Grand Prix Rejects

At approx 0.45 = great moments in Gabriele Tarquini punditry: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnXDEw3g ... re=related

What an inhumane noise.

watka wrote:At approx 0.45 = great moments in Gabriele Tarquini punditry: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnXDEw3g ... re=related

What an inhumane noise.

That Tarquini commentary just goes to show why, for all his mistakes and partisan bias, we all love Murray Walker. A passionate, natural reaction to a spectacular motorsport moment.

On topic: Well done to Gabriele! Tarquini for F1 2010? Lotus? USF1?

watka wrote:At approx 0.45 = great moments in Gabriele Tarquini punditry: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnXDEw3g ... re=related

What an inhumane noise.

It is inhuman, but I think that is the sort of squeals any of us produced when seeing crashes like that on motorsport. We need more commentators like Murray Walkey, i.e., alive.

CarlosFerreira wrote:It is inhuman, but I think that is the sort of squeals any of us produced when seeing crashes like that on motorsport. We need more commentators like Murray Walkey, i.e., alive.

And into the pitlane....OAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!-I never saw that before!

Just unforgettable...

Warren Hughes wrote:

watka wrote:At approx 0.45 = great moments in Gabriele Tarquini punditry: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnXDEw3g ... re=related

What an inhumane noise.

That Tarquini commentary just goes to show why, for all his mistakes and partisan bias, we all love Murray Walker. A passionate, natural reaction to a spectacular motorsport moment.

Better still, according to Murray's autobiography, since the BBC were reducing the BTCC to half-hour edits, Murray had actually studied the edited vision in detail and made notes before recording his commentary to it. In other words, he knew this crash was coming up. And yet he still makes it sound completely spontaneous and natural.

I know this is off-topic, but the one thing I've noticed that Murray could do that Allen and Legard has not done, apart from the passion of his delivery, is actually to fill his descriptions will heaps of detail - detail about the background and recent results of the driver in view, about the speed and gear of the corner etc. etc. - that way he just kept on talking which meshed well with the constant movement of the cars. Whereas Allen and Legard, when there's nothing to describe, run out of things to say, try to start a discussion with Brundle etc.

eytl wrote:I know this is off-topic, but the one thing I've noticed that Murray could do that Allen and Legard has not done, apart from the passion of his delivery, is actually to fill his descriptions will heaps of detail - detail about the background and recent results of the driver in view, about the speed and gear of the corner etc. etc. - that way he just kept on talking which meshed well with the constant movement of the cars. Whereas Allen and Legard, when there's nothing to describe, run out of things to say, try to start a discussion with Brundle etc.

The current U.S. commentary does exactly what Murray Walker used to do, fortunately. James Allen and Jonathan Legard are both boring as hell and seem barely interested, as a sidenote...

eytl wrote:Better still, according to Murray's autobiography, since the BBC were reducing the BTCC to half-hour edits, Murray had actually studied the edited vision in detail and made notes before recording his commentary to it. In other words, he knew this crash was coming up. And yet he still makes it sound completely spontaneous and natural.

I know this is off-topic, but the one thing I've noticed that Murray could do that Allen and Legard has not done, apart from the passion of his delivery, is actually to fill his descriptions will heaps of detail - detail about the background and recent results of the driver in view, about the speed and gear of the corner etc. etc. - that way he just kept on talking which meshed well with the constant movement of the cars. Whereas Allen and Legard, when there's nothing to describe, run out of things to say, try to start a discussion with Brundle etc.

And he did that also in F1 races?

You mean study the footage beforehand? He did that for some of the early races when the BBC only showed highlights, though apparently the camerawork for races in other countries was terrible (the Spanish director showed Mario Andretti leading by himself for half the race). But from about 1980 onwards almost every race was live, and commentated on live. One thing to mention though, he and James Hunt would for the races a long way away (Japan, Brazil, Canada etc) pretend to be at the track, and actually be in London commentating from BBC HQ. They'd pretend by saying things like "I can't see the pits from my position" or "Its very hot today". Murray's a legend, every year now I pursue the Australian coverage of the Aussie GP with his commentary.

Debaser wrote:One thing to mention though, he and James Hunt would for the races a long way away (Japan, Brazil, Canada etc) pretend to be at the track, and actually be in London commentating from BBC HQ. They'd pretend by saying things like "I can't see the pits from my position" or "Its very hot today".

And how do you know that?

http://www.fiawtcc.com/Read_News.asp?idnews=430
Nice