Cricket Commentary Radio Uae
Barton Ostby
Listen to Cricket Commentary in Hindi.All India Radio radio plays Live Cricket commentary of IPL 2021.Tune to IPL 2021 Live hindi Commentary online in Hindi.live cricket score,live ipl match today,live cricket match today,cricket news today,MI vs DC live commentary,live: MUMBAI vs DELHI live match score and hindi cricket commentary ipl 2021 DC vs MI live,live match score & hindi commentary, scorecard,live score,
Let's start with the differences between radio and television commentary. Richie Benaud's maxim about not speaking unless you add to the pictures obviously doesn't apply to radio, where you cannot allow dead air.
The art on television is saying as little as possible but making it as interesting as possible, which isn't actually terribly easy either. If you're bound so completely to the screen, there's only so much that you can offer that doesn't sound boring. I always have in mind a blind person, be that a blind person actually at the ground or somebody who can see perfectly well but who's sitting in his car or working in the office. And that's the No. 1 task of the radio commentator: to describe, to explain, what these people can't see. It's got to be clear. It's got to be accurate. And it's got to be believable. It takes a while, I think, for a new commentator to earn the trust of the listener. You get there eventually, but it does take a while.
Do you think there's more freedom with radio, then?
Oh yes, there's total freedom on the radio. It's up to you to decide how you're going to fill the time while the bowler's walking back or there's nothing going on in the game. But TV can give it more depth. If you look at the make-up of commentary boxes - and people talk about too many former players and former captains in a television box - I think that expert knowledge is crucial on TV, because you're having these slow-motion replays and lots of analysis and the viewer does need to know you're coming from a credible background for that to work. On the radio - and we have our Geoffrey Boycotts, who are very clear in how they think the game should be played - until you can actually see it, it makes it very tricky for that sort of analysis.
The absolute key difference between television and radio is the ability of radio to communicate. With television you can watch the screen and your mind can be anywhere. On radio it requires a certain amount of discipline from the listener to follow what's being said. Therefore, the art of communicating, the art of reaching out and getting inside that person's head, is what radio's all about. People really have to engage with you, and you have to make an effort to engage with them.
Some of the cricket in the UAE - it's the hardest Test series to commentate on, on the radio, because of the pitches, because of the type of play. That is hard work. You will be worn out. By the time you get back to your hotel room, you won't want to talk to anybody, because your brain has just been going at 1000% to generate conversation, talking points, enthusiasm, the sort of essential ingredients that are needed to keep people listening. There are times when it's very easy, lots going on, but there are other times when you have to work your socks off. But without sounding like it. It's all got to sound the same. While your brain's going at a million miles an hour it's still got to come out your mouth at your usual rate, otherwise it sounds all very forced.
"I did a stint with Phil Tufnell at Lord's last summer. I asked him what he had planned for the evening, and he said he was going to a board game party. Suddenly we got talking about Monopoly, Balderdash, Cluedo. People were emailing in, tweeting"
Have you ever had any voice training?
I've had no training, and I'm often amazed that people don't think about it. When you're speaking, you can manipulate your voice to make it sound interesting, melodic.
I find myself, when I'm commentating, pitching every word. You've got your background orchestra, which is the crowd. You've got that constant hum. You can pitch your voice against it, both as a note and in terms of strength. I often talk about it being a soloist against an orchestral backing, and that's what radio commentary is.
I'm always conscious that I really relax my throat, so I'm almost breathing each word out. I always turn my headphones up quite loud too, which means you set yourself quite softly. You're not forcing anything, so you've got somewhere to go. When there's excitement or drama, you can force it a bit more, against the "music" of the crowd, so it sounds that little bit more dramatic, but without shouting. If a commentator has to resort to shouting, then he's in trouble.
Do you have production meetings where you brainstorm potential topics of conversation for when there's a danger of running dry?
Adam [Mountford, the Test Match Special producer] and I will talk about doing intervals, what's newsworthy, but in terms of content for commentary, then no: nothing. That's what makes the job so interesting.
