What's new

Your impressions of New Zealand TV Commentators

K

Kaka4pope

Tape Ball Star
Joined
Mar 31, 2011
Runs
744
Been tuning in for the first couple of ODIs, have to say the NZ commentary team are great - Styris, Richardson, Smith is it? and there was also a lady who's name I don't know...(there's more names i'm sure)

Between them they carry the ODI so well and have to say - even give England with Nasser/Athers a run for their money...
 
Love listening to Ian Smith's commentary. He's not insightful at all but he's so easy on the ears. I find Simon Doull to be the dullest but I find commentary in NZ enjoyable. And they are biased? Like how? Examples please.
 
Better than their Australian counterparts for the most part. Probably the third best bunch behind the English trinity and the South African commentators.
 
Another reason why I can't stand cricket in New Zealand. If it isn't the incessant rain, biased umpires, weird TV graphics, awful time zone for the majority of the world, or small boundaries, its their biased commentary.

Other than the foreign commentator, you barely hear them discuss the opposition. There's no comparison to Sky - they always give their due to the opposition and give a decent amount of time analysing the opposing team.

I don't like this recent adoption of a 3 man commentary booth either. We see it with SuperSport in South Africa as well - talk about overkill.
 
Its certainly a lower budget production than other series (like the Ashes), and if it is bias - well it may be to do with Pakistan not having turned up so far - if they are to do so.

They praised Shadab and Hasan well enough for their 50s and if they are spending time commending their team, its because they're a good side and a very confident one at home, as many teams are.

Perhaps there are times when it gets nostalgic - but i quite like their easy going style.

Is any broadcaster doing the games in Urdu by the way?
 
Ian Smith is biased, the others are fine.

The reason why they talk up NZ players is because they have to. They have to sell Kiwis on them and make them out to be stars, if they don't sell them why on earth would people watch them? NZ isn't a cricket mad country where they'll watch no matter what.
 
Last edited:
Markhor said:
Another reason why I can't stand cricket in New Zealand. If it isn't the incessant rain, biased umpires, weird TV graphics, awful time zone for the majority of the world, or small boundaries, its their biased commentary.

Other than the foreign commentator, you barely hear them discuss the opposition. There's no comparison to Sky - they always give their due to the opposition and give a decent amount of time analysing the opposing team.

I don't like this recent adoption of a 3 man commentary booth either. We see it with SuperSport in South Africa as well - talk about overkill.
Click to expand...
They discuss star players, you have none atm. Afridi would have been highlighted if he was in the team. The likes of Dhoni, Kohli, Sachin, Steyn, AB etc. have all been highlighted whenever they have toured. These are names casuals recognize and the ones that draw fans. But this is generally the case everywhere.
 
Last edited:
SensiblePakFan said:
They are probably the most biased of the bunch, even more than indians and aussies.
Click to expand...
Maybe if you weren't such pushovers and won games, they'd praise you more.

Hell, they've been over praising the Pakistani's and making themselves look foolish with the performances Pakistan are producing.Reminds of the the first Test at the Gabba between NZ and Aus when the 9 commentators tried to sell NZ to Aussie fans only to be crushed.
 
Not buying the not praising pak enough. Ian Smith was purring about 3 shots faheem played in the first game, even into the 2nd game.
Hafeezs timing was impressing them and so were Shadab/hasan
 
I enjoy cricket in NZ the most

Its my wish to one day watch a test match sitting on the grass banks in Dunedin
 
I like them much better than the biased Australian Commentary Team. Ian Smith's voice is particularly best for voice over roles I find it hard to believe he's 60 from his voice! Their conversations are interesting and considerate of the opposing team-unlike Aussies who just love to talk about themselves. Though English commentators are quite better
 
Abdullah said:
Not buying the not praising pak enough. Ian Smith was purring about 3 shots faheem played in the first game, even into the 2nd game.
Hafeezs timing was impressing them and so were Shadab/hasan
Click to expand...

Yep, remember listening to all this.
 
