TdF Commentary

I think I will always associate their voices, the humming of a helicopter and half shut eyes in the early morning with July.

I think they are very knowledgable. Great sense of humor without being annoying. Great voices; however, sometimes it can be a pain in the butt to listen to them while Lance is racing. Especially if you are not a Lance fan. I know that they commentate on American TV, but in a sport like cycling, they need to be just a little bir more objective; or maybe less biased. I am not expecting them to donate the same amount of time to other riders; however, glorifying everything that Lance does, sometimes gets really annoying.

On Saturday's stage, after Lance got back to Jan's group, he was riding in the front of the group for a while and they said something like this: "Lance is directing every move of this group. He is telling them that he is the leader of this group." One minute later, Lance was the tenth man in the group dead-least and Paul goes: "Lance is directing the group from behind like a maestro!"

Those kinds of comments don't make any sense and take away from Lance's greatness in the eyes of the fans of his competitors in my opinion.

Oytun

Nein11 said:

I think I will always associate their voices, the humming of a helicopter and half shut eyes in the early morning with July.

True, but don't forget the "Boooonk, bonk, bonk, bonk!" of the tour directors car...

L

Oytun Calapover said:

I think they are very knowledgable. Great sense of humor without being annoying. Great voices; however, sometimes it can be a pain in the butt to listen to them while Lance is racing. Especially if you are not a Lance fan. I know that they commentate on American TV, but in a sport like cycling, they need to be just a little bir more objective; or maybe less biased. I am not expecting them to donate the same amount of time to other riders; however, glorifying everything that Lance does, sometimes gets really annoying.

On Saturday's stage, after Lance got back to Jan's group, he was riding in the front of the group for a while and they said something like this: "Lance is directing every move of this group. He is telling them that he is the leader of this group." One minute later, Lance was the tenth man in the group dead-least and Paul goes: "Lance is directing the group from behind like a maestro!"

Those kinds of comments don't make any sense and take away from Lance's greatness in the eyes of the fans of his competitors in my opinion.

Oytun

I would agree with that. Sometimes their zeal (especially Phil's) gets in the way of their own ability to reason. Yesterday when Basso and Armstrong were in the last kilometer, Phil was spewing superlatives about how Lance was setting up Basso as he did the day before, etc. etc., yada yada, when suddenly Paul decided he should point out that there were no bonus seconds awarded for 6th place. 🙄

I'm fairly certain that Phil/Paul have been gradually groomed over the years to understand that as long as they are broadcasting for an American audience, they need to hype the American star. I'll agree that it gets cloying at times, but I understand the business and the demographics. I would suggest, however, that this phenomenon isn't unique to the broadcast of cycling to the US audience. The French television feed showed about 4 consecutive minutes of Laurent Brochard riding solo for his 5th place finish yesterday, while Basso/Armstrong were locked in their duel behind him. The French want to see the French -- makes sense. In the meantime, you want hyperbole? Read the English translations of Thomas Voeckler's gallantry in 2004 from the French papers. :eek:

Interesting that this subject has come up, though. Just last night as I was watching the OLN replay (Bob/Al make Phil/Paul sound like Lance haters) I wondered how Phil and Paul would tailor their commentary if they were speaking to a generic audience. My guess is that we'd be given a lot more cycling strategy and a lot less genuflecting at the Armstrong altar.

I tape the morning (live) version, not the 'expanded' version because I like to hear Phil and Paul. They may make some mistakes, but cycling, any cycling, would not be the same without them. I liked it best when Bob Roll was with them.

If you watch some of the early season OLN stuff that doesn't have Phil, Paul, or Bob. Its not the same caliber.

AND, I can watch Kirsten Gum all day. I want to have her children.

Chance3290 said:

AND, I can watch Kirsten Gum all day. I want to have her children.

Ummm; isn't that anatomically impossible?

rejobako said:

Ummm; isn't that anatomically impossible?

I'm willing to try if she is. Where would the world be if we never experimented?
Come on Kirsten, let's give it a shot!

Chance3290 said:

I'm willing to try if she is. Where would the world be if we never experimented?
Come on Kirsten, let's give it a shot!

