Carlton Kirby - has to stay !!
I live in Canada and my partner and I are avid fans of F1 and Cycling!
However, we are not F1 or Cycling "purists" and do not own a Formula 1 car or a bicycle. We do attend events as spectators and have a good overall knowledge of these sports. We particularly enjoy Mr. Kirby's commentary on cycling races, especially his musings on the landscapes and towns as we pass by on our television, and also find it most amusing to learn what he had for dinner on the previous night, and breakfast that morning. Also, his comments about the various restaurants he had graced with his presence.
Through the 3 hours of coverage we need to be entertained, as well as informed. I think he does a very nice job of this and his friendly and amusing personality keeps us engaged and interested. He may not be the world's greatest authority on cycling, but he does not need to be. His sidekick, be it Dan or Sean, are there to fill this role. His excitement as each stage is reaching its climax is most appropriate, and we really enjoy his enthusiastic response to events as they unfold.
In terms of expanding the viewing audience of this great sport, I would suggest viewers like us represent a large portion of the potential audience - not just the "purists" as the writer of this post obviously is. If we had to suffer 3 hours of listening to cycling "experts" discussing the merits of "tubed" or "non-tubed" tires, or the lifetime statistics of each rider in the Peloton we would simply fast-forward to the sprint on each Stage. We must endure (in Canada) listening to David Coulthard and Co. for Formula 1 racing and his endless ramblings about tire construction, heat dissipation and brake pad properties is almost enough to drive us to watching Nascar!
If Carlton happens to get the occasional riders name wrong, so what? He got the Canadian rider Ryder right.
If exclusive rather than inclusive is what you want then fine, but many existing and new viewers like us will be lost.
Just my opinion.
Jerry S. Calgary. Canada.
I live in Canada and my partner and I are avid fans of F1 and Cycling!
However, we are not F1 or Cycling "purists" and do not own a Formula 1 car or a bicycle. We do attend events as spectators and have a good overall knowledge of these sports. We particularly enjoy Mr. Kirby's commentary on cycling races, especially his musings on the landscapes and towns as we pass by on our television, and also find it most amusing to learn what he had for dinner on the previous night, and breakfast that morning. Also, his comments about the various restaurants he had graced with his presence.
Through the 3 hours of coverage we need to be entertained, as well as informed. I think he does a very nice job of this and his friendly and amusing personality keeps us engaged and interested. He may not be the world's greatest authority on cycling, but he does not need to be. His sidekick, be it Dan or Sean, are there to fill this role. His excitement as each stage is reaching its climax is most appropriate, and we really enjoy his enthusiastic response to events as they unfold.
In terms of expanding the viewing audience of this great sport, I would suggest viewers like us represent a large portion of the potential audience - not just the "purists" as the writer of this post obviously is. If we had to suffer 3 hours of listening to cycling "experts" discussing the merits of "tubed" or "non-tubed" tires, or the lifetime statistics of each rider in the Peloton we would simply fast-forward to the sprint on each Stage. We must endure (in Canada) listening to David Coulthard and Co. for Formula 1 racing and his endless ramblings about tire construction, heat dissipation and brake pad properties is almost enough to drive us to watching Nascar!
If Carlton happens to get the occasional riders name wrong, so what? He got the Canadian rider Ryder right.
If exclusive rather than inclusive is what you want then fine, but many existing and new viewers like us will be lost.
Just my opinion.
Jerry S. Calgary. Canada.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram