I'm one of Crofty's detractors but I'll be more than happy if he goes to Sky. - Having cancelled my full sports subscription at the announcement of this dastardly deal, Murdoch will never again get a penny of mine, so I'll not have occasion to suffer Crofty's pseudo-style if he goes there. I have also cancelled all newspapers which Murdoch (to my knowledge) is connected with. Goodbye Crofty; I won't miss you. But I do think it's a shame about Martin Brundle - if he decides to go…
Why should he do what satisfies the fans the most? He is not running the sport he is looking after his own career. You wouldn't tell a driver to move teams because "it would satify the fans" The damage has already been done and it wasnt Brundles fault. Besides there is probably a split between the people who will not pay for Sky and those that are/already do. Those with the abilty to get Sky are probably hoping that atleast with MB the commentry will be good.
I'm incredibly bamboozled as to which commentators I'll be listening to next year and what races they'll be in.
Looks like Brundle is going to Sky: http://www.yallaf1.com/2011/10/29/brundle-looks-set-to-leave-bbc-for-sky/
Can't blame him to be honest Sky in my view will do a better job on F1 but who will be alongside Brundle?? Crofty?? And who will be the presenter(s) Georgie Thompson?? Still a lot to find out sbout before March but the most interesting thing will be what race the Beeb show?
I can't see why Sky would want Croft. They should get John Watson, he worked for them when they broadcast F1 before.
If Sky sign croft, then that means Brundle would be what yanks call "The colour commentator" (ex-professional, gives a pro's insight) and not the lead commentator he is currently.
I like crofty, i enjoy the 5live commentary, especially when they have Karun Chandhok with them, you're guaranteed an argument then.
He's average at best. He has limited knowledge of the sport and comes out with stupid comments now and then. He doesn't really have any real impact on the coverage for me, I can't see why Sky would go out of their way to get him on board. Coulthard, Allen and Watson are all miles better.
John Watson was very good when he was on in Singapore and I really hope he is on again. Interestingly on his wiki page it says he works for Sky Sports, if that is true then hopefully he will be involved in the coverage next year. I thought Brundle did not really get on much with David Croft and seeing as they are both lead commentators I can't see it happening.
Coulthard - Slightly boring, not typical sky material Allen - Not very good, perfect for sky Watson - Very boring for casual fans, great for die hards such as myself. Sky will cater for casual fans.
Sometimes these Wiki things are correct. I'm an arsenal fan, and on Mikel Arteta's (Arsenal player, former Everton player) wiki page it said he was an arsenal player hours before the deal was announced.
Wiki is more accurate than people think; in the transfer window newcastle fans were editing loads of playrs wiki enteries and they always got changed back almost straight away. I read somewhere (not on wiki) that wiki is more accurate per entry than the encyclopedia.
Try studying chemistry, I swear wikipedia was designed to frustrate and mislead! One of our tasks for our first week of first year was to find and correct a chemistry error on wikipedia, and record how many pages it took to find one. The average was 5.
As I'm sure I've mentioned before, 'Crofty' is infinitely better than Legard. He is also somewhat less grating than the very knowledgeable, very likeable (in real life) James Allen: I did not care for James' commentary style but again, he was - and always will be - infinitely better than Legard. "Meanwhile…"(sic) Croft comes across as a 70s disco DJ with a near complete package of clichés, ostensibly to smooth out the audio-links with his colleagues; then again, unlike Legard, one acknowledges that at least he makes the effort. Superficially self-deprecating, he even (casually?) name-drops his own pseudonym "Crofty", thereby deliberately reinforcing his own importance; and not just when referring to tweets and texts, but also when referring to his own conversations! One wonders if he took lessons from one-time Radio 1 DJ: Simon 'Master' Bates… Croft comes across not as unpleasant(Legard) or painfully irritating(J. Allen), but as false. He always sounds as if he's 'playing the part' by putting on an act. Murray Walker: Genuinely and passionately enthusiastic; makes loads of errors just like any real fan, and very very loveable for it. Martin Brundle: Consummate professional who really knows his stuff, yet has a real empathy with his audience; can explain the technicalities of the sport, whilst keeping his audience interested. Asks good, leading questions of other professionals. Has applied himself well to the role of lead commentator. David Coulthard: Brundle's professional friend, both at work and at play. Speaks clearly but often shows the truth as being less knowledgeable than Brundle. Also has a short-term memory problem with pronunciation. Alan Jones: Knowledgeable old-timer who still has something to offer. Accurate and professional. Speaks clearly. Forthright with his opinions. James Allen: Far more knowledgeable than was given credit for during his commentary years but his downfall was an irritating effervescence which sometimes sounded forced. Perhaps he tried too hard to be his own version of Murray? Jonathan Legard: (it's Hallowe'en) David Croft: Initially likeable, conversational style; usually able to get others to provide good err information. Becomes progressively err false with plenty of evidence of err 'affectation'; sycophantic, with a strangely forced err pseudo-laughter. Meanwhile sounds like a 70s DJ style err just a touch, with superfluous wordiness just a lot. When following in car footage, suddenly falls into advanced driving-commentary mode (leaving out the errs) and pretends he's so good at it that he must sound out of err breath. - But infinitely better than Legard… Ted Kravitz: Definitely worth a mention. He's good.
