Cricket 07 Commentary
Maya Malbon
I have been watching cricket on tv for years and have occasionally seen the commentary box. Usually, the camera will be behind the commentators and the image will show the commentators watching the match from a small room, and the players will also be visible. There may be a change of commentators (somebody moving in and somebody moving out) and even then, we could see the field. More-over, commentators will be talking about events which are not visible to tv viewers, meaning it is happening outside the range of the camera.
This type of video "proves" that the commentators are in the commentary box.
Here are 2 views of general "proper" commentary boxes:
Surely, these commentators are in the stadium.
Now-a-days (atleast in T20 WC matches or IPL Matches) I feel that the commentators are not in the box, but are watching a broadcast stream in some studio.
Here are 2 views of "suspicious" commentary boxes:
It is not really clear if they are in the stadium or in a small studio, pretending to be watching the match live at the stadium.
The last picture is especially suspicious, because it looks like the camera will be blocking the view of the match.
My Doubt is based on 2 main points:
(1) The commentators (and the change of commentators) will always shown from the front, and there will never be a view of the commentators with the field or players in view.
(2) The commentators seem to say exactly what is shown on the screen and seem to be clueless of the ground situation.
Eg 2A : On the tv, a ball going towards the boundary may look like it will cross it, while the commentators should be able to see a fielder running towards it. I have seen cases where the commentator was saying something like "going to be a four [that is what we can see] ... no, a fielder gets to it at the last moment [that is when the tv shows the fielder]", which I can make out without the redundant commentary.
Eg 2B : A ball hit too high may look like a six on tv, and even the commentator will claim that it is going to be a six, but eventually we see that it has simply gone up and come down on the wicketkeeper, who takes an easy catch.
After noticing this couple of years back, I have been waiting for similar comments in latest matches, but I think they have become clever and do not comment on these things now ; they wait for the tv to show what is happening and then they say what we can already see.
Beyond these two main points, I noticed two other minor points:
(3) I noticed that occasionally there is the light from tv screen on the faces on the commentators.
(4) I also noticed that commentators do not say anything which is not shown on the tv, Eg If umpire has asked for 3RD umpire Decision, but the tv has not shown him asking for it, then commentators too will be talking about other things, like "boy-o-boy, at a time like this, a huge risk in trying to take a single [replay shows umpire asking for 3RD umpire Decision] and what will it be ? Out or not out ?", where basically, they are trying to hide the fact that they are clueless until the tv shows what is happening.
We have English Commentary Broadcast (claimed implicitly to be from stadium) and Hindi Commentary Broadcast (known to be from studio) and both are similar, making me suspect that even the English Broadcast is from the studio.
I am not claiming that all commentaries are from studio, I am only saying that in some matches (especially T20 IPL) the studio is used, without informing the audience, but then they never explicitly claimed to be in the stadium, so they are not really lying.
It may be that the studio is easier for bringing in Film Stars who do not want to get stuck in the huge crowds or traffic generated by IPL. It may be that commentary boxes are used as VIP seats, and commentators are asked to move out.
The simple answer is - it depends. For a lot of matches, the commentators will be in the ground, but for others they won't be, for a lot of reasons but usually for financial ones - it can make financial sense to have commentators operate off a TV feed rather than send them thousands of miles for what might be a single match.
My experience of cricket broadcasting is European-based, and Sky always appear to have a studio-based analysis team (for intervals) and a ground-based commentary team. The BBC radio coverage is always from the grounds too.
I am adding the "answer" to help myself track the situations where the commentators "cheated" and tricked the audience to think that the commentary is from the stadium, where-as those commentators were actually miles away. [[ I posted this Question in 2016, hence it was in terms of IPL 2016, but the issue is larger and not restricted to 2016 or to the IPL ]]
14/NOV/2021 : World Cup T20 final between Australia and New Zealand.
I was watching this on "DD SPORTS" Channel in Hindi, which takes the Raw Broadcast Signal from the Original Broadcaster (in Dubai Stadium) and adds the Hindi commentary and other edits and advertisements. So far so good. I noticed several times where the commentators (CM) fumbled, which is somewhat ok, because they are not in the stadium.
