Having read the DS forum it's obvious you're biased JB. JL wasn't sensational last season (can't be easy making a change from radio to TV having not commentated on F1 since........2004? That's a guess by the way), but he wasn't total garbage all year either. I wasn't too impressed at the start (especially missing a few things, which Brundle did sometimes as well), as well as some of his stock phrases which were a bit annoying at first, as well as his reaction to some incidents, however he DID improve during the year as you say. Even you'd have to admit that he can improve, and needs to (that's not to say he's rubbish, but he does need to improve, by his own admission based on something I think you put on DS), and hopefully he will do. Don't think it helped that people hadn't heard him for so long either because of him stopping doing the F1 on 5 Live a few years ago, and so it was a shock to the system for some having a new commentator after..........what, 7 years or so of Allen? He does need to improve, and it's good that he admits he can do better, because it shows he wants to do better, which can only be good for the viewer. Hopefully he'll improve even more this year (all the team had faults last season, be they big or small, he's no different). Probably didn't help last season either with some..........not particularly good camera work by FOM, and not always an awful lot going on in races. If he can improve even more this year, then I reckon people will get off his back a bit more. I certainly thought he improved during the season, but like the rest of the team, can improve even more, which I hope he, and the rest of them, do.

Wow. Regarding Legard, I think it's a case that the longer he gets talked about in here, the more polarised and extreme both sides' opinions become in an attempt to 'win'. He wasn't great but he wasn't awful either IMO and it certainly wont ruin my season.

No talk about Anthony Davidson though? Is he still gonna be around IF he doesn't get a drive anywhere? I thought he was superb. Extremely knowledgeable, articulate and very interesting. His technical knowledge also seemed far more current than any of the TV crew and his tactical insights and reasoning often surpassed Brundle's. I'd suggest dumping Jordan and replacing him with Davidson. I 'get' that Eddie is fun, a bit mad, controversial and quite anti-protocol but he is too absorbed in his own self-importance and I don't like how greedy he is with his airtime. He was only short of pushing DC out of the way at times last season.

Davidson is hoping to race in DTM next season.............interestingly though, there are (as far as I know) NO calendar clashes, so he could do DTM racing 1 weekend, F1 commentary the next, etc.

Personally I found it all the more frustrating because the rest of the show was so good. But as I noticed each fault in Legard I became more aware of it, it was like an allergy that got worse with exposure. He was so obviously wrong - no knowledge, no spontaneity, that awful stiff voice, he lacked every possible qualification for a sports commentator.

Consequently his commentary was a mix of padding and the obvious.

Fortunately Ant and Crofty were there to save the day.

In my opinion Legard is doing an exceptable job and did improve greatly over the year. The only person I believe who could do a noticeably better job is Edwards. Some may call for another commentator but the BBC can't be expected to replace the lead commentator every year if some want someone different. There were ever only 4 people in with a shout of the job, Croft, Allen, Edwards and Legard.

• Croft's on BBCi anyway and as his GP2 performances on ITV4 showed, he's not suited to TV.
• Allen was a last resort and most would be up in arms if he got it. Bringing him over along with Brundle would have just made it ITV without ads which the Beeb didn't want. More importantly, Allen didn't apply.
• Edwards didn't want to give up his current commitments and the BBC wouldn't move on their terms.
• Which leaves Legard who had everything going for him. BBC employee, former F1 commentator and agreed to the terms.

As it is, if Legard is ever replaced then I'd say it won't be til 2012 at the earliest but more likely 2014 when the current BBC deal ends.

Not to mention ... if legard wasnt there just imagine all the other minor flaws that would be noticed/blown out of all proportion!

He is the viable scapegoat for the bbc at the moment without them having to make him a scapegoat. Legard mania has got to the point where humphreys could put a kitten in the sidepod of a formula one car watch it get squished and it would somehow be legards fault!

However what we have is the perception of an amazing show (i agree it was amazing too) but with the 1 major "flaw" legard ... but couldnt it be said that our rose tinted version of the beeb's broadcast is only rosey because its sitting right next to the perceived and dreaded legard? (though im happy to be wrong )

Honestly it didnt effect my viewing experience of the season at all and i dont have anything against the guy continuing he done a "good enough" job in 2009 to keep me happy and for all we know he might be alot better in 2010 for you nitpickers. or ... go write into watchdog you too might get your own personal voice actor! lol

Now I think we need to push on and see what he can do i mean 2010 season is just round the corner Anyway its up to the beeb to decide if he's over the hill .

