you're saying that, because people listen to him, he can't share an opinion?

[Jacob Black]

Opinion is an important part of colourful commentary. It's also a big part of insight. Without wanting to show my hand too much, I'm only recently even tolerant of Mark Skaife, and while I dont think all his commentary is brilliant, and know for a fact he is prone to bias, it's up to us to be smart enough to see through that, and up to him to entertain and inform.
I like the current commentary team. Though I think they need someone extra in pit lane doing pit reports.... I know a guy.... :P

[Chappelli]

Vanilla comment is not engaging... At the end of the day theiy're trying to add to the entertainment value of the product and make it more engaging....

The good commentators know how to walk that emotive line without crossing it (or they cross it and have another stategy to create balance).

Sure you may think Skaife is biased, but you'll listen to what he has to say so you can prove your point that he's biased.... Sure you may think a certain commentator is overly negative, but if they're good they'll know how to walk that line between everyone thinking they're an idiot and creating just enough angle to envoke an emotive response..

[SSbaby]

Originally Posted by Holly Wood

So you're saying that, because people listen to him, he can't share an opinion?

It would be good if you actually read what I wrote.

Says he in a mildly derogatory way.

[Kiwikid]

People who think commentators can't say anything derogatory must have never listened to James Hunt. A expert commentator (i.e. Hunt / Brundle / Skaife) should be honest and critique what they are watching. Why have an expert otherwise.

What a bland world it would be if we could only give praise

[david5]

Originally Posted by Kiwikid

People who think commentators can't say anything derogatory must have never listened to James Hunt. A expert commentator (i.e. Hunt / Brundle / Skaife) should be honest and critique what they are watching. Why have an expert otherwise.

What a bland world it would be if we could only give praise

Agree entirely, if the expert commentator cant say that was silly, clever, good move, bad move, whats the point of having the expert commentator ?

May as well get Mel & Kochie in.

MS may be biased but he has shared the praise pretty well across the brands & again if we dont get some inside info from HRT & Sprintgas land, why have him.

[stoned pony]

What a bunch of big girls' blouses some of you are! (or is that too derogatory?)

I for one do not want to sit and listen to verbal custard!

[DAVID PATERSON]

I understand the point you guys are making about professional commentators calling it like they see it on top level motorsport, but my earlier post was from the perspective of many years as a commentator at State level, where i am very careful not to slag off at someone.

At my first race meeting, i was sitting on dummy grid and i could hear the commentators laughing and joking on air about my choice of car and how little i must have spent on it. Very upsetting for a 19 y.o., having a go and doing it all on his own.

[Belly13]

I was Barry Sheene was still alive. Baz was the best commentator ever...

[david5]

Originally Posted by DAVID PATERSON

At my first race meeting, i was sitting on dummy grid and i could hear the commentators laughing and joking on air about my choice of car and how little i must have spent on it. Very upsetting for a 19 y.o., having a go and doing it all on his own.

OK, thats just wrong.

[Peregrine]

Although not a fan of the guy i reckon i would find Paul Morris very "entertaining" in the commentary box. Vanilla commentary is for vanilla people who would probably get enjoyment from watching golf......

[fourWheelDrift]

OK so I don't know any of the commentators being discussed but surely the line is between criticising behaviour and attacking indivduals, for example:

That was a silly move/poor driving/risky/dangerous is fine and indeed necessary.

He's a numpty/ugly/thick/cheat/liar is questionable and shouldn't be part of normal commentary.

[NewsStalker]

But the first one is just an opinion whilst the second could well be an accurate description of some in the field Oh hang on - the last two would only relate to F1 drivers!

[Ricky Bobby]

Originally Posted by Kiwikid

People who think commentators can't say anything derogatory must have never listened to James Hunt. A expert commentator (i.e. Hunt / Brundle / Skaife) should be honest and critique what they are watching. Why have an expert otherwise.

What a bland world it would be if we could only give praise

Originally Posted by stoned pony

What a bunch of big girls' blouses some of you are! (or is that too derogatory?)

I for one do not want to sit and listen to verbal custard!

Same for me Stoned Pony.
If I wanted to listen to some sanitized boring politically correct dribble I would go and listen to a Kevin Rudd speech or media statement.
When did us Aussies become lap dogs to the PC brigade?
We've gone soft.

