Jump to content

Can someone put a sock in his mouth


neale
 Share

Recommended Posts

Burnicle you are an idiot, I am fed up of him whinging about Bou getting away with 5s. He said it was a 5 and in Geneva and now tonight....watch the action rather than eyeing up who is in the background and maybe you will see it correct. Learn the rules too !

Sorry rant over, can we get someone better next year ?

Burnicle is a great commentator.. He makes the whole event a bit more light hearted and has more knowledge than most common taters....

I bet that you couldn't think of anybody better?? Eh?... remember they have to be able to talk to the masses! Not just a load of trials geeks... erm thats if the masses bother to watch this repetitive circus?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

  • Replies 40
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Burnicle is indeed a great comentator, genuine enthusiasm, light hearted and amusing with a great appreciation of the skill shown by the riders. He also has a good depth of knowledge of all off-road disciplines with which he can fill in the gaps in the action. He brings a sense of humour which helps liven up what is essentially a pretty boring sport.

More importantly, unlike the MotoGP commentators on both BBC and Eurospport, he isn't stuffed so far up his own backside that he has to repeatedly let everyone know what each rider is thinking, is capable of, what is 'typical' of them (as per Ryder) or what they had for breakfast dinner and tea. They've really lost the art of commentating, all they want to do is let everyone know that they know the reasons for every move or mistake a rider makes, how everything works (including a rider's mind) and why they're winning or losing. It certainly is endless drivel from a know it all brigade.

Burnicle was right about Bou. He rolled backwards with his foot down in both events which is a 5 and it is difficult to understand why it wasn't given. It wasn't exactly hard to see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Dear Beta Beta

PLease explain to me why it wasn't a five.

I totally agree that the officials present had a better view than us and more knowledge of the rules than Jack does, however I have an FIM Clerk of the course licence for both Trials and enduro, I have been ACU delegate at more WC events than I can count. I was assistant Clerk Of The Course at British World Trial at Carlisle and I have total and absolute confidence in Dave Willoughby But I HAVE NO IDEA WHY THAT WASN'T A 5

and if that makes me incompetant well so be it

The only way I can see it being a five if you are not allowed to go backwards But I have seen Bou on several occasions when he has jumped the bike backwards. Or if this is allowed but the bike rolling backwards isn't I'm not sure, e.g last week in madrid on that huge red box step, he jumped backwards about 4 times But only just got the five when he actually jumped off the bike completely from his last attempt, I think when Bou jumps back off stuff it must be allowed as he has done it so many times before

If you noticed when Dabill messed the step up in Milan, Both of his feet came off the bike which is a five, But when Bou did it he still had one foot on the peg, So basically all he did was one dab.

I think Fujigas also knew that it was a single dab as well.

All in all though I think Jack is a good comentator & makes the event even more fun to watch. Can't be any worse than that commentator on Eurosport last year for the fort bill round.

Edited by BenBeta23
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
 

More importantly, unlike the MotoGP commentators on both BBC and Eurospport, he isn't stuffed so far up his own backside that he has to repeatedly let everyone know what each rider is thinking, is capable of, what is 'typical' of them (as per Ryder) or what they had for breakfast dinner and tea. They've really lost the art of commentating, all they want to do is let everyone know that they know the reasons for every move or mistake a rider makes, how everything works (including a rider's mind) and why they're winning or losing. It certainly is endless drivel from a know it all brigade.

Rubbish, I think the motogp comentators on eurosport do a fantastic job,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It's personal opnion obviously, so not something I'd bother arguing over

I think they used to do a good job a few years ago, I still like Moody's genuine excitement over the racing, but I just think informed opnion has evolved into an I know everything about everything attitude, particularly from Ryder. I'm fed up having chapter and verse on every aspect of Rossi's bloody shoulder for one.

I used to like Keith Heuwen on WSB. I like Burnicle and Whitham on WSB. Moody and Ryder I could like again if they'd just tone down the know it all attitude. Why does Ryder sound like he has a mouthful of sandwich when he's speaking..??

Jack's still the man for WTC.

Edited by Woody
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I thought Bou had 1 dab and Dabill had a 5 on the night.

I will watch it again and pass judgment with the benefit of Sky +

As for Jack Burnicle I think he does a very good job of what must be a very difficult task but he was wrong on his view of the controversial "dab or five".

The poor part of the Eurosport coverage is the editing or whatever its term is. Now that would be better with someone who understands trials so we don't end up with a close up of a sprocket at a critical time!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
 

I think that before slagging off Jack Burnicle then maybe the commentator who used to fill in on some rounds before should be worthy of a mention. Remember a five being called a fiasco and he literally had no idea who any of the riders were.

Jack Burnicle would know riders if he saw them in the street! He is tuned in with all the bike sports and actually makes the motocross half worth watching and that is like watching paint dry.

I remember Keith Heuwen and Julian Ryder doing a commentary on the old Bercy indoor in 1992? and they had no idea what was going on at all. All they talked about was speedway.

I think its an inenviable task doing commentary for a live broadcast when as we know trials riders are all finicky sods who criticise everything.

In relation to the alleged dodgy observing, there was no question that the decision was correct. The observer was stood right next to it when it happened and Dibs had both feet down at the back of the bike.

Toni however did his magnificent jump back as he does, landed and lost his balance then dabbed so was not actually going backwards when his foot went down. At a glance I understand why JB thought it was a five as it simply looked a bit like Dibs' failure but it was a completely different scenario.

