hatcher wrote:Thought of any examples yet?
Maybe that Paris-Roubaix commentary posted on page 1 is a good example of his "wogs begin at Calais" attitude. Perhaps he thought Johan Vansummeren was from Surrey.
Mrs John Murphy wrote:Plenty thanks and I've already given them. As I've said before my opinion is based on having listened to him over a number of years and I don't keep a record of every stupid thing he says because if I did it would be longer than war and peace. If you like Harmon then that's probably because his view and your view of the world chime together nicely.
PR is a good example of him thinking emotion is more important than calling the race action.
However, I will credit him where this style was beneficial and where he did a mostly good job and this was on the Stage 4 of the Giro, although he blotted his copybook there with some fairly crass comments about DDL when it was neither then time or the place.
hatcher wrote:Oh I see. So his emoting overrides his racism. Gotcha.
You came up with zero examples the last time you trotted out this drivel, and shock horror you'll come up with zero examples this time.
It's funny how often you bring out the "wogs being at Calais" line. I can only begin to imagine how excited you must have got when you realised there was a new thread for you to use it in. Maybe as excited as when you realise you'll get to make the oh so cutting "but I thought Anglo riders don't dope" line for the billionth time today.
nesocip wrote:Haimar Zubeldia was never mentioned even when he was racking up Top 5 finishes in the Tour. Must be the most media underhyped rider of last 2 decades.
Im forced by geography to listen to Serbian Eurosport commentary for the last 3 years, and before that it was all Harmon&Co for me.
The Serbian guys were absolutely dreadful the first year, one of them an ex semi-pro rider who knows what cycling is about but just doesnt have what it takes to be a commentator, and the other dude a commentator with 0 clue about cycling. I dont need to mention that their rider recognition was next to none.
3 years later, and both of them have improved immensely. You cant call them good yet, but they are getting there slowly. They tell riders apart better then i do myself and they actually make those dull flat sprint stages more manageable with their commentary.
It just takes some research, a little brain and a lot of experience to become an useful cycling commentator.
The Father of Clean Cycling, Christophe Bassons wrote:When I look at cycling today, I get the impression that history is repeating itself: riders who are supposed to be rouleurs are climbing passes at the front of the race, and those who are supposed to be climbers are riding time trials at more than 50 kilometres per hour.
The story is beginning again, just as it did 14 years ago
Mambo95 wrote:Ignore 'Mrs John Murphy'. He/she is a forum 'character' - the postings are all extreme reactionary nonsense. Engage in an argument and you'll just get abuse.
diggercuz wrote:second post ever after reading the forum for the last few years and one thing i must say, ACF94 is probably the most intelligent poster here, never biased to BMC or Cadel, and never gets worked up over anything.
orange_lycra wrote:Harmon + Kelly is certainly the best combo I've come across.
Harmon certainly has his faults, notably the tendency to go "Whoooooaahhh ....!" whenever anyone attacks or "Oooohhhh ...!" if someone has a dodgy moment on a descent, even on the replay! His obsession with "bike handling skills" and descending prowess also gets a little tiresome (he obviously sees himself as some sort of expert in this field "being an mountain biker"). But he is pretty good at recognising riders, knowing their characteristics and interpreting what's going on, unlike many comentators.
Kelly is great as a counterpoint; knows his stuff, gives an unbiased opinion and doesn't fall into the "everything was better in my day" trap that a lot of ex-riders do.
Carlton Kirby irritates the hell out of me. He obviously thinks he's hilarious with his "amusing" anecdotes and lets us all know it by chuckling away at his own jokes. Plus his wheeling out of stock phrases "it's now or never", "there's a big push here", "the team is well-marshalled" etc. regardless of whether they apply annoys me mightily. If he's lead commentator on a race then it's almost enough to stop me watching it.
But anything's better than P&P.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 13 guestsBack to top