Show me a photo of this kirstin gum please:p

you forgot to say "absolutely." as in "they are absolutely blowing the field apart." or "literally" as in "they are literally blowing the fields to pieces." :p

oh...and i know this might be sacrilige but i think Al is actually getting better. he's learning a bit about cycling and doesn't sound like as much of an ass now. 🙄

cheapie said:

oh...and i know this might be sacrilige but i think Al is actually getting better. he's learning a bit about cycling and doesn't sound like as much of an ass now. 🙄

I'll agree that he appears to have learned a bit about cycling, and it's nice that he takes the time to learn how to pronounce the names of all the Basque villages and such, but it still galls me that he thinks the race is about the GC and nothing else.

Yesterday there was a 14 man breakaway that was whittled to two men, one a long-time faithful domestique of the GC leader, and the other a man who did his best to rid himself of everyone else, who would have been very worthy of the stage win. These two were dueling it out for honors on the acknowledged "queen stage" of the greatest event of cycling, an achievement that would forever be highlighted in the palmares of anyone who won it.

But all Al can think of to say is that "meanwhile, the 'Tour' is happening behind these two men", as if the stage win was a meaningless triviality unworthy of coverage because hey, Lance and Basso are back there somewhere. That kind of comment irks me to no end, because while the GC competition is indeed the glamour event, each day's stage is in itself a worthy goal, and Al was obviously oblivious to the significance of the possibility that a teammate of Lance Armstrong, who has faithfully ridden beside him for each of Armstrong's wins, was finally getting the opportunity for his own day of glory in the TdF, on what is arguably the most prestigious stage of the event (save maybe for the sprint in Paris).

Off topic: did anyone listen to ABC's coverage of the British Open over the weekend? I've always liked Paul Azinger as a golfer, and, like Lance, I admire him for battling cancer and returning to his sport. But he was weird to listen to. Friday was about Nicklaus' retirement, but Azinger seemed to go out of his way every few moments to remind everyone that Jack had his run-ins with Arnie's Army earlier in his career. Mike Tirico would say something like "There he is, probably no golfer in history has been more respected and admired by his peers and the fans." Count 1, 2 . . . and 'Zinger would chime in with "It wasn't always that way, you know . . . " OK, so maybe it wasn't, but do we really have to remind viewers of some shots at Jack's weight taken by Arnie's followers 40 years ago? Then over the weekend he made a few remarks about Monte that seemed a bit unnecessary. Apparently, Monte has been quoted as saying that in every tournament he's ever played in with Tiger Woods, Woods has finished higher (except the Ryder Cup, of course) -- Monte had himself at 0-64 against Tiger. Of course, the ABC research crew found an exception, and the announcers made it a point to give a little boost to Monte as being a bit too self-depracating. For no apparent reason, long after the discussion was over, Azinger chimes in with something like "well, 1 out of 64 is pretty abysmal too, you know." Maybe it was just me, but Azinger seemed like an angry man over the weekend, not particularly someone I wanted to listen to. Contrast him with Faldo, who has become surprisingly a very engaging personality. His golf career seemed to be filled with such angst and drama, I'm pleasantly surprised to find him so ingratiating on the air.

Ullefan said:

Show me a photo of this kirstin gum please:p

I doubt you'd think she was spectacular. I think Kirstin is attractive, in an American girl-next-door sort of way. I recently watched an HBO special about a brothel in Nevada in which one of the girls, who was pretty but nothing extra, said many of her clients say they choose her because she "looks like she could be their girlfriend." I think Kirsten has the same sort of comfortable appeal.

Kirsten looks better as a brunette than a blonde, IMO, and I think the change has also lowered her ditz-factor. Other positive differences from 2004 can be found on her chest; someone's been augmented.

OK; I can't find any photos of Kirstin, although I admit that I got sidetracked when doing a search and found a number of sites devoted to the podium girls. Wouldn't mind one of them leading me out for a mountain-top finish, ifyouknowwhatImean. 😉

[font=Verdana]What US viewers missed that Paul Sherwin had a bet with the ITV crew and Phil for £100 that he wouldn't say 'unbelievable' or unbelievably' for the entirety of Sunday's stage..... he won and ITV2 matched the bet which he gave to charity...... note how many times he said it on Saturday then Sunday does not say it at all.......
[/font]

cheapie said:

you forgot to say "absolutely." as in "they are absolutely blowing the field apart." or "literally" as in "they are literally blowing the fields to pieces." :p

oh...and i know this might be sacrilige but i think Al is actually getting better. he's learning a bit about cycling and doesn't sound like as much of an ass now. 🙄

"he's digging into his suitcase of courage."
"these riders are riding on absolute courage."
"Ullrich is turning a massive gear."
"Armstrong is just ticking the pedals over."