There are no calendar clashes indeed, except for the possibility that Ant might want to do Le Mans again this year, that would clash with the Canadian GP.

Crofty has shown on the BBC's own broadcast that he's very good on TV, on F1. He does it every race on the red button.
The supposed stubbornness of Ben Edwards over off-season availablility is an absurd excuse. What has Legard been doing since the 09 season finished?
The greatest, most natural, spontaneous and excitable commentator of the moment was available, and actually started in F1 before he moved to bikes, Toby Moody.

But the BBC had decided to appoint one of their own. For reasons that are impossible to fathom they chose someone worse than Allen, and have now decided to persevere with him.

My agreement leads me to the opposite conclusion. Leave him on the radio where I can listen to him and Crofty during the race.

Maybe you get used to Legard but I'm glad I don't have to yet.

I find Legard irritating and I feel he has a negative effect on Brundles commentary too. The Croft, Davidson pairing outshone them.

While I found JA irritating I did grow to respect his input and his passion for the sport did come through. Legard seems to have nothing like as much to offer, a journeyman at best.

That's standard BBC procedure, they'll always commission a second helping of any old tripe, just to prove a point, cut off their noses to spite our faces, and then cancel it later, usually claiming the audience wasn't ready for it or some such nonsense.

Hopefully they figure out a way to run the 5Live commentary lifeboat uninterrupted, at least online, or red button, or something ... nothing worse than Crofty having to handover midflow to some half-man half-sheepskin jacket to drone on witlessly about some goalless draw at Stamford Bridge.

If they wanted to play it really smart they'd fill the Maurice Hamilton/Ian Philips gap with James Allen/Ted Kravitz, doing an audio version of their respective blogs for a session. A bit of in-depth what's goin on, picking over the hot topics and a bit of email comment feedback as the cars circulate on mystery fuel loads, no one would complain about that.

Never a truer word spoken. You only have to watch Points of View to see time and time again some bigwig from the BBC insisting that they know best, and that we the viewer are the ones who are wrong, but hey, there's nothing we can do about it so ner.

A scary prospect though is that I'm sure I read somewhere last year that Legard was advised by John Motson that to be a good commentator can take up to TEN YEARS. Clever posturing by Captain Obvious? There's no way he'll remain in the commentary box for another decade, is there?

Let's just get the facts straight:

- an average of 4.3m watched on BBC1 with BBC TV commentary.
- an extra 250,000 chose alternate commentary, that's not even 10% choosing alternative commentary. In reality, not many viewers really care about the commentary.

Not scientific information. Anyway, I say again a few hundred/thousand at most out of the mass audience who couldn't care less about the commentator as long as they get decent coverage.

Many on these boards prefer Toby and Julian to Charlie and Steve, yet the BBC's MotoGP coverage attracts the highest viewer appreciation results of ANY BBC Sport output. What does that tell you about the opinions on these boards?



Why are you listening to JL then?

If you don't like A, but enjoy B, why do you insist on listening to A?



I agree. In fact I think this sums up the opinion of many across several forums. There are a few (i.e. undersquare) who just don't get Legard and never will no matter what happens from here on in, they will never, ever change their opinion of him. The rest believe he was OK/good, but wasn't terrible either, i.e. he's better than James Allen, but there is a better man for the job (Edwards).



Yes, I agree. There were many areas where he needs to improve, and let's not forget he did improve markedly over the course of last season. Still room for improvement though, certainly.



Indeed. Spot on.



Who do you think he should be replaced with? James Allen? F1 Addict gave you the choices above, you already have Croft, leaving Edwards and Allen.

This was the reason why the BBC decided to offer alternative commentary streams, to (try to) keep everybody happy. The problem is people love complaining, instead of choosing which commentary team they like the best and get on with enjoying it. I'm not a particular fan of Croft/Davidson for the race, they are good in practice, but I don't want them for a whole weekend. But I don't then go nitpicking every minute fault and clanger that Croft comes out with (Brazil 08, etc.)

If you don't like someone, listen to the other.

Anybody who suggests Allen should be brought back is crazy. There's only one person in my opinion who is better, Ben Edwards. Unless he was ever willing to agree terms, then this whole debate is a non-starter.

Don't forget Ben Edwards would have been doing A1 GP this season as he has been for the past few years.

Yes, and X-factor does 16.6 million, so what exactly is your point?

