Paused by mediocre health, I turned to books to pass the days. One was a memoir of famed cricket broadcaster and writer, John Arlott, written by his son, Timothy.

It was engaging for what it told about Arlott's personality and how he split it to accommodate his convivial public self and his egocentric private one.
Full Story

In reply to Vaneisa Baksh

Wow!!! What a brilliant commentary....not being my usual sarcastic self here. Really, really nice piece that can be applied way beyond the confines of a cricket discussion.

Regarding this question, I will say this much: the Caribbean radio broadcaster is still very viable, especially for the taxi drivers plying their trade. What I've noticed (and this is something of an oxymoron) is that West Indies' performance is an externality that must be considered.It's not so much that radio commentators don't hold our attention- our dismal performances surely contributes to any decline in interest.

I am a child of radio and was privileged to listen
to John Arlott, Alan McGillivery, Tony Cozier,
Reds P.and Roy Lawrence.
Cricket commentary developed my language skills and
descriptive ability.
I remember John Arlott describing Charlie Davis's
bowling as friendly medium pace. Also ......
" Cowdrey at first slip, Graveney second slip,
Oakman in the gully, legs apart, waiting for
a tickle."

I hope this article reaches a wider audience.

Komando.

Well, I've never read any of VB's pieces in its entirety before. This, however, held my attention until the end. Though, you asked some pertinent questions regarding cricket commentary, it is by no means limited to cricket nor is it a ground breaking discovery! This trend has been present in almost all facets of sports commentary, from baseball to football (American) since the advent of TV coverage and most recently the internet! With TV, there is no need for the commentators to be as descriptive as in radio for obvious reasons!

Using ex-players as commentators provides technical insights that may not be otherwise provided by a radio/TV/journalist,thus enhancing the coverage for the viewing audience!
For instance, an ex-player should be able to say why a fielder has been placed at a certain position for a specific bowler!

However,there is still a place for radio coverage, as in your car or when there is no access to TV or internet! Radio is still a big part in sports commentary in NA, for the aforementioned reasons! So, if you're turned off by TV, then you can turn on your R A D I O! :wink:

In reply to CaribbeanCricket.com

Vanesia ,

You have written a very good article .I have always maintained , and will always maintain that John Arlott was peerless as a cricket commentator . In this region Roy Lawrence is head and shoulders above everyone else .

Obviously for openers , the vocabulary of yesteryear commentators was and is superior to current commentators . Perhaps from a purely cricket technique , former players may have the edge , but for describing the grounds , the weather , eg . breeze , windy warm wet etc . Absolutely no one can touch John Arlott.

There are several persons who generally turn down the volume of their TV sets and listen to the commentary via the radio .

I am absolutely certain that were John Arlott to be alive today and was bringing the commentary on TV people who regularly turn off the volume of their TV sets wouldnt do so .

The advent of TV , sad to say, in my opinion , has impacted negatively on the vocabulary of current commentators .

My advice to those who want to have a career in being Cricket Commentators , LISTEN TO JOHN ARLOTT AND THOSE OF YESTER YEAR TAPES , THEY DO EXISTS . You will learn a lot more than listening to current Commentators .

I happened to be in England some years ago , turned on the TV , and there was a panel talking about John Arlott . They all agreed that John died of a broken heart after his son , I have no idea how many children he had , died from a terrible motor accident , while going home in his car , around a corner , a lorry was parked without lights on his hand and his car travelled into the back of the lorry ; as a result , his son died .

John Arlott was never the same again after the death of that son .

Regards .... . POINT .

