A current Indian writer once commented on his favourite cricketer, Mansur Ali Khan Pataudi, thus: “He was the best expert commentator I’ve ever heard: sharp, sardonic and shrewd, but I’m glad he didn’t make it a living because it left my memories of him intact. I didn’t have to watch him age into a professional hack. Looking at Richie Benaud on Channel 9 peddling memorabilia, it’s impossible to believe he ever played cricket”. Most observers in the cricketing world, however, appear not to share this line of reasoning. As a corollary, they would much prefer their commentators to be readily recognisable ex-players.
A consequence of such an attitude among both television networks and audiences, is that the non-playing professional broadcaster has all but disappeared from commentary boxes worldwide. While it can be a pleasure to hear Ian Chappell on the finer points of captaincy or even Wasim Akram’s bowling insights on air, by and large the quality of cricket broadcasting has suffered for this shift. The ex-cricketer might well have enough wisdom garnered from his playing days to share, and lend a certain aura to the proceedings; but, as with sitcoms, every cast of characters in the box needs a “straight man”, someone to focus solely on presentation.
This has been particularly apparent in the cricket I’ve watched over the last couple of months. For me, the standout commentator in the coverage of Pakistan’s recent Tour of New Zealand, among names such as Simon Doull, Mark Richardson and Shane Bond, was Grant Nisbett. Equally, I have grown to appreciate Alan Wilkins as a member of ESPN’s World Cup commentary team. Both Wilkins and Nisbett have been in the Broadcasting business since the 1980s, and have even provided commentary on rugby, tennis and golf between them. Their more illustrious colleagues, by contrast, have often come across collectively as an old-boys’ club whose love for cricket doesn’t always translate into good coverage of a mainstream sport.
The English sports reporter, Brian Viner, in describing how broadcasters such as John Arlott and Desmond Lynam were a major part of his viewing experiences of cricket and football, noted that “[they] managed to convey the notion that it was only a game while at the same time encouraging the feeling that it mattered more than anything”. The sheer amount of meaningless cricket fixtures might have taken its toll on today’s commentators, putting to rest any romantic ideals of the role they play; but still, a great sporting moment is often illuminated and etched in memory because the person behind the mic was able to capture the very moment perfectly. This is where one’s broadcasting – as opposed to sporting – credentials make the difference.
Careers in journalism and the radio were once key routes to a television commentator’s post. The decline in their importance, in cricket’s scheme of things, has perhaps contributed significantly to the entry barrier for non-players. After all, some of the best players-turned-commentators such as Benaud, Chappell and Mike Atherton, have done their time as journalists. Harsha Bhogle famously graduated to television after stints with All India Radio, and ABC Radio in Australia; he and Tony Cozier are often cited as being the last of a dying breed.
While Cozier is less visible these days (as a result of the West Indies’ complete decline as a cricketing force), Bhogle’s celebrity status surprisingly hasn’t been the springboard for attracting more local talent for television in India. Although, there was a reality show a few years ago called Harsha Ki Khoj – The Hunt for the next Harsha – whose winner, Anand Narasimhan, has since made it as an anchorman.
A couple of recent events in the sporting world could be seen as reaffirmation of the way things have been. In the same week in which he was banned following his involvment in the spot-fixing controversy, Salman Butt was signed on as a TV expert for the World Cup by Channel 5 in Pakistan. And, legendary football pundit Andy Gray was snapped up by TalkSport soon after being banished from Sky Sports following the on-air sexism storm. The world of TV programming is extremely competitive, and channels obviously feel that big names and known faces are the way to bring viewers in.
But where there is saturation there is also a void; the emergence of the excellent Test Match Sofa ( http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/480852.html), in which a group of cricket tragics provide “alternative cricket commentary” online, is a pointer to the possibility of a brewing counter-culture. Perhaps the non-playing experts haven’t disappeared, they’ve just gone underground.
———————————-
Written by Suhas Cadambi
Clear Cricket 
mykuhl
March 20, 2011
The other stand out commentator in the New Zealand Pakistan series for me was Simon Doull. Doull came into cricket commentary a little later than some of his peers, having spent time working as a DJ on a music radio station. The experience that he gained working on The Rock (a station that has such witty advertising as “if you don’t listen to The Rock, you’re not a real mechanic) has held him in good stead as a cricket commentator.
He often brings something a little different to the commentary, firstly given that he was someone that truly mastered the mysterious art of swing bowling, but more because he has learned the art of capturing an audience that are listening to the radio to hear music, not to hear talking.
