Who are the GOOD sports presenters on TV?

most of the good ones are dead now hence we are left with a huge amount of crap on our screens if only we could go back to the days of great broadcasters such as brian moore dickie davies harry carpenter reg gutteridge to name a few all proper experts in their field who came across so much better than the politically correct divvys we have to put up with nowadays

there is no need for presenters. the eurosport format (as used by espn for the copa america)  is fine. the sky sports/bbc attitude that we aren't going to show anything unless we have at least three blokes to discuss it in a studio is daft. sometimes the "experts" they have in the studio add some insight (like mike carlson) but this is the exception rather than rule. however the presenters are rarely wise enough to ask them the right questions. show us some other action or news at half time instead. most sports have ample time for the commentators to lecture us on the finer points so if they do a good job the goons in the studio are usually just repeating what they have said.

so having damned the whole lot of them as pointless i'll say my favourite presenter was mark webster because i liked his sweaters. i don't think he can count as eye candy.

I like Jake Humphrey and the BBC F1 coverage, that's about it

Only one tonic....gutteridge and carpenter...now we're talking quality...but it seems like a lifetime ago.

DonNo1 - I haven't seen Humphries on F1...but isn't he exactly the sort of presenter Charltan is talking about? I remember Humphries from his time as a children's tv presenter and it's impossible for me to imagine him making a credible sports anchor. Isn't he just the male presenting version of Fearn Cotton??? (who I personally absolutely detest)

Also, I'd always personally enjoyed John Inverdale presenting the World's Strongest Man, but was shocked to hear him being slated on the forum recently (admittedly I didn't see his Open Golf work).

Surely, we haven't come that far that the likes of young Humphries are now considered better pros than the ilk of Inverdale. Or have we?

Dan Walker was getting some stick to. It seems he is among the new breed of BBC presenters, who are getting much younger...but are they any good?

Not on TV but Pat Murphy on BBC R5 is excellent.  Intelligent informative and entertaining when covering football and cricket

Maybe it's tv that turns people into morons?

Gary Richardson is aggressive and rude but tackles the tough questions in his radio interviews. They put him on tv to interview Murray at Wimbledon - and he turns into the biggest kiss-ass I've ever heard. It was embarrassing stuff.

Likewise, Mark Pougatch has fronted the sport on Radio 5 for years. Yet I saw him working as a reporter for TV at the Open Golf (where his interviews only consisted of maybe 3 questions) and he was awful. No, he was worse than that. Asked the most stupid, pointless questions that weren't even questions sometimes.

So what do people expect from a 'good' commentator. Is it an ability to make us go 'Ooh, I hadn't thought of that' quite a lot? Or is it an unerring ability to pinpoint where a contest is going? Or is it something else? Are we looking for betting information, or are we assessing them as a normal non-betting audience member might?

I like the Racing UK coverage, mainly for the time they lavish upon each race. That especially goes for the post-race analysis, where they spend quite a lot of time looking at the key runners and how they ran which, for me, is quite useful information for the future. Would I generally hang on the word of their analysts? No. But I do appreciate the chance to look over a race in some detail and hear other people throwing their ideas around.

I also like the F1 coverage - more for Brundle/Coulthard than the Humphries segments which, frankly, I often fast forward through. Generally though, I think most of the old-school commentators were, perhaps, better because they got their positions through being knowledgeable journalists. Far too many of today's sport 'analysts' are former players, many of whom don't really seem to have much detail to impart.

Is it an ability to make us go 'Ooh, I hadn't thought of that' quite a lot?

Yes otherwise they aren't adding much and I might as well watch it with the sound turned off (except for where the sound is necessary for betting as in rugby union where you need to hear what the ref says) and music on instead. My choice of music is more entertaining than most "entertaining" commentators (although bumble has his moments).

It's tough to constantly come up with insights that'll be new to experienced Betfairers though - and especially if you don't want to go over the heads of the more casual users. A lot of the people who post here are, essentially, professional sports watchers, and are likely to know rather more than the typical viewer.

Not so much an commentator, more of an analyst but I think Michael Johnson (athletics) is class.

I think Sue Barker agrees with you there!

DonNo1
I like Jake Humphrey and the BBC F1 coverage, that's about it

Me too, and I like Coulthard and Brundle - Eddie Jordan though constantly makes a t1t of himself imo.

Some good points Lord Bobbin. Insightful analysis I feel always enhances a programme, and at it's best I think can be as enjoyable as the sport itself.

Most of you seem to be picking out commentators and their analysis so far for praise. So does this mean presenters aren't needed any more. Do we just needed good analysis?

I ask, because I thought the likes of Des Lynam really made a programme come to life. One of his dry quips could stay in the memory for ages. Lineker seems a poor imitation for my money. James Richardson also made a few comments on Football Italia that I've remembered fondly for years.

Is the presenter no longer needed? Is there no place for charm and a touch of humour among the analysis? And even if there is, are there any presenters in the Lynam mould who can still bring that touch of personality to a show?

It's tough to constantly come up with insights that'll be new to experienced Betfairers though

agreed but it would be useful if they could come up with something i may not have spotted when i wasn't concentrating rather than rehash of the blindingly obvious (or even worse a biased one as in mos tinternational events).

Ray Warren
Hugh Bladen
Jim Nantz

All great voices for their sports of NRL, SA rugby union and golf.

I know what you mean h-bomb, I hate the way BBC find a presenter they like and then stick them on every sport.  But Humphrey seems to have a fair knowledge and high enthusiasm for F1 and imo is a likeable guy.  With Coulthard, Brundle, Croft (5 live+Davidson/Chandhok) and even Jordon (who might be a bit of a clown but isn't afraid to speak his mind) you've got a great team and it's the only sport coverage where I actually enjoy the presenting/analysis aside from perhaps NFL on 5 with Coombs and Carlson.

As far as presenters go I hate Inverdale (used to like him on WSM for some reason)and Balding (I hate their demeanour and the way they start chatting irrelevant bollocks about sports they really don't know), don't mind but don't like Irvine+Lineker+Barker.
I think the general level of commentary/punditry across all sports is atrocious, I can't think of a single football person I like (perhaps Richardson if I saw more of him and Seedorf was decent last year), Tennis has a couple of great pundits but is let down by a number of idiots, same goes for Athletics (Johnson is superb and a great scoop for the BBC)

I'll reserve a special spot for Adrian Chiles who is a complete disgrace.  The clown should be presenting Soccer AM or something, I tune into watch sport for some serious discussion and this mug is cracking jokes every 2nd sentence (usually about some irrelevant people in the crowd), I seem to remember him having a good chuckle after/during one of the England games as if he really didn't give a ****. He made ITV's WC coverage completely unbearable for me.
I have fond memories of Vine, Ryder and Lynam but this new breed do my head in.  I'm just grateful if I can tune into sport these days and not get wound up more than a few times during the broadcast, a sad state of affairs.

Personally I just want a presenter and a team who have deep knowledge and enjoyment for the sport and aren't patronising to the viewers but chip in at the right times with insightful views.

James Richardson

Gary Imlach always seems to do a good job whatever the sport.
James Richardson on footy Italia was class...

I find snooker to be the only one with a depth of quality analysts.

Surprisingly possibly the best football analyst i've heard is Capello when he used to do it in Italian football in his sabbatical season 97/98. Incisive, very technical, and certainly not afraid to lay into a managers tactics, particularly when it was Zoff's national team.
I concur with the comments about Chiles, an absolute joke.