[I am very sorry that you are so young and therefore missed commentary by the old stalwarts like John Arlott.
I started listening to the BBC cricket commentaries in the late 1940's and especially followed the 1948 Australian tour.
Then when the West Indies toured in 1950 I really began to appreciate what was being offered. It was if I was at the game and seeing it live. The descriptions of the weather, the fields, the strokes and all the details about the game made a big impression on me.
Then when I went to England in the 60's and began to watch and listen to cricket, it was if I was there before.
There is no doubt that Parker made a big difference to watching cricket on TV.
When the BBC did the TV broadcasts previously, it was as if you were watching a silent movie with a little background noise as the commentators said very little. Plus the BBC used very few cameras. But their radio broadcasts always stood out.
Very few of our Caribbean commentators either on radio or Tv can ever match the eloquence of John Arlott.
There are tapes available which I am sure you can listen to that will help you to appreciate Arlott's works.

The difference in commentators today is that today's commentator is a true commentator (as in commenting on the proceedings)....the commentators of yester-year were on-the-scene live reporters.

Sadly, and I don't know how many of you may have noticed, the information revolution over the past decade- the growth of live TV coverage, Internet, has resulted in such an overload that a lot of the magic has been taken away from sports. There are no longer any legendary tales of heroic batting performances since each and every act gets scrutinized from so many directions in real time. When you throw in the amount of party-spoliers around today, there no longer is a gloss to events.

As an example, the WI winning the 2004 Champions Trophy is widely accepted as a hugely heroic effort, yet there'll always be the reminder: Browne was not given plumb lbw on his way to that victory. I daresay (and this might be intellectually dishonest on my part) that such a minor detail would not have been given the prominence it did had the availability of information not be so free-for-all as it is today.

Another example of a legendary performance- one of the greatest of this era- was South Africa's 434 run chase.....because each of us formed our own ideas interactively and not from craftfully scripted anecdotes that embellish these events and whose magic is increased with each recalling. As a result, the gloss is gone as quickly as it came.

In reply to CaribbeanCricket.com
Yep, i remember his commentary too - Is this about Fazeer?

I always liked Reds P but my favorite has always been Bobby Frey. He had the best discription ever of Jeffrey Dujon driving through the off for four. Henry Bloomfield was one that I enjoyed also. You are correct though in that some of these past players should stay far from the commentary box.

In reply to CaribbeanCricket.com
Some cool audio clips here - Butcher and Gibbs on the first
http://www.radioacademy.org/halloffame/arlott_j/
Check wikipedia as well
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Arlott
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tv_and_radio/test_match_special/1294293.stm

In reply to CaribbeanCricket.com

Great Article, I never heard John Arlott (too young) but Henry Blofeld was incredible to listen to. Etonian to the core he like all great commentators had a way of making mundane things sound both funny and exciting. Blofeld could make a rain break sound exiting. Reds P. was good as well, I think his achievements are all the more notable since he was versatile enough to commentate on any sport whether it was boxing, soccer, basketball or athletics. I also believe aesthetically the type of voice matters, Blofeld has a great voice and Reds probably because as a kid he had a speech impediment always managed to sound exciting.

Very good article. Arlott was boss - no one else came or comes near.

Allyuh West Indians easy to mamaguy bhai. Any ole cunumu could spin few words, drop some names, pretend to read a book and allyuh googoogaga.

As for you Ms Vanessa what skuntery it is you coming with. Ah sure John Arlott do a 180 wondering who wielding the shovel. And I quote "It was engaging for what it told about Arlott's personality and how he split it to accommodate his convivial public self and his egocentric private one". What de hell does that mean? It look like it come straight out of a secondary school copybook. And if it is that you wanted to lambasse one of de cricket commentators jus hit dem straight up. No need to highbrow them behind musings about Arlott. They deserve it but they will not understand it if you clothes the licks in John Arlott niceties. Hit dem hard sister.

My point is you selling both Arlott and we on the MB short. Wheel and come again.

In reply to CaribbeanCricket.com

Come on Vaneisa....don't be shy. Who are the 5 or 6 that make up the proficient group?

Who is the Vaneisa chick?

In reply to Banner You cyar be serious

In reply to pufftrini

yep i serious

is who she is?

regards

In reply to Banner Caribbean Cricket Journalist. Writes for the Trinidad Express and contributes to Cricinfo.