Good summation for me - I've preferred it to BT's commentary for the ashes, and they have all the gizmos at their disposal.
 
They're terrible, listening to them you'd think their team is Windies from the 80's.
 
Better than Ramiz Raja.
Atleast my ears won't bleed for this series.
 
Aman said:
They discuss star players, you have none atm. Afridi would have been highlighted if he was in the team. The likes of Dhoni, Kohli, Sachin, Steyn, AB etc. have all been highlighted whenever they have toured. These are names casuals recognize and the ones that draw fans. But this is generally the case everywhere.
Click to expand...

the other team is not there just for the dance ormake numbers......In england even if u are losing they will discuss the reasons ,,,,why should and will i lesson t scot styris always talking about williamson or tims southe???
 
They are not biased,

Alter_Ego said:
As bias as they get apart from Ian Smith.
Click to expand...

You fans are biased who still think Malik is the freatest player. Only NZ and ENG have 80% commentators that are good.
Pak india Aus have the worst
 
Last edited by a moderator:
New Zealand commentators always speak from NZ team point of view, Ian Smith and Jeremy Coney are someone I'm listening to since childhood, so it is nice to hear them coupled with watching around the the most beautiful scenery in the cricketing world esp. Napier, Nelson and Hamilton. They do appreciate the other side also like Hasan Ali's batting or shots hit by Fahim and Fakhar in the first odi.

Don't know if Coney is still commentating, some fellow by name of Cummins and a lady commentator has joined in.
 
pub commentary, like when sarfraz gets out he says "go on son!". Is this a cricket match or premier league with your mates??
 
I enjoy their commentary. One or two are biased but even they will applaud good cricket when they see it. If anything, they've been overhyping our team to sell the series.
 
I enjoy listening to Scott Styris. But before today I never thought these guys were bad or biased but there lack of attention towards Pakistan players is definitely disheartening but they do love to bang there own drums about there players.
 
I find them amongst the most biased commentators in the world and awful to listen to.

I remember a few years ago when they were laughing at the names of Pakistani players, not realising they were actually on air.
 
backfootpunch said:
spot on - commentary is atrocious. Most biased as it gets
Click to expand...

Yeah every now and then Waqar Younis will say something about a Pakistani player and when he is done speaking the NZ commentators continue talking about their own player as if Waqar Younis hasn’t said anything.
 
They are boring.

In fact, cricket in NZ is boring. They need to play more in stadiums like Eden Park and Westpac Park. Seems like no one is in the ground even with sold out.
 
UP said:
They are boring.

In fact, cricket in NZ is boring. They need to play more in stadiums like Eden Park and Westpac Park. Seems like no one is in the ground even with sold out.
Click to expand...
Stadium games work best for big draw teams who can draw a big crowd. Pakistan would get a good crowd for a T20,not sure about an ODI game though.
 
Sounds like most people agree they are biased, but have different reasons for why they are.
 
j_kazmi said:
Yeah every now and then Waqar Younis will say something about a Pakistani player and when he is done speaking the NZ commentators continue talking about their own player as if Waqar Younis hasn’t said anything.
Click to expand...
Because most of them know nothing of Pakistan's players.

Pakistan's games are rarely shown shown here.
 
Last edited:
Aman said:
They discuss star players, you have none atm. Afridi would have been highlighted if he was in the team. The likes of Dhoni, Kohli, Sachin, Steyn, AB etc. have all been highlighted whenever they have toured. These are names casuals recognize and the ones that draw fans. But this is generally the case everywhere.
Click to expand...

Yeah no big deal just the no 1 bowler in the world.
 
The intelligent Supporter said:
Yeah no big deal just the no 1 bowler in the world.
Click to expand...
yes, someone most of the cricket world knows nothing of.

I probably watch cricket more than the commentators and I haven't seen enough of him to call him anything.

You grossly overestimate how much cricket Pakistan cricket is watched.

They aren't a big drawing team like Aus, India or SA who has the cricket world's attention on them.
 