Feynman's first rule of crowds, they know bugger all. Might does not equal right. No matter what size of mob Leggard turns-up with, it doesn't in anyway alter the objective fact of the matter, that he proved utterly maladroit and incapable in his performance.

Good point, and those figures are in line with the average for other sports offering alternative streams/commentaries for other BBC Sport output.

So undersquare's 66% figure from that poll is like I said an unscientific reflection of public opinion. Now if you could get 66% of those 4 million+ listening to Croft's commentary, then you may have a point, as it is though, like I said this is a non-starter.



In your opinion.

The alternative commentary option was actively promoted by Jake before most sessions, so it's not as if average Joe didn't know it was available. There's also a big yellow box at the top right saying "Choose Audio".

If more people didn't like Legard, then more surely in theory would press Red to listen to Crofty and co?

...although I don't really want (or wish) to be running round in circles for 6 weeks discussing this. Let's wait until Bahrain.. who knows, there maybe a improvement!

It's such a shame that BBC f1 season 09, which was without ad breaks thankfully, and still in season 2010, won't see F1 in HD still, such a shame...Anyway. I look forward to BBC's 2010 coverage with great anctipation! I loved last year's coverage to a tea! YAY!!

But you have to remember that he's talking to a radio audience as well, not just those who press the red button, so it'll likely be a different style of delivery compared to if he knew he was just talking to people who could see the action in front of them, he also has to describe the action suitably well for those who are relying on nothing but what he says, rather than being able to look at pictures at the same time.

Nothing to do with my opinion, it is an objective undeniable fact of nature, just like gravity, just like the speed of light, Legard was a Hindenburgian disaster in the commentary box.
The fact that many people endured it, gritted teeth and clenched fist, to hear Brundle proves nothing; the fact that many people objected to the 5Live stream being constantly interrupted by a perma tanned Stuart Hall gibbering ad nauseam, or the latest update on that jack-knived goods vehicle on the M6 when we are trying to watch Monza, again is not specifically relevant; the fact that much of the great unwashed proved incapable of mashing at their remote and hitting the appropriately colored button, still proves precisely hee-haw.

Anyone taking refuge in ratings numbers, in a discussion of quality, already admits defeat.

If the casual viewer even bothered using the red button I would bet my money most would prefer 5live's commentary. And there were many times where I didn't even have red button access...

HD should be available in 2011. the only reason they still don't provide it thou using HD cams is money, they want to write off all costs

I hope you don't have any sort of decision making role at the BBC as you neither seem to understand your audience or basic human psychology.

1) Some people don't have access to the red button feed, or get a poor signal (applies to me)
2) The Five Live feed is not uninterupted, people don't want to hear news bulletins half way through a gp (applies to me)
3) People stick to BBC1 to get Brundle, Kravtiz (an extra pit reporter) and sometimes DC (applies to me)
4) The Five Live feed is designed for radio audience, not TV.

The fact that so many people turn over to radio despite the obvious limitations should be totally embarrassing. Fail stats IMO.


Exactly the same thing with Allen.

90% of people who watched F1 on ITV, did not give a **** about him.

Yet you were calling for his head? There is no evidence at all to suggest that Legard is more popular than Allen.

The BBC had the chance to give a proper motorsport TV commentator the dream job (Haven, Hindhaugh, Ben Amos etc) but epically failed.

Your numbers may well be a fact but :

firstly, can you put in context with a survey of who knew it was available. Even on forums like this people were still complaining about Legard unaware of an alternative.

secondly, to say that they don't care about the commentary is a non-sequitur. Many people like Brundle and are quite happy to stay on BBC1 regardless of what they think of the other chap.

thirdly I'm sure despite what many of us feel Legard does not irritate everyone. For many it seems the more you know the sport the less highly one regards his commentary.

Perhaps you have figures for how many turn the sound off and listen to some nice classical music. Now those people, I will agree, don't care about the commentary.

Was the alternative commentary available on freeview as well as Sat?

Was last year, yes. Including the CBBC commentary feed for most of the season.

Yes it was though reception was sometimes an issue, at least for me.

I'm pretty tired of Brundle now actually, I was his biggest fan but he's gone stale now. Obviously you're all right about Legard, what the hell he's there for is beyond my imagination. Jake Humphreys was brand new to the show last year and he has been great and showed us that there are people out there so perhaps we could do with a completely fresh commentary team. Anthony Davidson for me harps on about tyres far too much and has taken to many anti-charisma pills. There must be plenty of young Murray Walkers out there not necessaily in motorsport or sports commentary perhaps they should look further affield. Someone whose voice like Murray's sounds like the cars.