I've always believed that if you sit down and spend hours researching things before each day's play then you'll turn up to work with a mass of paper, and you'll want to show everyone that you've researched it, so you'll read things out. And they're boring. I think people want to hear about what's going on: it's a live event, it's happening now, and that's why I try and generate live content, if you like.
Is the balance between information and entertainment something you're always mindful of?
Oh yes. You do have to do both. Hopefully the cricket will do it for you, but if it doesn't, then you have to generate it yourself. These days, with social media, you can start to tell pretty quickly if people are bored!
You're only on for 20 minutes - five or six overs - which doesn't sound very long, but it can be exhausting and you're very much dependent on the person you're with. I did a stint with Phil Tufnell at Lord's last summer, the graveyard shift on a slow day and a pretty bland pitch. Making conversation, I asked him what he had planned for the evening, and he said he was going to a board game party with friends. Suddenly we got talking about Monopoly, Balderdash, Cluedo - all our favourite board games. People were emailing in, tweeting. Chat, chat, chat, chat, chat, and even though the cricket was dull, the time flew by. As he got up to finish his stint, Adam said: "That was fun. Have a great party." Tuffers said: "Oh, I made that up!" He completely hoodwinked everyone. Just to have something to talk about.
That on-air chemistry and repartee is a very important ingredient of TMS, of course, but there are also differences of opinion. How much do you feel you can disagree with someone on air before it becomes bad radio?
That's a good question. If you really felt strongly about something you'd disagree until it really did become bad radio. Obviously Boycott and I have a few moments, but I think I would withdraw before it got too vehement. You can politely disagree. For instance, I like that Simon Mann, who's doing my job out in the UAE, has very differing views to my own on lots of things. But that's really good for the programme, as long as it's done politely. People aren't listening to us for arguments and rows.
On the subject of Geoffrey Boycott, he seems to polarise opinion - certainly in England, where he's not everyone's cup of tea. How do you think he's viewed now?
I think he's viewed more affectionately now than 20 years ago. His time on the radio has done him a lot of good. People have warmed to him more. And he's a softer character than he sounds anyway. Yes, he has his way - he's always right, everybody else is wrong - but he's very professional; he's brilliant at analysing the game, particularly batsmen's techniques, and he gets there very quickly. I really enjoy working with him and there's a lot of mutual respect there.
Which other commentators have you admired, or learned from?
The answer is that you learn from everybody. That doesn't mean to say you do what they do; sometimes you avoid doing what they do. It's an interesting education to listen to cricket commentary when you're not at the game. When you're there, which is most of the time for me, it flows over you. But when you're not there, you look at it in a slightly different way. You pick up things. You might hear something and think, "Oh, that's a good way of saying that."
I do like some of the old-style commentary. Their vocabulary was deeper. They didn't do as much cricket. The modern commentator is blighted by the amount of cricket we have to do. Whereas Johnners would rock up and do three one-day internationals and maybe five Tests in a summer, and occasionally pop out for winter Tests, we're doing 13, maybe 14, Tests a year, and goodness knows how many limited-overs matches. Therefore it's very easy to slip into cruise control with what you're saying. You need people listening to you, saying: "You've developed that as a habit", "You're saying that too often." It's very, very easy to get formulaic - TV people particularly, because they've got less scope than we have. Your brain goes into overdrive mode. That's harder for us now than when they didn't do so much cricket.
I was listening back to Alan McGilvray recently and just the way he defined where fielders were reminded me how it should be done. I think the way it was done 30 years ago was the blueprint for radio commentary. I don't think that will ever change.
Is that easy to grasp for the specialist broadcaster who hasn't played professional cricket?
Take someone like Christopher Martin-Jenkins, for instance - a very keen club cricketer, but that was the extent of his playing ability, yet a massive cricket fan and lover, a great thinker of the game. It's very important that that type of individual can come and commentate on TMS. He went from that background to become one of the most respected writers and broadcasters of the game. Probably those days are gone on television, for the reasons we were talking about. But on radio it's important to get that broad spectrum of people's understanding and love of cricket.