[PhaseIII]

Originally Posted by Ricky Bobby

We've gone soft.

SOME OF US've gone soft!

[Spunky]

I have missed the previous threads on this and not sure who you guys are referring to so apologies if this is him: I heard a commentator at Winton CJ and he was boring, critical and a terrible commentator. This opinion was shared by quite a few, at least put somone in there with him that can fix it. I am sure it is difficult to do this on your own but even more so when they have so many opinions.

[Woolley]

The previous threads were closed because they degenerated into what was basically a personal attack on one commentator. Precisely the sort of thing that people are being critical of commentators doing to competitors.

I've deleted 4 posts which are returning to that topic. This is not a discussion of anyone person, and as a thread it's a good basis for discussion. I won't be pulling the thread, then, but it will be monitored closely for content or abuse and any repetition will be considered trolling.

Back to the topic, we have a pretty good standard of on-circuit commentary up here on the whole. The key word is respect for the competitors and officials. Our lot are certainly not excessivelely 'correct' in their commentary, but they're never hurtful or derogatory. They call it as they see it, they might comment on an under-prepared car, but with a 'good on you for being out there' type of attitude.

[bazil]

Originally Posted by Woolley

The previous threads were closed because they degenerated into what was basically a personal attack on one commentator. Precisely the sort of thing that people are being critical of commentators doing to competitors.
I've deleted 4 posts which are returning to that topic. This is not a discussion of anyone person, and as a thread it's a good basis for discussion. I won't be pulling the thread, then, but it will be monitored closely for content or abuse and any repetition will be considered trolling.

With all due respect Woolley I reckon that’s a little over zealous when you consider, the many threads over time that have taken various television stations and commentators to task for their opinion and comment. With little, or no recourse.

Surely if an announcer (such as the one in question) has liberty to make reference or comment to the public about individuals, teams, or the sport in general, they are equally accountable. I happen to like commentary with a "say it as you think it" approach as it is more entertaining. However if say Matty White was to bag the driving ability or skills of a driver, there would be a pretty strong case to argue about his right to comment based on his driving background or lack there of. He can say it but should be prepared for the public like on these forums to have a crack back. Personal attack should not be part of this but sometimes the lines get blurred.

The bloke in question should be mindful of his own skill set. Watching the team he "run" in action during meetings at times bordered on Keystone Cops. There is an old Italian saying that says "if the head of the fish stinks, the whole fish stinks..." JB and some of the guys in that team deserved better.

Back to the topic, we have a pretty good standard of on-circuit commentary up here on the whole. The key word is respect for the competitors and officials. Our lot are certainly not excessivelely 'correct' in their commentary, but they're never hurtful or derogatory. They call it as they see it, they might comment on an under-prepared car, but with a 'good on you for being out there' type of attitude.

If the above attitude had been applied this thread probably would not have been started.

[charliesangels]

Originally Posted by Woolley

The previous threads were closed because they degenerated into what was basically a personal attack on one commentator. Precisely the sort of thing that people are being critical of commentators doing to competitors.

I've deleted 4 posts which are returning to that topic. This is not a discussion of anyone person, and as a thread it's a good basis for discussion. I won't be pulling the thread, then, but it will be monitored closely for content or abuse and any repetition will be considered trolling.

Back to the topic, we have a pretty good standard of on-circuit commentary up here on the whole. The key word is respect for the competitors and officials. Our lot are certainly not excessivelely 'correct' in their commentary, but they're never hurtful or derogatory. They call it as they see it, they might comment on an under-prepared car, but with a 'good on you for being out there' type of attitude.

We can be critical of commentators, we pay the tickets, we pay for V8 Supercars to exist, no people no money no sport no need for commentators. Without the public and fans the commentators would be speaking to the insects flying around ( if you still dont understand my point). The drivers wouldnt be who they are or what they are, so if WE wish to be critical its our MONEY that is paying for it. WE can have an opninion in both a negative and postive fashion, who are you to dictate what people can think or feel. If they feel Chris Jewell is boring and should be kicked out, who ARE YOU to say NO. If people would like to start a petition to do so, power to the people I say. If they feel he isnt good enough for the role on track, why cant we say anything...should we have to pay for second rate commentators who got the job not on qualifications but pretty much by chance? Delete as many posts as you can, but you cannot change the fact that many people aggree with me