Martin Brundle - lead commentator
Discussion
davepoth said:
do you get the impression that DC is not a fan?
I'm a big Brundle fan. His commentary over the last 16 years since he raced in F1 has been outstanding. He sees things from a perspective the rest of us would never know or realise.
But since teaming up with DC in the commentary box, there seem to be more 'back in my day' comments. It is almost as if he is worried that most of the younger viewers will recognise DC as a former F1 driver, but will now think of MB as just a commentator, and needs to remind us every weekend what it was like to drive a Tyrrell.
Yesterday, him and DC spent segments of qualifying talking about their races - moaning about the points system (Brundle's 7th places meaning he didn't score as many points as the modern drivers)
Is it me? Or is it starting to grate? I remember when Jackie Stewart commentated on F1, he's irritate me as he'd turn every topic into a story on himself. Whereas James Hunt, Jonathan Palmer and Brundle until recently were rarely self-promoting.
This wouldn't normally bother me, until I read Martin Brundle's GP preview in the Sunday Times today. His Sunday Times qualifying report headlines with Schumacher crashing - and no mention of it being a car failure in the explanatory paragraphs. It is just a factually incorrect dig at Schumacher on his 20th anniversary. It is appalling journalism. Even Mercedes admitted it was car failure. But the Sunday Times readers will just see Brundle painting a picture of a past-it champion making a critical embarrassing error on his 20th anniversary.
He then goes on to talk about Schumacher's career, but even gets in the fact that Schumacher only won at Spa in 92 because of Brundle's mis-timed pit stop....
But since teaming up with DC in the commentary box, there seem to be more 'back in my day' comments. It is almost as if he is worried that most of the younger viewers will recognise DC as a former F1 driver, but will now think of MB as just a commentator, and needs to remind us every weekend what it was like to drive a Tyrrell.
Yesterday, him and DC spent segments of qualifying talking about their races - moaning about the points system (Brundle's 7th places meaning he didn't score as many points as the modern drivers)
Is it me? Or is it starting to grate? I remember when Jackie Stewart commentated on F1, he's irritate me as he'd turn every topic into a story on himself. Whereas James Hunt, Jonathan Palmer and Brundle until recently were rarely self-promoting.
This wouldn't normally bother me, until I read Martin Brundle's GP preview in the Sunday Times today. His Sunday Times qualifying report headlines with Schumacher crashing - and no mention of it being a car failure in the explanatory paragraphs. It is just a factually incorrect dig at Schumacher on his 20th anniversary. It is appalling journalism. Even Mercedes admitted it was car failure. But the Sunday Times readers will just see Brundle painting a picture of a past-it champion making a critical embarrassing error on his 20th anniversary.
He then goes on to talk about Schumacher's career, but even gets in the fact that Schumacher only won at Spa in 92 because of Brundle's mis-timed pit stop....
Redlake27 said:
I'm a big Brundle fan. His commentary over the last 16 years since he raced in F1 has been outstanding. He sees things from a perspective the rest of us would never know or realise.
But since teaming up with DC in the commentary box, there seem to be more 'back in my day' comments. It is almost as if he is worried that most of the younger viewers will recognise DC as a former F1 driver, but will now think of MB as just a commentator, and needs to remind us every weekend what it was like to drive a Tyrrell.
Yesterday, him and DC spent segments of qualifying talking about their races - moaning about the points system (Brundle's 7th places meaning he didn't score as many points as the modern drivers)
Is it me? Or is it starting to grate? I remember when Jackie Stewart commentated on F1, he's irritate me as he'd turn every topic into a story on himself. Whereas James Hunt, Jonathan Palmer and Brundle until recently were rarely self-promoting.
This wouldn't normally bother me, until I read Martin Brundle's GP preview in the Sunday Times today. His Sunday Times qualifying report headlines with Schumacher crashing - and no mention of it being a car failure in the explanatory paragraphs. It is just a factually incorrect dig at Schumacher on his 20th anniversary. It is appalling journalism. Even Mercedes admitted it was car failure. But the Sunday Times readers will just see Brundle painting a picture of a past-it champion making a critical embarrassing error on his 20th anniversary.
He then goes on to talk about Schumacher's career, but even gets in the fact that Schumacher only won at Spa in 92 because of Brundle's mis-timed pit stop....
I agree. I'm a big fan of his also (MB), however I have too noticed more and more 'when I raced with Senna' etc stories creeping in. Don't mind the odd story in reference to a similar incident so we (the viewers) can understand it from a drivers perspective, but it seems to be story time every time I hear him now. But since teaming up with DC in the commentary box, there seem to be more 'back in my day' comments. It is almost as if he is worried that most of the younger viewers will recognise DC as a former F1 driver, but will now think of MB as just a commentator, and needs to remind us every weekend what it was like to drive a Tyrrell.
Yesterday, him and DC spent segments of qualifying talking about their races - moaning about the points system (Brundle's 7th places meaning he didn't score as many points as the modern drivers)
Is it me? Or is it starting to grate? I remember when Jackie Stewart commentated on F1, he's irritate me as he'd turn every topic into a story on himself. Whereas James Hunt, Jonathan Palmer and Brundle until recently were rarely self-promoting.
This wouldn't normally bother me, until I read Martin Brundle's GP preview in the Sunday Times today. His Sunday Times qualifying report headlines with Schumacher crashing - and no mention of it being a car failure in the explanatory paragraphs. It is just a factually incorrect dig at Schumacher on his 20th anniversary. It is appalling journalism. Even Mercedes admitted it was car failure. But the Sunday Times readers will just see Brundle painting a picture of a past-it champion making a critical embarrassing error on his 20th anniversary.
He then goes on to talk about Schumacher's career, but even gets in the fact that Schumacher only won at Spa in 92 because of Brundle's mis-timed pit stop....
IndyAndy777 said:
Surely a decent producer has the power to tell them to stop talking about their careers? I know what you mean about the 7th place moan, I found myself telling him to shut up at that point.
I thought it was amusing really. Like going to a party, everyone goes home with a balloon etc...Redlake27 said:
He then goes on to talk about Schumacher's career, but even gets in the fact that Schumacher only won at Spa in 92 because of Brundle's mis-timed pit stop....
The biggest factor allowing Schumacher to win at Spa in '92 was Mansell's misfire towards the end of the race...had to mention it.I guess it is down to personal opinion, and I enjoyed the commentary from Spa. He is one of the best sports commentators.
But the piece in the Sunday Times was bitter, self-promoting and above all factually inaccurate. I know News International are hardly the greatest purveyors of truth, but I'm surprised someone of Brundle's stature lowered himself to write a piece portraying Schumacher's qualifying crash as being his fault
But the piece in the Sunday Times was bitter, self-promoting and above all factually inaccurate. I know News International are hardly the greatest purveyors of truth, but I'm surprised someone of Brundle's stature lowered himself to write a piece portraying Schumacher's qualifying crash as being his fault
Forums | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff