Croft has to go
Discussion
JaredVannett said:
Serious question, this thread was created last year but crofty/sky have been broadcasting F1 for many years now...
so has crofty changed recently thus become unbearable or was he always unbearable to you?
I noticed him getting worse since this thread started so has crofty changed recently thus become unbearable or was he always unbearable to you?
Some days he does seem far worse than others... as if they have left a bowl of Haribo & a Redbull in commentary box.
RichB said:
I feel as if he's decided to significantly up the degree jeopardy to increase the excitement in recent years. This simply manifests itself as him shouting yet more, about even the most insignificant thing.
A trait he's picked up from football commentators, as they seem intent on rupturing my eardrums every time someone has a shot at goalJaredVannett said:
Serious question, this thread was created last year but crofty/sky have been broadcasting F1 for many years now...
so has crofty changed recently thus become unbearable or was he always unbearable to you?
He picked up from the incredible low point that was Jake humphies (or was there the brief one year Coulthard/brundle coverage in between?) but in any event our expectations were low.so has crofty changed recently thus become unbearable or was he always unbearable to you?
But yeah like a festival portaloo he started out acceptable but just gets unbelievably worse and worse.
For what it’s worth, I have been following F1 since the late 80s on tv (so less than many of you but during most of its time as a live sport)
I tend to watch with at least 2 others who have more background than me.
Croft is absolutely fine. Commentating on a complex multi-faceted sport to a mass audience of mixed familiarity and which is sold over the world (so needs at base to be in intelligible relatively simple English) is a hire wire proposition.
Yes he may utter the odd repetitive statement as does every commentator on any sport but balancing that mix of energy, info and explanation to a widely mixed audience is incredibly difficult.
David Croft is perfectly fine as was James Allen (btw). Jonathan Legard on TV was dreadful but he was drafted in at short notice and moved on after 2 years or so.
Just my views. I have absolutely no issues with Croft. He gets things wrong (so does Brundle, Kravitz and the team principles!) but that is the nature of a dynamic situation.
Does he convey the overall tension and areas of interest in any given race, I would say yes with support from Brundle or whichever expert is standing in). Those saying he generates false excitement in processions, that’s his job! Sell it when it’s dull. He knows it, you know it but a large proportion of viewers globally getting the sky feed that may be occasional/accidental
viewers may not be and if he keeps them engaged then he has earned his salary.
I tend to watch with at least 2 others who have more background than me.
Croft is absolutely fine. Commentating on a complex multi-faceted sport to a mass audience of mixed familiarity and which is sold over the world (so needs at base to be in intelligible relatively simple English) is a hire wire proposition.
Yes he may utter the odd repetitive statement as does every commentator on any sport but balancing that mix of energy, info and explanation to a widely mixed audience is incredibly difficult.
David Croft is perfectly fine as was James Allen (btw). Jonathan Legard on TV was dreadful but he was drafted in at short notice and moved on after 2 years or so.
Just my views. I have absolutely no issues with Croft. He gets things wrong (so does Brundle, Kravitz and the team principles!) but that is the nature of a dynamic situation.
Does he convey the overall tension and areas of interest in any given race, I would say yes with support from Brundle or whichever expert is standing in). Those saying he generates false excitement in processions, that’s his job! Sell it when it’s dull. He knows it, you know it but a large proportion of viewers globally getting the sky feed that may be occasional/accidental
viewers may not be and if he keeps them engaged then he has earned his salary.
He makes a plethora of mistakes, shouts far too much, and has ideas above his station as to how good he is, how popular he is and how important f1 is.
But I also do feel he is pushed into a lot of this by over zealous direction and production and he is so wet he just goes along with it instead of sticking up for himself.
He is also vastly overpaid
But I also do feel he is pushed into a lot of this by over zealous direction and production and he is so wet he just goes along with it instead of sticking up for himself.
He is also vastly overpaid
I don't mind the enthusiasm but the fact that Croft equates that to SHOUTING all the time, even when there is nothing to shout about, never pausing for breath and constantly talking over other people and even now the team radios.
Its like he is paid by the volume and quantity of his commentary rather than the quality.
Its like he is paid by the volume and quantity of his commentary rather than the quality.
LukeBrown66 said:
He makes a plethora of mistakes, shouts far too much, and has ideas above his station as to how good he is, how popular he is and how important f1 is.
This feels like really niche criticism. “Ideas above his station”…what does that mean? How good/popular is he allowed to think he is? How important is F1, and how should he portray the correct level of importance in his commentary?Let’s be honest: most of this thread is just irrational grumping because Murray Walker isn’t somehow magically still doing it.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff