Classic Spain races now online: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/andrewbenson/20...he_verdict.html

far too much complaining about commentators, imho.

really, do you watch F1 for the racing or for the listening?

I think JA writes very well, but he wasn't the best commentator of all time, and for that matter, Murray got away with a great deal of nonsense because he was the Grandfather of commentary. So loveable he was given grace for many a mistake that many an inbound reporter would have been fired for.

So Legard isn't so great? So what? He's not so bad, Martin is still there and the racing is still there. Job done.

I'd give Legard a season or two to hone his skills. Particularly this year where there's so much going on, its hardly as though a ringmaster is needed to bump the excitement.

For that matter - what would people like in a "great" commentator? I find it hard to answer this for myself - let's face it, not all candidates are true petrol-heads, and not all viewers either. I barely notice him, so I suppose he doesn't offend me at all, but I don't know what else to look for. I think Croft and Davidson do very well indeed on the webfeed, but others have their doubts.

So who do you think would do well? I'd vote Brundle in without hesitation, but Brundle and Davidson? Could do well but I doubt it would ever be signed off. Brundle and Croft? Maybe.

Loving the very first comment in that thread about the fact it's not on Freeview until Sunday morning:

I'm serious, I don't think he's as terrible as everyone here is making out.

He has gravitas.

really? Well I've never seen the back of him, but it's clear some people here would like to

By the way, those who say Legard shouldn't do A leads B leads C, I suggest you listen 03:50 in: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport...one/8034526.stm

I don't think Legard is as bad as people here are making out. And for me he is a damn sight bettter than that dreadful screaming twit, James Allen.

Hopefully not, because the hope is that Dullard will be replaced by mid-season.

Dansus's thread earlier on was absolutley spot on. Fantastic post which summed up perfectly.

And then Kelly spoils it!



Both actually. I enjoy watching racing with my eyes and I enjoy being entertained through my ears (as it were). They go together. You might enjoy watching in silence, but most of us don't.



Murray was actually an excellent commentator. There was no nonsense and mistakes were actually very rare. Not that mistakes are important - a few mistakes don't detract if the overall commentary is good.



Commentary isn't important, yet it suddenly matters if Martin's on? How does that work.
Legard isn't 'not so bad', he's bloody dire.



A season OR TWO? That's EIGHTY HOURS. I know he's crap from just 9 hours - I don't need to suffer him for two sodding years to realise he's pants.



Pretty much every other motorsport commentator on the airwaves in Britain at the moment. Seriously.
If you don't know what makes a good commentator, are you really qualified to give an opinion on it?



Croft. Edwards. Allen.

I'm one of the biggest Legard detractors on this forum but I'd still take him over the old fool Walker any day of the week.

In your opinion.

Remember the "Old Fool" Walker, has memories of motor racing, whereas, others may have only dreams.

Of course it's his bloody opinion! Who elses would it be?

Aw poor child.


Get yourself a life you big girl's blouse!


Read a book or something.

I was watching Motors TV the other night and they were showing rally cross near Donington over easter.

And who was among the spectators watching for his pure love of motor racing? Murray Walker!

He was grinning ear to ear and didn't even know the camera was on him. Now that's passion.

That's why his blunders were forgivable in my eyes. If he was nothing else, he was right there with you. Rather than trying to come out with wisecrack journalist cock remarks trying to fit in and sound important.

So what? Most of the people who post on Atlas are lovers of motor racing... it doesn't mean we'd make good commentators though.

Exactly, before being a journalist he was a fan as far as his commentary was concerned. Just watching the classics on the red button reminds me exactly why guys like Legard and Allen will never be able to be good enough. Murray put his passion for the sport into every single event he did. It didn't matter if it was the final round decider of the F1 championship or the local rally that had nothing but pride at stake. He made it fun to watch and he made you feel as if you were sat next to him watching. I could forgive his mistakes because of that.

Part of Murrary's communication was simply through enthusiasm which is what he excelled at. His genuine excitement made it even more exciting. When you recall old clips, you remember Murrary yelling in disbelief as much as the visuals. He is of the opinion that you're better off saying something, anything, even if it's wrong (for instance getting the right driver) than to say nothing. His blunders are not important because we all know he knows his stuff and it's not because of a lack of knowledge that he made errors.

I've been watching since 1984 and he is still the most entertaining non-driver/F1 participant for me.

Exactly

Ross Stonefeld, Sean Valen, Slick, LB, me, you, Nicolas Garth and the thousands of others on this forum are lovers of motor racing but that doesn't mean we could make good commentators, I don't doubt Murray's enthusiasm for the sport merely his competence

Murray was good up until a few years before he retired but his constant mistakes just ended up being infuriating.

I never agreed with the hate campaign directed at him by (IIRC) The Daily Mirror, who actually ran a campaign to have him retired, but I do think he should have stepped aside earlier than he did. Ironically since he stopped doing full-time commentary his thoughts (when he appears on TV) appear to be more concise than in his final commentary years. One would imagine the travel got to him, even during his final wind-down season, as some points of his last few years were appalingly bad.

For all the mistakes he used to make, I would love to have Murray do a guest appearance for one or 2 races this year..

It would be awesome to hear his voice screaming "Go! Go! Go!" again...

Classic Murray:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4Q_9VYU9FE

Not going to respond? Not much of a debate if one party slinks off!

Yes, but Murray is incredibly likeable, and his enthusiasm, optimism and passion were big parts of that charm.

Lovers? I often wonder whether the 'love' of some on here has turned into an abusive bad relationship.

Those Pizza Hut ads were good fun.

Of all the drivers Murray commentated on, I'd say he was closest to Damon Hill.

I'd really like to see Murray interview Lewis Hamilton actually.

You know what.. I just find that so babyish, the kind of humour that appeals to more simple minds.

Lucky Damon getting the chance of what I would loved to have done every time Murray commentated on a race

Personally I would have gone for the throat though ;)

haha, so true. I didnt need to write my big piece, this covered it all perfectly.

Cant say im interested in comparing commentators, im more concerned as to what im getting now, today and aint it good.

the mirror campaign stank. If I have half the ability to react and make comment on things as quickly as Murray did and does when I reach his age I'll be very pleased.

Ah, you're a Trekkie.

Legard has been criticised in this week's Autosport mag.

Indeed he has, although the article bizarrely takes a snide little swipe against Legard's own critics, by referring to them/us as "the anonymous internet forum boo-boys".

Boo to you too Autosport !!!!

I think Trekkies have a sense of humour...

Yes, Autosport magazine seems quite aware of the writings on this forum. Bradley Lord even wrote about how harsh internet criticism can be in his column the other week.

Perhaps they should concentrate on working up a magazine that is a better read when it isn't a week where they can fill it with F1 race weekend reaction.

I found this week's issue particularly thin.

The meaty pages were dedicated to an inteview with Jack Brabham, a straight-from-the-filing-cabinet verbatim race report of the 1981 Spanish Grand Prix and a piece on Jacques Lafitte's memory of that very race. 12 pages of very ancient history. I thought I'd picked up Motorsport magazine, after all, Nigel Roebuck wrote the race report.

Where is the solid F1 feature they normally drum up on the non race reaction editions?

I would cite the following as excellent F1 material in this edition:

Hall Of Fame Jack Brabham interview.

GP Gold review.

Jacques Laffite feature.

On current issues you have:

Feature on upgrades being brought to Barcelona.

Feature on the budget cap.

Story about 2010 weight changes (which I haven't seen on the internet).

You could also chuck in the excellent DC, Mark Hughes and Bradley Lord articles.

On the non-F1 front the GP2 preview is excellent.

Elsewhere there's a Donnington update with info I again haven't seen on the internet.

I happen to think for a preview edition it was excellent.

By the way, they've been running GP Gold for some time now, why was it suddenly a disappointment in this issue?

I'm not with these guys...

I've no problem with the historical elements.

But for me, one of the parts of Autosport I look forward to the most are the F1 features, and these normally seem to run on the weeks between races.

This week all the feature/profile pieces were on a driver who retired nearly 40 years ago, and a race run nearly 30 years ago.

The news items you speak, and the preview, are to be expected for a news magazine on motorsport.

The preview especially has a set style so doesn't change much.

But I want decent F1 features too. Once I'd waded through the F1 Gold stuff this week it was straight into the race reports then into the classifieds with just GP2 preview piece for company.

To each his own, but I felt this week's issue was a but thin compared to its usual excellent standard.

Anyway, back OT..

...I'm listening to Anthony Davidson and David Croft for the first time and they're actually very good.

What do they say?

F1 racing has the better features, usually. I considering swapping my autosport sub for the F1 racing, cos of cost and value.

And ant and crofty have a pretty damn good partnership going at the moment.

Of course. Because everyone who uses an internet forum is male.

My hands are clean in all of this. Autosport tells me so.

Blink and you would have missed it to be honest. Right at the very back in the 'Revved Up Over What's on the Box' article:

I ditched F1 Racing (after more than a decade) at the start of the year because it didn't have the depth I was looking for.

I'll pick up a copy in a few months and see if things have changed.

I think it is a pretty sad state of affairs when Britain's motor racing bible is gauging the mood of the motor racing populance via these forums.

I don't. There's a lot of hard-core F1 fans here, much higher percentage than in the general population.