There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
... on the actual job he's doing. Just back in and watching Hamilton back. My heart sank. Ok, he's an easy target - I know that - but in all seriousness, the people employing him to commentate on horse racing really need to ask themselves what they are getting. Any half baked, performance review procedure in the most run down business, would have sussed out his incompetence to do the job he's employed to do by now. Yet day after day he's still there.
Every race is the same script, "away to a good level break" until he spots the Hamlet advert which is always "sluggish". "All well into their stride" regardless of any rider using up his whip allowance in the first 50 yards just to get the horse to stay with the field.
Every race has something "beginning to stay on", or "coming with a good looking run" when it's patently obvious they won't be winning. Can they not see that this devalues the impact whenever it actually is an accurate description of what's happening? You get the basic running order, and that's it, the embellishments often have no basis in reality.
And he cannot call a close finish without the hysterical "Wow - that's a phodo" in an intonation that makes it sound as if such an event has never happened before - all the while providing minimal opinion as to the actual order they cross the line, anything less than a neck is for others to call, not him.
The 7.35 was called as "a good level break" while Classy Al was rearing, losing ground and all chance. No mention. In the last, Warrendale Wagyu was "travelling well" when in reality it was fighting the jockey, never settled and giving itself little chance.
This is just not good enough. Who is it that needs to answer to the decision to book him?
If he wants to do his clown act on the sidelines fine, I really couldn't care less. But he spoils the specatacle of watching races and should never be allowed to commentate. - Ever!
Every race is the same script, "away to a good level break" until he spots the Hamlet advert which is always "sluggish". "All well into their stride" regardless of any rider using up his whip allowance in the first 50 yards just to get the horse to stay with the field.
Every race has something "beginning to stay on", or "coming with a good looking run" when it's patently obvious they won't be winning. Can they not see that this devalues the impact whenever it actually is an accurate description of what's happening? You get the basic running order, and that's it, the embellishments often have no basis in reality.
And he cannot call a close finish without the hysterical "Wow - that's a phodo" in an intonation that makes it sound as if such an event has never happened before - all the while providing minimal opinion as to the actual order they cross the line, anything less than a neck is for others to call, not him.
The 7.35 was called as "a good level break" while Classy Al was rearing, losing ground and all chance. No mention. In the last, Warrendale Wagyu was "travelling well" when in reality it was fighting the jockey, never settled and giving itself little chance.
This is just not good enough. Who is it that needs to answer to the decision to book him?
If he wants to do his clown act on the sidelines fine, I really couldn't care less. But he spoils the specatacle of watching races and should never be allowed to commentate. - Ever!
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 32
|
By:
chill out dude!
first world problem if that  a lot of 70 year olds can't do their laces up or get to the bathroom on time before they soil their nappies. at least he's out there giving it whatever he has left. The dude could be sat at home with his slippers on enjoying his retirement. You can always turn the volume down on your tv set? |
|
By:
Had to laugh myself when he called warrendale wagyu travelling well as I backed it and knew it was goosed at that point.
Anyway woa big fella, here's the bucket . |
|
By:
Down to Hamilton (or Lanark according to tommo) for booking him for their biggest race evening, he doesn't usually commentate there.
|
|
By:
It's all very well saying his incompetent performance doesn't really matter , but isn't that symptomatic of racing's problems ? The commentary is probably the most important part of the experience for most racegoers ,and this chaps' efforts are simply not good enough .
Another example of a massive sport being run bu amateurs . |
|
By:
Thommo will go anywhere for a payday. ooooh that was close! The judge said treat his evidence with caution
 |
|
By:
Thommo will be employed because he is generally popular, hard as that is to believe to some.
i tend to watch a race with the sound down...stops you from being distracted. |
|
By:
OP sounds like a bitter old man, probably not, however the post does suggest very bitter person
I met DT at Perth and he was a very decent bloke, took time to talk to everyone, gave some info for the card ( not great) but he is paid to commentate. He is simply trying to make a living, and is an easy target for punters losing, wanting to blame anyone but them self. |
|
By:
TV Gold Morning Line 20th June 2009  |
|
By:
You forgot to mention his constant licking of his chops whilst commentating.
|
|
By:
Peter O'sullivan use to start a race off by saying, ''Thank you Richard, and they're away''.