Phil has an almost comical ability to predict the wrong stage winner and he does tend to get really excited. Paul is much more reasoned and I enjoy his perspective. And of course, I can barely count the number of times Phil has been prattling on about something while a big an attack was starting on screen.

But all the same, I think they do great commentary. It would be nice if they could have some famous guests on from time to time. Heck, Sean Kelly is sitting right next to them. How about a little trading of commentators from time to time.

I don't dislike Bob and Al but I can't stand their commentary. I only watch the live coverage.

And I did wish that everyone was a little more impartial. Important to remember that OLN used to be a sponsor of Postal and Paul used to work for Postal.

tcklyde said:

"he's digging into his suitcase of courage."
"these riders are riding on absolute courage."
"Ullrich is turning a massive gear."
"Armstrong is just ticking the pedals over."

.

Do you remember, right after the musette bag incident, when LH wasn't yet clipped in, Phil and Paul had a string of Pedal Problems:
"I think he's having a Problem with his Pedals!!"
"Armstrong is having a Problem with his Pedals!!"
"There's a Problem with his Pedals!!"

Try and say that three times, fast.
Viewing cycling is NOT the same without them.

or my all-time favorite

Quoted post said:

He took a look straight into the eyes there of Jan Ullrich and said, well, here I go are you coming or not?... and the answer is, NOT!"

or LOOK AT THE FACE ON THIS MAN! 😄

cheapie said:

or my all-time favorite

or LOOK AT THE FACE ON THIS MAN! 😄

Funny because Armstrong couldn't have looked straight into Ullrich's eyes. Ullrich was wearing dark sunglasses.

tcklyde said:

Funny because Armstrong couldn't have looked straight into Ullrich's eyes. Ullrich was wearing dark sunglasses.

"The Look" can be easily the most over-hyped and the most over-interpreted moment in cycling.

I believe Armstrong's "look" wasn't a challenge to Jan at all - a common interpretation of "are you coming or not?". And he wasn't even looking at Jan - he was looking past Jan, to see where (late) Andrei Kivilev, Joseba Beloki and others were. He wanted to make sure that as he made his move, the group was small enough so they couldn't take turns to get back to LA. He also wanted to make sure that they look like they are suffering already, so his moves is successful.

sportzgurl said:

Im sure this gets posted every year but how good are Phil Liggitt and Paul Sherwan????

I am trying to get my mum into watching the cycling this year and she has never watched it before-knows nothing about it! She keeps saying how easy it is to understand cycling when those two are commentating. She has started using cycling terms even like 'cracking'! If they can explain cycling to my mum they must be good!

.😄

My mom called last night and started talking about the TDF 😉 I couldn't believe my ears. She talked about Hincapies win in SaintLary Soulan and the relentless pace Discovery (no,she didn't use the term Disco) has been putting on the peloton in the mountains. She can't believe T-Mobile isn't doing better this year. Go Mom ! 😄

tcklyde said:

"he's digging into his suitcase of courage."
"these riders are riding on absolute courage."
"Ullrich is turning a massive gear."
"Armstrong is just ticking the pedals over."

I remember in the 2004 TDF for 10 days while Thomas Voeckler was wearing Maillot Jaune. Phil would repeat several times " Young Thomas Voeckler, riding his heart out" " Look at him dancing on the pedals "

This link is on the "Who is he" thread but you can go here to get a little TDF commentary fix between broadcasts. It's got Cow Bells, The Devil, Phil Liggett and more. Click on the "Videos" pane(top right corner) to play the entire video. http://www.giro.com/main.html

lw

yeah i like phil and paul a lot been than al and bob. or whatever their names are.
it is interesting to note the descrepancies in the info they give while commenting i watched the live coverage of sunday's stage, and then i watched the expanded later on as well (i was bored). phil and paul had noted that voeckler was in worse condition than he was last year and that it was a shame that he wasnt in great shape. on the other hand bob said that he was the exact same rider in the exact same shape but was doing poorly because he didnt have the yellow jersey for motivation. bob is an idiot. im glad that i can see the earlier coverage with people who know what cycling is.