Eg 1: In the middle overs, a batsman missed hitting the ball; the next ball, he hit it high and CM said "great shot, super", thinking it was going to be a 6, but the ball came down half-way to the boundary and it was caught "OUT"; Red-faced CM said "Still, better shot compared to previous!"
I am somewhat ok with this because the CM is watching the TV and the commentary is limited to what is shown on the TV.
Eg 2: CM was not able to tell whether the batsmen took 2 runs or just 1, until the Screen Display showed the number. If CM had been in the Commentary Box, in the Stadium, CM would have seen the running.
This is tolerable, but CM is redundant and we might just read out the screen ourselves !
Eg 3: When a batsman missed a ball, CM was saying "good ball, good bowling", because umpire was not shown, but the umpire had signaled a wide !
This is crossing the tolerable limit, because, before the umpire signaled, I too could see that it was a wide, but the expert CM could not. If CM had been in the Commentary Box, in the Stadium, CM would have seen the umpire signalling the wide.
The only way we can keep cricket free the world over is with your help. NOW WE NEED THAT HELP MORE THAN EVER as we search for a new broadcast studio. Frankly, unless we double the money that we get through the support of our Patreons we will no longer be able to continue. It really is you who keep us on air and our unique cricket coverage free the world over to our audience.
Baseball fielding positions are fairly standard. There are precisely eight of them, one for each player other than the pitcher. The outfield players might move in and out a little, infield players might shift left or right, but essentially the players keep to their positions throughout the game. This is not so in cricket. Because the action takes place in the centre of the field, and all directions are live, there is vastly more territory for the fielders to cover. Also fielding positions can vary wildly depending on whether the fielding side is attacking (i.e. trying to get the batsman out) or defending (trying to stop him from scoring runs). As a result, names for the various fielding positions are essential.
Why is this important? Well, baseball field placings are generally very symmetrical (except when Barry is at the plate), but in cricket field positions depend very much on their relation to the batsman. It is therefore no help to talk about the right or left side of the field, you must talk about field positions in relation to whether the batsman is right- or left-handed. The on side is always the on side, regardless of which way around the batsman stands.
I explained in the previous article that there are different types of bowlers: fast, swing and spin. But bowlers can also vary their tactics in terms of the length and line of the delivery.
Slower bowlers tend to concentrate on bowling what is called a good length. This means pitching the ball in such a way as it will reach the batsman on the half-volley. However, note that the batsman has a say in proceedings too. He can reduce the length of a ball by playing back (i.e. stepping back as far as he dare without risking treading on his stumps) and he can increase the length by playing forward (i.e. striding forward out of his crease, though if he misses the ball he risks being stumped).
For a swing bowler the very best line of attack is just outside the off stump. The batsman can then never be quite sure if the ball is going to swing in, in which case he has to defend his stumps, or swing out, in which case the ball may catch the edge of the bat and be caught, or just carry straight on. This region is sometimes known as the corridor of uncertainty.
Finally with respect to line, note that a bowler cannot bowl absolutely straight because there is a set of stumps at his end of the pitch too (not to mention an umpire) and he has to run around them when delivering the ball. He has a choice whether to run to the right or the left of the stumps. Again this depends on whether he is right- or left-handed, so the official terms are hand-neutral. The bowler is said to be bowling over the wicket if his bowling arm is adjacent to the stumps (for a right-handed bowler, he is passing to the left of the stumps) and around the wicket is his bowling arm is on the far side of his body from the stumps. Note that a delivery bowled around the wicket will necessarily be more slanted diagonally across the pitch than one bowled over the wicket.
The bowler can also vary the angle of his line by choosing to bowl from close in to the stumps or from wider out. However, if he chooses to bowl from close in he must be careful where he treads after delivering the ball. It would be very advantageous to the bowling side to create scuff marks on the pitch on a good length (i.e. where the ball is likely to pitch). If a bowler treads in this area he may be warned by the umpire for running on the pitch. If he persists in offending he can be banned from bowling for the rest of the innings.
c80f0f1006