Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Could it be a high-definition thing? I'm watching the telecasts in HD and I assume that is the native format that they are recording/transmitting in. Are they merely cropping the edges for standard TV?

What I have noticed is that the replay of first resort is a tightly-cropped super-slow-mo that reveals very little about the action that has just happened.

Typically the cameraman follows the ball from the bowlers hand, jags the camera back upwards as it hits the wickets, and then the frame is still moving as the batsman plays his shot.

This particular type of replay is good for watching a batsman snick it to the slips, but not so great if you want to see a flourishing pull shot through mid-wicket, because all you are likely to see is the last 30 degrees or so of the bat as it swings through the point of contact.

(I'm not talking about super-duper-slow-mo, which is generally bloody good).

for "wickets", read "wicket" or "pitch"

Hadn't thought of that, FM, I just assumed there were issues with the camera-work.

I know what you mean, Gaz. Reckon they'd be better served if they just pulled back for an all-encompassing wide(r) shot. Regularly this season I find myself wondering if I've missed something as the tightly cropped visual changes direction.

The radio commentary is so much better - where pundits have been selected for their dulcet, mellifluous tones, and/or original thoughts.

One of the TV talking heads said (?SOD), during the dramatic denouement of the Adelaide Test - 'this is why we talk up every single game on the television, even when all seems lost - moments and days like these' - or words to that effect. Nothing to do with keeping audiences tuned in then?

Nup. Sky's MUCH worse than Nein. Bill used to shit me, but he's got nothing on Botham.

At the risk of charges of heresy, I have to confess to enjoying Bill Lawry and the snippets we get of Nine's coverage. The BBC show 30 minutes of highlights cropped from the days coverage on Nine and there's more insight and entertainment from the comentators than you get from a whole day of Sky.

As I remarked on other threads, Sky are absolute shit. Dreary, monotonous, no insight whatsoever and lacking in any sense of drama. Holding sounds like a stroke victim undergoing therapy, Botham repeats himself, Hussain is dumb and Gower mistakes being slightly urbane for informative.

Channel 4 were excellent last year and are ahead of Nine but miles ahead of Sky.

Thanks for the plug Tony. I'll be experiencing Ch. 9 coverage for the Perth Test - might even be a post in it.

Funnily enough Bill Lawry popped up on the Sky coverage a few times in the last test. He came across pretty well, though bearing in mind he was alongside Gower most of the time, he was probably too pissed up on vintage champagne to come out with anything too gormless!!

And on an unrelated subject, it turns out it was Fred who wanted Giles ahead of Panesar for the second test and not Fletcher; and that Jones the dropped catch, our piss-poor wicket keeper, is part of the on-tour selection team!!!

I'm off to pray for an hour at the chapel dedicated to Simon Jones's and Michael Vaughan's knees.

Am I confusing Sky with Channel 4? Who was it who did the Ashes last year? They were excellent. Well, they were from afar. It could just be a case of us here getting sick of Nine while you lot over there are sick of Sky.

A little Botham goes a very, very long way and it's the same here with Tony Grieg and co.

But as far as I know, you lot in the UK aren't subjected to a long and tedious advertising campaign of tiresome, tatty paraphernalia masquerading as collector's items. You'll know what I'm talking about when you see it, Mark. And consider yourself lucky you won't, Woody.

Yep. It was Channel 4 coverage that we got last year via SBS. But to muddy the waters slightly, weren't there are a number of Nine personalities moonlighting for them at the time? Ritchie, for example (not that I minded). I think regardless of who gets the coverage, some of these guys will still keep turning up. All the ex-captains for sure.

I particularly resent that Tony Grieg keeps popping up in foreign telecasts. Just when you are settling in to something like India vs Windies, there he is "yarp, yarp, yarpy yarp". You'd think sometime, anytime we'd cop a break.

That's what was so good about the Straya vs Windies tour in 1995. Channel Ten had the telecast and the commentators were David Hookes, Alan Border and Mike Coward. NOt sure if I'd like them in the long run, but they were a huge relief from the standard drone.

Oh I agree. There wasn't much radically different from last year's Channel 4 broadcast, but it was a refreshing change. It would have to be a one-off though. I can't see Nine being that stupid again.

I'd like to see more of AB -- don't know who he's pissed off at Nine.

I'm not convinced by AB from what I've seen on BJ & The Boys. Rod Marsh is my pick for the guy who's MIA (Missing In Airtime). Now there's a bloke who could shed some light on the stratagy and tactics.

I think he dissed one-day cricket way back when.

James Brayshaw and Jeff Thompson?

Thommo's great on Test Match Special. He's a dry Aussie counterpoint to the Poms, way better than someone like Jim Maxwell or, God forbid!, Neville Oliver. It's s surprise he doesn't get a run on Our ABC.

I'd be very surprised if Jim Brayshaw didn't eventually get a chance on Channel Nine. Did he do it at all last year? I can't remember.

I'm not sure where to put the latest episode of Shrill Lanka.

Running out Murali was apparently poor sportsmanship rather than an act of idiocy by the batsman. Typical of them to make their mistake someone else's problem.

The rules of the game are mere guidelines to them far too often.

Because it happened on a hot weekend, I sort of missed "the news cycle" with Murali's run-out. Well, "sort of missed" as in "couldn't be stuffed".

Anyhoo, it couldn't happen to a nicer swine. What happened to Murali doesn't even go 1/100th of a way to repaying the damage his chucking has done to the game.

Still, it's fun watching the Kiwis tying themselves in knots over the fairness of the dismissal, comparing it to the underarm. Ha!

In isolation, as in judging the incident on its merits, Murali is a goose and McCullum was well within his rights to run him out. Fleming MIGHT have called him back, but the fact that he didn't doesn't worry me in the slightest.

The comments to this entry are closed.