Maybe Bernie can setup a charity drive to attain the money.

Anyway, yea I love the bbc team, the coverage and no ads, and it shall be a blast this up comming season again!

I felt the same last year. The spark seemed to be missing.

climbing the steps, like a condemned man to the gallows, knowing you were to endure two hours of being stood next to Legard, in a stuttering cycle of cliche and dead-air, would be enough to suck the life-force out of most anyone.

Case of too much of a good thing, or merely running out of steam?

I agree with you, but I can't quite put my finger on why. I dunno, it just seemed like Brundle wasn't as interested or enthusiastic perhaps as he once was. Almost like he was running at 90%.

What would happen if we switched the commentary teams over then? Red Button is not an equal test by any means, with the long delays and general obscurity. You can't count those figures as data.

And I'm not sure where that argument leads, if even if we take your interpretation of it. If not many viewers care, why does it matter what else Edwards is doing? You're not really claiming he'd be missing races are you? Why not find someone else? It doesn't amount to an argument for someone who's bad at it.

I'm sure Legard did affect Brundle. For one thing he virtually had to do both main and pundit commentary, so he had less time to think or look at the race and data.

And for another he knew it was going to be poor overall however hard he tried.

I couldn't my finger on it either. At the start of the year I thought it was just that he hadn't gel'd with Legard, but it didn't really get better as the season went on.

Speaking of Brundle, I miss his pole lap commentary, instead we had EJ in all his apparent wisdom doing it.

There's never been a survey (AFAIK) on the issue. Those people that were 'unaware of an alternative' clearly don't hear Jake before the race telling people about the alternative options wither it's Interactive, Online or Radio.

That's true, a reason to suppose Ant/Crofty would be even better on the main TV commentary.

Also there are those irritating breaks for football updates.

Erm, I don't think I ever heard Jake once suggesting that alternative commentary was available on the red button at any point? Onboard feeds, CBBC commentary yes, but not once did they mention the the availability of a far superior commentary duo via Five Live?

Which apparently won't be there for this season. 5 live in London will opt-out and the commentary team will cary-on via the red button and online.



You can't have been listening properly then.

Why would he mention onboard feeds and CBBC commentary, but fail to mention 5 live commentary? He mentioned it before more-or-less every single session - and even when he didn't, there was a big yellow thing plonked on top of your screen telling you there were audio options. You couldn't miss it.

Praise be!

Yes, and bloody annoying it is too. I hate the TV companies splattering their buttons and don't forget the next program banners on the screen, even if it is only for a short time.

Great news abour the football breaks. So now the two commentaries will be more comparable. If the BBC cared they'd arrange to collect some proper data about which is better received. That data obviously would not depend on assumptions about how usable the red button service is.

And if I were you, trying to support my company on here, I'd keep my posts polite and unaggressive...

So I pulled out four random races from last season that I had recorded to DVD: Belgian, Italian, Japanese and Brazilian grands prix. Of these, I watched the last 15-20 minutes of pre-race build-up (before going over to Legard/Brundle), which I would imagine would have been the optimum moment to announce the other options available so that the viewer doesn't easily forget.

Out of the four races, only once did Jake mention that an alternative feed on Five Live was available via the red button (Belgium), a yellow banner mentioning the website (Brazil) and the other two races, no mention at all.

Your talking as if a commentator being good at his job is a true or false question. That's patently utter bollocks, it's an opinion of the viewer, you cannot classify what makes someone good because no one is good for everyone.

O/T, but not sure where else this could go:

Did you fail to notice the message that was in reply to, the guy was trying to make exactly that same qualitiative judgement, that you accuse me of, except, ludicrously, trying to sell us that Legard was in fact servicable and some way fit for purpose, and to prove it look how many people tolerated his inane stilted ramblings.
Never mind the quality feel the ratings.

So that's worse.

It's not even based on the actual objective observable reality of how truly terrible he is, it tries to win the argument by proxy on something as specious as viewing figures. One has nothing to do with the other, absolutely nothing. He's trying to throw enough sand in our eyes that we forget the horror, the horror, of an afternoon trapped with Legard.

It? It? Do we not have usernames that we refer to one another to?

And I'm not trying to win an argument (I'll judge Legard again come March 14th), I was simply trying to provide some statistics to people's arguments. And as a matter of fact, near 250,000 people choosing alternate commentary is a very good figure.

I'm in the middle here, I can see where both sides are coming from.