The best of the best |
|
By:
Tommo is too old to be commentating. You need a sharp brain
|
|
By:
to be fair they're all pretty useless when it comes to the placings, Holt is the worst, Cattermole, say no more, backed one in the week at York first 6 places was only able to hear the race, it came fifth so nice return until I discovered it was 7th a length off 5th, cheers.
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
Luke as I said I really don't have a problem with DT doing his thing on the sidelines. I'm simply saying he shouldn't be commentating because he's no good at it. I'd be a useless commentator, but I'm not trying to be one.
|
|
By:
You have access to the jockey's colours, along with a pair of eyes to watch the race.
What more do you need? The days of yore when all one had was the extel commentary where the 'fav' was alway mentioned and you'd wait an eternity for the announcement of the winner that had won by a neck  |
|
By:
I remember when he got fined by the ASA for claiming on his tipping line he was on the gallops in Newmarket when he was actually in Dubai commentating.
|
|
By:
Yeah this mute button arguement cuts no ice with me. It's fine when watching back for styuding form, in fact preferable. But a good call is an essential part of the spectacle.
|
|
By:
Thommos part of the industry, his commentaries are from the 80's when you couldn't see what was happening and they all had a chance.
Had to laugh myself when he called warrendale wagyu travelling well as I backed it and knew it was goosed at that point. Every race has something "beginning to stay on", or "coming with a good looking run" when it's patently obvious they won't be winning he doesn't want to say it's goosed, or it won't be winning, cos you might think fk that everything i back is goosed / going backwards 3f out and walk out the shop. he doesn't want to tell you you're beat on the line, he wants you to think you've got a chance (no chance) in the phodo. all about keeping you interested / excited and having a bet on the next. |
|
By:
you were only jut beaten in a fodo finish, have a bet in the next you're getting close, your luck will change.
look at the results, beaten a length and a half. |
|
By:
how you get on in the bookies dave ? was unlucky, coming with a good looking run 3 furlongs out so i'm knocking on the door. i'll go back and have another bet in a bit.
says here you were tailed off dave ... |
|
By:
No in running markets in the 1980s.
|
|
By:
Let's leave this one to the judge.
|
|
By:
I watched this replay meeting on Friday night and one race he mentioned oh that's close when I thought it won 1/2 a length and waiting on final Furlong replay again the result appeared on screen won 1/2 length next 3 were covered by a head/neck
|
|
By:
There's a few commentators who are irritating, not sure if Thompson is actually the worst. O'Sullevan went on much too long, making plenty of mistakes, but presumably, people were too kind to tell him.
Not sure why in racing retirement age is viewed differently to other professions. By continuing well beyond retirement age it just creates a log jam in the system, and that's obviously not just commentators. |
|
By:
Whether they actually ever do come from ‘last…to first’ is a fact that never seems to bother thomo.
|
|
By:
DD wrote "There's a few commentators who are irritating, not sure if Thompson is actually the worst."
I agree with that - several have voices that only a mother could love and I just have to mute them regardlessof a reluctance to do that.But that's a subjective opinion. DT is NOT one of them. I can tolerate his voice, it's the quality of the service I'm commenting on. A caller could sound like Richard Burton licking honey, but if he's not actually relating whats happening and simply repeating the same script with different names every time he picks up a microphone, then sorry, but that's incompetence. As consumers we shouldn't have to be using the mute button on the basis of what's actually being said. |
|
By:
"Over to you Mr Judge" ....because I had my eyes tight shut
|
|
By:
You have a pair of eyes?
watch the race |
|
By:
the worst eyes were the ATR guys who thought it was a dead heat for 3rd.
|
|
By:
A lot of people on here are agreeing he's useless but saying leave him alone . What a second rate attitude
|
|
By:
swiftynifty 10 Sep 24 20:50
the worst eyes were the ATR guys who thought it was a dead heat for 3rd. Or the eyes that said a completely different horse King Sharja finished 3rd shown on ATR as well as the Racing Post for a short time. |
|
By:
maybe the judge called it wrong, I favour accuracy over speed, a bit like Betfair's instant settling when a stewards is possible.
|