What's new

"The standard of commentary has gone down all over the world": Chishty Mujahid

James said:
Fine post Abid Z.

The only part I'd question is why you feel apologetic for potentially 'offending' anybody. It is a credit to you that you would think in such a respectful way, but really there should no problem for many of us to disagree with the outrageous statement in the OP title.
Click to expand...

James - have you read the interview?
 
Just listening to Mr. Mujahid on TV now - there is so much class in the way he delivers his sentences. Amazing how some of us have a habit of denigrating our own to please others.
 
James said:
I don't see how Nick Knight being on the Sky team defeats my points particularly.

'Your man' is Irish slang, it means the guy you were just talking about. (I'm Anglo-Irish so I use it occasionally.)
Click to expand...

You made a generic statement about Sky. My point is Nick Knight is also a Sky commentator who is extremely poor and you have conveniently ignored. Paul Allott and Bob Willis also work for Sky, they aren't exactly world class commentators are they. So the point I'm making and that you are probably ignoring is that not ALL of Sky's commentators are brilliant. Some are, some are not so good.

Mujahid isn't my man. Hope that's clear.
 
Last edited:
Wonderful interview! Always a pleasure to hear Chisty from those matches in the 90s especially in Sharjah. Certain tehzeeb and tarika in his voice and manner that has all but gone from the present day commentators.
 
It really is a fantastic interview and fantastic to read about his views. He comes across as a very knowledgeable man, as you would expect, and clearly very passionate about the game.

I do agree with many on this thread though that his commentary feels a little bit out of place at times, certainly on TV. He seems to describe some very obvious things which the viewer can see and doesn't really need any further input. I feel he is slightly better suited to radio due to the detail with which he likes to describe the on-field play.
 
Misbah takes single on the last ball and Chishti says "wants to rotate the strike and give it to Sarfraz".:)))
 
With all due respect, MeninG, I think you are blinded by your nostalgia goggles to see that Chishty Mujahid really isn't that amazing of a commie
 
^ Kind of reminds me of Tony Greig. He would sometimes not recognize immediately situations such as whether a close catch was dropped or whether an inside edge bowled a batsman. The only logical explanation is that they dont watch the coverage on the monitors simultaneously.
 
Nuekboi said:
With all due respect, MeninG, I think you are blinded by your nostalgia goggles to see that Chishty Mujahid really isn't that amazing of a commie
Click to expand...

True - call it nostalgia or a want to go back to the golden age of our cricket.

Anyways - pls do read the interview.
 
MenInG said:
One's a seasoned law graduate from Cambridge and the other is - well I'd rather not say. Yes, I can see the difference in class here.
Click to expand...

You know I was not even talking about that point, its more about how he doesn't seem to have anything Pakistani about him, talks in a strange accent, uses strange British terms, and talks in the most drowned out voice that would make even Michael Holding sound energized
 
MenInG said:
No you havent offended anyone as you have merely stated an opinion. To each their own.

All I ask is for you to read the Interview and cherish what our country has produced.

I am also wondering if the the ones who dislike Chishty are mostly people who live outside Pakistan as clearly his style does not suit them.

The reason I mention his education is simply to show his class - but then I am also from another generation where education mattered and still does.
Click to expand...

Ok MiG let me start by reiterating a few points.

Yes I read the interview. It was a good and very down to earth interview by somebody who has been a servant of the game for a long time. Had I been doing the interview I wouldnt have chosen the title as it is a rather flippant title to a hearty debate. Something along the lines of "Tamsha cricket commentary is drowning TV coverage around the World" would have been a little more apt but also far from perfect but at least would have encompassed the sentiment of IPL jingoism and corporate cronyism better.

However my issue isn't with the interview or title as I respect that you have taken the time out to bring the interview to us through a voluntary donation of your time. But now that you have done that, the more thorny issue remains, which goes beyond the words you write but expresses your mindset.

This is illustrated by the following posts.

One's a seasoned law graduate from Cambridge and the other is - well I'd rather not say. Yes, I can see the difference in class here
Click to expand...
.

All I ask is for you to read the Interview and cherish what our country has produced.

I am also wondering if the the ones who dislike Chishty are mostly people who live outside Pakistan as clearly his style does not suit them.

The reason I mention his education is simply to show his class - but then I am also from another generation where education mattered and still does.
Click to expand...

What in effect you are saying is that Cambridge education in effect imbues him with a certain authority. This is elitist and endorses a position of privilege where you suggest that his education should be taken as a factor in commentary. British University education is peer reviewed and external examining boards are appointed to ensure across the board standardisation to eradicate exactly the kind of biases of class we are discussing. Your endorsing of it, enforces crass class divisions many of us who work and compete with Oxbridge people are scornful of exactly this kind of privilege where we work hard and achieve on merit and they throw their brand around to open doors.

Secondly, you suggest that this has something to do with "our country" this is akin to focusing on the medium and not the message. In essence you are suggesting the medium is the message. I would have the same view on his commentary whatever country he was from. His nationality is not what I pay the subscription for, its his commentary and that is dire.

Thirdly you suggest that many critics disliking of him might be due to being from abroad. I take great offence at this reductionist and presumptuous comment. Although based in England, i love Pakistan and have great memories of living there for many many years. But that doesn't mean i will take a non-critical stance towards all things Pakistani, whether they are icons or not. You are endorsing a cult of personality where you feel that he should be respected for who is is. I disagree. I suggest he should earn respect by being a good commentator here today which he isn't.

Now language could be an issue, his command of English is poor, but maybe he is a good urdu commentator. As I am fluent in both i would happily listen to his Urdu commentary but right now he is speaking in very antiquate English. Its what you call "eloquence of language over clarity of thought" He seems to enjoy using ornate statements but completely out of context almost as if he just enjoys exercising his vocal cords and they are devoid of analysis, insight and completely ahistoric.

You could do me the courtesy of expanding on whether you agree that he has any of the qualities a Good Commentator has as expressed in my post 68. Until then please leave your bias aside.
 
^Spot on again.

MenInG said:
James - have you read the interview?
Click to expand...

I have. I thank you for providing the interview and I look forward to more PP exclusives in future. I have always supported this site and my feedback genuinely comes with the respect that I can muster out of my nature, although my tone can be ambiguous in text and I admit that. What I think is that some of the answers were insightful and enjoyable, some less so, while the answer on current commentary was problematic and small-minded.

Still, I probably wouldn't have commented if not for the chosen title, because it references this issue only and so colours the OP in a certain fashion; add in the repeated assertions of him being highly respected (by whom?) with his Oxbridge education (so what?) as opposed to actually dealing with different opinions, and the whole exercise begins to feel rather patronising. You see, it isn't only the interview and the man himself that people read and interpret, it is the way the staff present them. And although you have claimed otherwise, the counter-arguments to this narrative have been rather pertinent, mostly articulate, and absolutely relevant.

In short, many legitimate points have been raised in this thread that do not view Mr Mujahid, his outlook, his background and his commentary through those favourable tinted spectacles, and they are worth taking on board for when future interviews are presented.
 
Perhaps it is his Urdu commentary that people love. But his English commentary isn't something that sets the scene on fire for me. He called Williams Villiams and that made me lol uncontrollably.
 
Kiwi said:
I find the coverage quite boring... NZ, Australian, SA and the English commentators are much better..
Click to expand...

Sorry but most NZ commentators I have heard are either utterly annoying or blindingly bias, or both.
 
and they are worth taking on board for when future interviews are presented.
Click to expand...

I find your tone patronising actually.

We'll present the interviews how we want, not how you want.
 
James said:
^Spot on again.



I have. I thank you for providing the interview and I look forward to more PP exclusives in future. I have always supported this site and my feedback genuinely comes with the respect that I can muster out of my nature, although my tone can be ambiguous in text and I admit that. What I think is that some of the answers were insightful and enjoyable, some less so, while the answer on current commentary was problematic and small-minded.

Still, I probably wouldn't have commented if not for the chosen title, because it references this issue only and so colours the OP in a certain fashion; add in the repeated assertions of him being highly respected (by whom?) with his Oxbridge education (so what?) as opposed to actually dealing with different opinions, and the whole exercise begins to feel rather patronising. You see, it isn't only the interview and the man himself that people read and interpret, it is the way the staff present them. And although you have claimed otherwise, the counter-arguments to this narrative have been rather pertinent, mostly articulate, and absolutely relevant.

In short, many legitimate points have been raised in this thread that do not view Mr Mujahid, his outlook, his background and his commentary through those favourable tinted spectacles, and they are worth taking on board for when future interviews are presented.
Click to expand...

Wow James. Have you completely lost it mate?

Suggest you keep your opinions of our interviews to yourselves - I dont kill myself everyday for providing content on PP for people like you.

Absolutely disgusted by your patronizing tone.
 
Convict said:
Maxwell is a legend.

He's the ABC radio main man.

He's not actually with TMS. The ABC and TMS just chose to do a combined telecast to save money (similar to how channel 9 just used the sky feed and gave it to Australians on free to air tv).

I'd expect TMS to combine with the ABC again this summer.
Click to expand...

Yes i can see why he is such a legend. Really clear, engaging and acerbic style of commentary. I would be very careful with my words if i was around him. Was a real match for Boycott.
 
Saj said:
I find your tone patronising actually.

We'll present the interviews how we want, not how you want.
Click to expand...

Saj you were recently on Radio 4 TMS, think it was in June when you had to list a favourites from Sub continent team. How was the TMS team with you..were they interested in Pakpassion? were they keen on knowing and collaborating with you guys at some informal level?

Did you also go to the Aagra in Bradford when the Pakistan team came here in 2010? It was supposed to be with Wasim but he pulled out and we had the team plus Younis (who was banned) and Geoff boycott alongside Ramiz and was interesting night.
 
yeah no words to explain his class, so calm, so cool and so selective
seems to be Kishore is singing
 
MRSN said:
Harsha Bhogle is unbearable when a batsman is scoring quick runs..:afridi he's only good for interviews..
Click to expand...

I love Harsha Bhogle, he always say something funny. Sahstri always sounds like he is having constipation. Gavaskar is good too, he is unfunny sometimes, but he sounds so inncoent. Is Chisty commentating Pak vs NZ ?
 
Would have loved more Aussie commentators during the Pak v Aus series. They are really biased commentators.




Sent from iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Why is Chisty Mujahid back with his references from the 70's again
 
Yeah! commentary has become really poor today. What's also shocking is the bias from commentators especially those from India, England, Australia, South Africa and Zimbabwe. Commentators like Ravi and Harsha of India over-hype their players and hardly give praise to the players of other teams. Ramiz may say stupid things at times but he's not bias.
 
chisty is a living legend. i wish we had blofeld back as well
 
Chisty is a fine commentator. We need to get rid of Rameez 'broken record' Raja though asap.
 
The problem with sports commentary as a whole is that everything has become so dumbed down and bland. Cricket is not the only sport that's suffered from this - I cannot tell you many football pundits out there are stealing a living - totally devoid of any enthusiasm or speak with any coherence.

Instead of providing extra analysis - we simply just hear the mic men telling us what we as the viewers can plainly see on television !

Sky are the benchmark, with the likes of Hussain, Atherton, Lloyd, Gower, Holding et al. who all do a fantastic job. Blowers, Agnew and Boycott are all great on the BBC. But its mainly because they all have a personality, and you can tell they genuinely enjoy working with each other. They're all great storytellers and can put the match into a narrative. I like Harsha Bhogle who even though he's a little rose-tinted about Indian cricket at times, he's very educated and actually sounds like he WANTS to be in the commentary booth - whereas others just sound they're there to pick up a paycheck.

It seems the commentary is a by-product of the commercialisation of sports in general. Quick, snappy soundbites are what the audience have been educated to want - so the likes of Chisty Mujahid's radio-style commentary will appear outdated to the current generation.
 
anuk said:
chisty is a living legend. i wish we had blofeld back as well
Click to expand...

Blowers is still around - just not on TV anymore but he still does TMS. He's got a voice that most non-UK people think all British people have :))

He does the occasional stage appearances too, and is hilarious:

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/NW4fISElkmk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 
Heard him a couple of times, to each his own but his commentary is cringeworthy and pretty one dimensional. Keeps repeating regal shot regal shot again and again.
 
Arham_PakFan said:
Chishty,along with the other commies has been quite poor in this tournament.
Click to expand...

Think they have run out of things to say! I mean if teams are scoring 300+ with so much ease, what is there to describe?
 
MenInG said:
Think they have run out of things to say! I mean if teams are scoring 300+ with so much ease, what is there to describe?
Click to expand...

True, other things discussed in the same match (and this is within one hour)

50 times why Shehzad was at 3 and probably a conspiracy (from the previous match)
Arif Lohar concert
Monuments from the Victorian era
Kamran Akmal not sitting with the players and abusing seniority/rank
Arif Lohar concert again
Price differences of 100 rupees for Pakistan Cup and 3400 Rs (equivalent) for Kent match.
Mohd Waseem chillaxing and smoking in the comm box on live TV.
 
Chisty is the 3rd worst commentator behind Atahar and Arnold. Time to retire and let us hear some live commentary.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
"I don't think anyone has doubts over the ability of Shadab Khan & Azam Khan, they play and perform all over the world": Mohammad Amir
Replies
16
Views
803
BouncerGuy
BouncerGuy
BouncerGuy
“We are eagerly looking forward to measure ourselves against South Africa, who have always been one of the top sides in the world": Shan Masood
Replies
5
Views
282
Cricket Warrior
C
B
Was the pitch for the 5th Test between Australia and India in Sydney fair for Test match cricket?
Replies
23
Views
405
deltexas
D
N
Does Champions Cup has the highest standard of bowling among all list A competitions?
Replies
11
Views
418
Muhammad Saad
M
BouncerGuy
[VIDEOS] "Hundred percent I will play for Pakistan again": Fakhar Zaman
Replies
47
Views
815
Cricket Warrior
C
Back
Top