There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Asked him before on here about the commentary being all about the betting for him and most other commentators and he denied it. That race just gone is a perfect example.
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 14
|
By:
i thought he didnt deny they had to mention the fav ..
|
|
By:
iirc - he sayed the only guide they were given was to mention the fav
|
|
By:
May 16, 2018 -- 5:09PM, ratpack wrote:
That a reference (not constant) to the favourite should be made is the only part of that which is true. Thank You. Most UK commentators seem to give far more than a reference unfortunately, as though every punter is just a favourite betting idiot. Pity commentators have been asked to reference favourites in the first place, a ridiculous directive. |
|
By:
Delta is right. Though that might only be the on course caller.
|
|
By:
If that's the case its one thing 'mentioning' it, obsessed by it is another thing. It would be nice if races were called on their merits and not by the betting.
|
|
By:
can't stand hoiles. just sounds so smug with that syrupy voice.
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
Thank You. Most UK commentators seem to give far more than a reference unfortunately, as though every punter is just a favourite betting idiot. Pity commentators have been asked to reference favourites in the first place, a ridiculous directive.
^ that line was posted by you on the original fred and lewisham ranger has also posted his again too  |
|
By:
Alzheimer's is setting in early. I must get it cheeked...
|
|
By:
head in hands man required ... >>
|
|
By:
Good commentator - wish we'd lose all the clever clogs history stuff
|
|
By:
In Australia - The FAV gets lots more mentions in a Commentary - wherever it may be in the race, and often referred to as, "the FAVourite," too.
Mind you a lot more FAVs do Win in australia - and they nearly all frame or run well, in many races. |