Up and under – with fizz
The six nations is underway, which means that every weekend I can be found sporting my replica Scotland shirt and screaming at the television.
Screaming at the television is a very different occupation to shouting at the television. Shouting at the television is what you do when you are confronted with stupidity. This is, of course, something that happens every day in real life and we put up with without comment, but I’m buggered if I’m going to let it happen in my own front room without remonstration. Usually shouting at the television happens on the hour, as this is when news bulletins are broadcast.
There are occasions when the screaming turns to shouting and these are less to do with the performance of the team than the performance of the commentators. I don’t know what it is about rugby commentators but they are, at least the domestic ones, the most negative breed of people I’ve come across.
If a team wins, it’s because the other team made errors and beat themselves. If a team loose, then they are written off for the rest of the tournament (interesting to see if they learn the lessons of England’s amazing performance in the World Cup).
The real issue though, is the narrow lexicon of rugby commentators. A few seasons ago, you could not watch a match without hearing a commentator opine that ‘they’ve left themselves a mountain to climb’ when a side go more than ten points down. (Wales apparently left themselves with a ‘hill’ to climb on Saturday. Presumably we can look forward to other landscape protuberances being pressed into use, I especially look forward to hearing that a team has a tumulus to climb, as I’ve often seen them marked on maps but have no idea what they actually look like).
If they go fifteen points down, then ‘you’re just playing for pride now’.
This season, apparently, is all about fizz. Is the team fizzing, in a state of fizzment, has there been sufficient showing of fizz? With a new stock phrase added every year, by 2020 you won’t need a commentator at all, just a randomiser.
To me, commentary should be limited to who is passing to whom, how the pass was achieved and what local club they play for. If it’s the player’s birthday or his wife has just had a baby, this may also be mentioned. It used to be that commentary options were either listening or turning the volume knob down. If the match was on the radio, one listened to the (better) radio commentary as a matter of course (especially if it was Test Match Special). Thanks to the digital age, one now has ‘commentary options’ when watching a match. These though, are fairly restrictive, telly commentary or usually the local radio commentary from the home nation.
It’s coming to the point where I’m going to mute the teevee and stick on some music. You know how they cut together the ‘best bits’ of the match into a montage at the end and play ‘beautiful day’ or something over it? Well, imagine the whole match being like that.
Screaming at the television is a very different occupation to shouting at the television. Shouting at the television is what you do when you are confronted with stupidity. This is, of course, something that happens every day in real life and we put up with without comment, but I’m buggered if I’m going to let it happen in my own front room without remonstration. Usually shouting at the television happens on the hour, as this is when news bulletins are broadcast.
There are occasions when the screaming turns to shouting and these are less to do with the performance of the team than the performance of the commentators. I don’t know what it is about rugby commentators but they are, at least the domestic ones, the most negative breed of people I’ve come across.
If a team wins, it’s because the other team made errors and beat themselves. If a team loose, then they are written off for the rest of the tournament (interesting to see if they learn the lessons of England’s amazing performance in the World Cup).
The real issue though, is the narrow lexicon of rugby commentators. A few seasons ago, you could not watch a match without hearing a commentator opine that ‘they’ve left themselves a mountain to climb’ when a side go more than ten points down. (Wales apparently left themselves with a ‘hill’ to climb on Saturday. Presumably we can look forward to other landscape protuberances being pressed into use, I especially look forward to hearing that a team has a tumulus to climb, as I’ve often seen them marked on maps but have no idea what they actually look like).
If they go fifteen points down, then ‘you’re just playing for pride now’.
This season, apparently, is all about fizz. Is the team fizzing, in a state of fizzment, has there been sufficient showing of fizz? With a new stock phrase added every year, by 2020 you won’t need a commentator at all, just a randomiser.
To me, commentary should be limited to who is passing to whom, how the pass was achieved and what local club they play for. If it’s the player’s birthday or his wife has just had a baby, this may also be mentioned. It used to be that commentary options were either listening or turning the volume knob down. If the match was on the radio, one listened to the (better) radio commentary as a matter of course (especially if it was Test Match Special). Thanks to the digital age, one now has ‘commentary options’ when watching a match. These though, are fairly restrictive, telly commentary or usually the local radio commentary from the home nation.
It’s coming to the point where I’m going to mute the teevee and stick on some music. You know how they cut together the ‘best bits’ of the match into a montage at the end and play ‘beautiful day’ or something over it? Well, imagine the whole match being like that.
Labels: Rugby, Six Nations, Sport
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home