On the whole JB is informative and does bring a bit of humour and excitement to the event. I know for a fact that I couldnt do his job. He mentions other events that we can relate to like the trials race at the tough one and the first BTC. The bit I miss is that he used to be quick at spying the pretty girls and he missed the 2 that were there on Saturday night :-)

I think the commentary at Sheffield is awful and ruins a good event. Fair enough Crosser knows what hes on about but they are off-putting for the riders.

Most people I know think the commentary at Sheffield lets it down but it wont change as Neil Crosswaite is in charge and Martin is his son.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I like Jack's style and having spent a few days working with him, have seen first hand that it really is a difficult task to continually find something to talk about. Never saw any eurosport coverage but watched every round on the FIM website. Some rounds were without commentary but most had someone talking. Not sure who it was but it was pretty good and at one round Dabill joined him to help (sure he'd rather of been riding though).

Its not very often trials is on TV so I'm just happy with whatever I can see and will listen to whomever is tasked with talking about it. Peter Purvis wasn't a trials expert and got a few things wrong but for the average man of the street he allowed them to understand what was happening. Sure Jack isn't as knowledgeable as some on here but he manages to connect with a wider audience range. I'm sure Jack does a better job than any of us could do but theirs always the option to turn the volume down if it causes that much offense.

Edited by billycraig
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The bit I miss is that he used to be quick at spying the pretty girls and he missed the 2 that were there on Saturday night :-)

Yes, I used to enjoy his 'commentary' on the girls. Sad state of today's PC B*****ks has obviously gagged him from continuing with that aspect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Dear Beta Beta

PLease explain to me why it wasn't a five.

I totally agree that the officials present had a better view than us and more knowledge of the rules than Jack does, however I have an FIM Clerk of the course licence for both Trials and enduro, I have been ACU delegate at more WC events than I can count. I was assistant Clerk Of The Course at British World Trial at Carlisle and I have total and absolute confidence in Dave Willoughby But I HAVE NO IDEA WHY THAT WASN'T A 5

and if that makes me incompetant well so be it

From reading this and the subsequent posts it appears that only yourself and Jack believe it was a 5.

I'm not a rules expert, however as I understand it there are slightly different rules for ITWC (X Trial) to WTC.

For example when they teeter on the edge of something and use both feet not only on the pegs but also to get up the obstacle. Outdoors I think that is a different call to indoors as is going up something, not making it, coming down, taking a dab, getting your feet up and trying again.

I'm pretty sure that outdoors this is deemed a 5 but indoors it is NOT a 5 hence Bou got a 1.

Dabill, went backwards and with both feet off the bike thus meaning he had only his hands on the bike and not having control over the bike at all. Bou went backwards then put one foot down with one on the peg and both hands on the bar, thus being in control of the bike. As you will have witnessed on one section where most riders put a foot down, lifted the front, then dropped off the top - in control. Pretty damn sure you couldn't try that with both feet off the pegs :rolleyes:

As per previous post you could nullify a lot of JB's ramblings with a co-commentator. JB as the professional commentator doing most of the filling the gaps (and hopefully talking less about the buildings architects and year it was built) and a co-commentator with trials and rider knowledge who could actually discuss what happened/will happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Burnicle is indeed a great comentator, genuine enthusiasm, light hearted and amusing with a great appreciation of the skill shown by the riders. He also has a good depth of knowledge of all off-road disciplines with which he can fill in the gaps in the action. He brings a sense of humour which helps liven up what is essentially a pretty boring sport.

More importantly, unlike the MotoGP commentators on both BBC and Eurospport, he isn't stuffed so far up his own backside that he has to repeatedly let everyone know what each rider is thinking, is capable of, what is 'typical' of them (as per Ryder) or what they had for breakfast dinner and tea. They've really lost the art of commentating, all they want to do is let everyone know that they know the reasons for every move or mistake a rider makes, how everything works (including a rider's mind) and why they're winning or losing. It certainly is endless drivel from a know it all brigade.

I have to agree with all of the above, Burnicle is a fantastic commentator in many peoples eyes and a true legend to boot.. Ryder and Moody are very bias towards certain riders [normally those with the best hospitality tents!!] which can be annoying. Mr Burnicle however knows alot of riders personally and he's happy to abuse them if he feels they have done wrong. His knowledge in Trials, Enduro, Motocross, WSB and BSB international and club level is immense, and if he's not commentating on TV he's normally track side on the loud speaker. I'd much rather listen to him than some of the clueless folk that Sky sports employ just because they know the producer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
 

It's personal opnion obviously, so not something I'd bother arguing over

I think they used to do a good job a few years ago, I still like Moody's genuine excitement over the racing, but I just think informed opnion has evolved into an I know everything about everything attitude, particularly from Ryder. I'm fed up having chapter and verse on every aspect of Rossi's bloody shoulder for one.

I used to like Keith Heuwen on WSB. I like Burnicle and Whitham on WSB. Moody and Ryder I could like again if they'd just tone down the know it all attitude. Why does Ryder sound like he has a mouthful of sandwich when he's speaking..??

Jack's still the man for WTC.

I agree that Whitham and Burnicle are excellent on WSB, as for Ryder - he probably does have a sandwich in his mouth!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


×
  • Create New...