Sky TV/Cricket Company

Sky TV/Cricket Company

Post by Francis Payn » Sun, 14 Nov 1999 04:00:00


Did anyone see this two hour season review/preview programme on Sky
(NZ)?

Any comments.

Will be a half hour show each week during the season.

 
 
 

Sky TV/Cricket Company

Post by Simon Thomps » Sun, 14 Nov 1999 04:00:00



Quote:
> Did anyone see this two hour season review/preview programme on Sky
> (NZ)?

> Any comments.

> Will be a half hour show each week during the season.

Yep, saw some of it.

Coney lifts it from the mundane to above average. M Crowe just tries
to talk Max up. Not sure how M Graham will go. Larsen's insights were
brief, but gave you a better idea of the thinking in the team.

Thought their tribute to M Marshall was very good.

It was great to relive the English test series. Luckily, I missed the
bit (if there was one) on the Indian series.

Their comments on the last Indian ODI was that Fleming looked tired,
which were my impressions posted in an earlier message. Do they read
r.s.c...;-)

-----------------------------------------
Simon Thompson
Christchurch
New Zealand

 
 
 

Sky TV/Cricket Company

Post by shineyth.. » Sun, 14 Nov 1999 04:00:00

In article


Quote:


> Coney lifts it from the mundane to above average. M Crowe just tries
> to talk Max up. Not sure how M Graham will go.


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

 
 
 

Sky TV/Cricket Company

Post by Simon Thomps » Mon, 15 Nov 1999 04:00:00

Quote:

> In article




> > Coney lifts it from the mundane to above average. M Crowe just tries
> > to talk Max up. Not sure how M Graham will go.



Maybe I got the name wrong. The Aussie guy Sky use to front many of
these programs. He is very good at making the boring sound exciting,
which is why he is so good commentating League...

Knows little about cricket, not sure whether that is good or bad. A
lack of knowledge is good if he acts as a host and lets the 'guests'
talk. Bad if he talks too much. A knowledgable host can sometimes talk
over the guests, but then they can make pertinent comments if they
talk nonsense.

-----------------------------------------
Simon Thompson
Christchurch
New Zealand

 
 
 

Sky TV/Cricket Company

Post by Francis Payn » Mon, 15 Nov 1999 04:00:00

Some clarification needed here!!

The man in question is of course Graeme Hughes and he does know a thing
or two about cricket!

It's a pity that being perceived as a league man, his cricketing
background (in NZ) can go unnoticed.

NSW Sheffield Shield team for several seasons in 70s. Sound bat,
brilliant catcher. At one stage the only non-test player in NSW XI.

NSW 2nd XI captain also.

Although there is no scope during a Max commentary to show it, his
knowledge of cricket (in general) and of current happenings is top
notch.

Howewver, as you say, his job was to be the continuity man on this
occasion - not the expert - and he did this quite OK.

Would you have preferred more from Coney on such things as Fleming's
captaincy instead of Chris Harris fooling around with a camera in India?

Quote:

> In article




> > Coney lifts it from the mundane to above average. M Crowe just tries
> > to talk Max up. Not sure how M Graham will go.

> Maybe I got the name wrong. The Aussie guy Sky use to front many of
> these programs. He is very good at making the boring sound exciting, > > which is why he is so good commentating League...
> Knows little about cricket, not sure whether that is good or bad. A > > lack of knowledge is good if he acts as a host and lets the 'guests' > > talk. Bad if he talks too much. A knowledgable host can sometimes talk > over the guests,but then they can make pertinent comments if they talk > nonsense.

                    -----------------------------------------
                    Simon Thompson
                    Christchurch
                    New Zealand
 
 
 

Sky TV/Cricket Company

Post by Simon Thomps » Mon, 15 Nov 1999 04:00:00



Quote:
> Some clarification needed here!!

Thank you.

Quote:
> Howewver, as you say, his job was to be the continuity man on this
> occasion - not the expert - and he did this quite OK.

Given he knows more about cricket than I thought, he did very well in
not dominating the show.

Quote:
> Would you have preferred more from Coney on such things as Fleming's
> captaincy instead of Chris Harris fooling around with a camera in India?

Yes. Harryvision is juvenile, much as I like Harry.

I'm a big Coney fan, and I understand he will also have a presence on
the radio. I generally prefer commentators on the radio, somehow many
of them are more intelligent on the radio. My only critiscm of COney
is that I occasionally find him a little negative.

He has the ability to lift the standard of those around him, and that
should really help M Crowe. Crowe can easily become puerile, but with
a good co-commentator, he can be perceptive.

-----------------------------------------
Simon Thompson
Christchurch
New Zealand