Hello and back welcome to my blog
When shorter forms of cricket were manufactured by the likes of Packer and recently Modi, most believed that spinners would suffer at the hands of aggressive batsmen whose sense of defending their wicket was suddenly gone. However bowlers such as Shane Warne, Daniel Vettori and Murali have proved those people dead wrong as they adapted (as any good bowler should) to new conditions. 20/20 has again brought out the best in good spinners while their faster comrades have been belted like a boarding school troublemaker. My point this week is that unfortunately the art of commentating has not yet adapted in such a way.
The quote in the title was taken from an article on cricinfo.com which discussed the fake nature of commentary in the IPL where 'disinterested critique and fine observation' has become repetitive selling of the game and its sponsors. The quote is a summary of the problem with 20/20 commentary namely that because there is such a feast of hitting the superlatives are used up on slogs and the commentator is left speechless when a perfect cover-drive or a well-timed late cut is produced.
Suddenly 20 off 10 balls is run-of-the-mill but still spoken of like a unique ODI counterattack and when a batsmen gets 100 from just 50 balls - a true 20/20 achievement - the commentator is out of ammunition and the moment suffers because of this. A 150 strike rate built on cross-the-line slogging is lorded while a technical, paced innings by a Sachin Tendulkar can be forgotten.
Also the unpredictable nature of 20/20 makes fools of commentators that announce the next Don Bradman (after a couple of fours/sixes) then have their batsman dismissed the very next ball. On the other hand a bowler is praised for a string of dot balls before consecutive sixes destroy their bowling figures. These are extremes of this form of cricket that make it interesting - I don't have a problem with them - but the commentary needs to change or it will destroy the viewing experience to a point where we yearn for the commercial, sorry 'strategic', break to escape the monotony.
What can be done? I'm sure you have your own opinions as to how commentary can adapt. I think their style needs an overhaul, it needs to be more carnival like and less analytical. Therefore commentators of the Tony Greig style would be useful - styles that involve a lot of loud fun but less depth (a bit like the game itself). Also the concept of having players with microphones isinteresting as people get a greater idea of what's happening at the crease.
The key will be a bit of imagination like that used by the spinner bowler when the overs were reduced and the boundary rope encroached them.
Well that's it from here and I hope you join me again
It's good bye for now
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Send Murray over. He would provide a lot of fun and amusing commentary, and knows little about cricket, so couldn't do any in depth analysis (Though that doesn't stop Doully trying to analyse batting)
ReplyDeleteAs for having the players with microphones, I am surprised they haven't been doing that, would be a great addition