I find myself often enjoying the radio commentaries, where there is one commentator, and one analyst. The commentator is very rarely a former player, but the analyst almost always is. (the only exceptions that I can think of are Peter Sharp and Jonathan Agnew who were both players, and David Trist, who is one of the more insightful analysts, despite never having played international cricket). The combination of someone who has (as TestMatchSofa so eloquently put it) “spent their time learning how to talk about cricket, rather than how to play a forward defensive” and someone who has been there – done that, is for me, the zenith of good commentary.
Suhas
March 20, 2011
Interesting, I had no idea of Doull’s background in radio. He’s a decent commentator, and could go on to become the voice of NZ Cricket (if such a title were to ever be in demand). I wish he would be a bit more restrained, though. His reaction to Nathan McCullum’s disallowed catch off Jayawardene the other day was way over-the-top.
I like the idea of one-commentator-one-analyst, that would probably be the ideal balance.
K
March 20, 2011
I feel that the inclusion of ex-cricketers mucks up commentary at times because they tend to carry their patriotism on their tongues (if that makes any sense). Partisan commentary dulls the game and I really don’t want to hear Sanjay Manjrekar and Ravi Shaastri fall out of their pants rooting for India….or Gavaskar swoon over Sachin.
Ankit Poddar
March 20, 2011
Ex – cricketers are not there because they are insightful, they are there because in the minds of the listener and in the minds of the ex cricketer, the commentator still represents his nation.
This allows for a competitive aura on air. A non cricketer comes across as neutral, which is the point really why they be included more often, but is exactly the reason why broadcasters don’t seem to prefer them!
Suhas
March 20, 2011
“in the minds of the listener and in the minds of the ex cricketer, the commentator still represents his nation.”
This is an excellent point. I suppose it’s an age-old practice in sports coverage to hire commentators who are implicitly in one side’s “corner”. In cricket it seems to descend into parody much too often, though.
Ben
March 20, 2011
I’m with K on this, if I have to here Sunil go wild for Sachin, or Rameez Raja talk about how good Misbah+Younis’ partnership once more, I may kill someone. This is almost exactly the reason I listen to Test Match Sofa so much. It’s unbiased country-wise, because Jrod and co are more likely to just insult everyone, and it’s definitely funny. Boycott on TMS is also more likely to insult the England players than anyone else, mainly because he doesn’t think they’re doing well enough! I’d back myself to know a damn sight more about any of the cricketers playing in this tournament than most of the commentators, who frequently get names wrong, Mark Nicholas more than most. Absolute joke of a commentator. Rant over.
Alternative Cricket
March 20, 2011
The notion of the piece is absolutely 100% correct. However, I would go so far as to say that even Wilkins et al don’t know what they’re talking about. The quality of cricket commentary at the moment is terrible – and I’m particularly talking about the likes of Aamir Soheil, Ranjit Fernando, Russel Arnold…who can’t even speak English vaguely coherently enough to be doing this for a living!
RushyNet
March 20, 2011
Test Match Sofa should never change too!
They don’t pull punches for fear of upsetting “Angry Daily Mail reader of Weybridge”. They call it how they see it and enjoy a good game no matter who wins!
rahul
March 20, 2011
This is a superb and long-overdue post. Given that modern cricket has borrowed so heavily from American-style professionalization, it is a crying shame that its commentary standards remain so far behind the great American broadcasting traditions.
But then again, I suppose an audience gets the commentators it deserves.
Suhas
March 20, 2011
@K and Ben: Fair enough. But apart from bias, it’s poor presentation which puts people off. Of course, there are several ex-cricketers who are excellent commentators too – off the top of my head.. Benaud, Chappell, Holding, Boycott, David Lloyd. It’s just a pity that commentators seem to be hired based on their sporting achievements, not skill as a presenter.
@Alternative Cricket: Thanks for the feedback. Wilkins apart, agree on your assessment of the names you mentioned.
@RushyNet: Yeah, long may it live. Especially since BBC’s online radio coverage is inaccessible outside the UK.
@rahul: Thanks! Makes me wonder, if a site like Cricinfo is able to flourish, cricket’s audience must be a bit more discerning than the networks seem to imagine.
K
March 21, 2011
Very true Suhas. Ideally, I would like to see a professional commentator or a seasoned cricketer (like Boycott, etc) handling the proceedings and then he goes on to invite a cricketer to give his opinions. Not have the cricketer in charge throughout.