Last edited:
Kane, Boult and Guptill are proven players who have performed for years and I would struggle to call them superstars,
 
I don't pay much attention to what they say. To engrossed in the match:uks
 
Aman said:
yes, someone most of the cricket world knows nothing of.

I probably watch cricket more than the commentators and I haven't seen enough of him to call him anything.

You grossly overestimate how much cricket Pakistan cricket is watched.

They aren't a big drawing team like Aus, India or SA who has the cricket world's attention on them.
Click to expand...

I mean it is not Pakistan Cricket team's fault when NZ is taken down by Bangladesh of all teams.

All eyes were focused on the Champions Trophy and thas where he shone through. His spell against SA or England / Sri Lanka even India ( Dhoni) was enough to get him some attention.

Now after his entertaining innings of batting and trademark celebrations etc, hes bound to get more attention.

The commies would make it Kane-mentary and just talk about how awesome Captain Williamson is all the game, if they could. Clear bias

And trust me when I say Pakistan Cricket team is followed more closely than you think. A nice example would be comments across social media and so many non Pakistanis seemed to follow along along Babar's scores very closely.
 
PakLFC said:
I don't pay much attention to what they say. To engrossed in the match:uks
Click to expand...

I weirdly relate to this. Most times their "input" is way too obvious and if you watching the game they add nothing much .

Harsha Bhogle is one guy who I enjoy listening to more closely than the match sometimes.
 
The intelligent Supporter said:
I mean it is not Pakistan Cricket team's fault when NZ is taken down by Bangladesh of all teams.

All eyes were focused on the Champions Trophy and thas where he shone through. His spell against SA or England / Sri Lanka even India ( Dhoni) was enough to get him some attention.

Now after his entertaining innings of batting and trademark celebrations etc, hes bound to get more attention.

The commies would make it Kane-mentary and just talk about how awesome Captain Williamson is all the game, if they could. Clear bias

And trust me when I say Pakistan Cricket team is followed more closely than you think. A nice example would be comments across social media and so many non Pakistanis seemed to follow along along Babar's scores very closely.
Click to expand...
Pakistanis follow Pakistan.

The teams which attract are most likely to grab neutral interest are Aus, India, SA and England.

I agree they overrate Kane, but they're trying to make him the next face of NZC and a star in NZ. He isn't, he's well below a dozen + rugby players.
 
Last edited:
They cannot be worse than the SA commentators. Even when India were bowling well, they kept on talking about how SA can increase the lead. I think the SA tour to India hurt everyone in South Africa.
 
Aman said:
Pakistanis follow Pakistan.

The teams which attract are most likely to grab neutral interest are Aus, India, SA and England.

I agree they overrate Kane, but they're trying to make him the next face of NZC and a star in NZ. He isn't, he's well below a dozen + rugby players.
Click to expand...

What are you basing this on? Your own opinion?
 
MeanAndGreen said:
What are you basing this on? Your own opinion?
Click to expand...
Common sense.

Most people would want to watch the big teams, quality cricket and stars, those teams have most of the top stars in the game and generally produce the best quality cricket. These are the teams you want to beat because they're the top sides.
 
Aman said:
Common sense.

Most people would want to watch the big teams, quality cricket and stars, those teams have most of the top stars in the game and generally produce the best quality cricket. These are the teams you want to beat because they're the top sides.
Click to expand...


What are you defining as neutral in this case? Fans of NZL, BANG, SL and WI?
 
Aman said:
Anyone that has no horse in the race.
Click to expand...

Strictly speaking that doesnt make someone a neutral. For example, an Indian will always follow Pakistan cricket more closely than English or South African cricket. That doesn't make PAK a better team than ENG or SA and it doesn't make it a more attractive proposition - its simply due to the history between IND and PAK. Same thing b/w ENG and AUS.

At the end of the day these are just unquantified statements based on personal opinion. The fact of the matter is that if you are being paid to voice your opinion on an international broadcast, at least go to the effort of mentioning the opposition and knowing their players. It's not like we're the Kenyan cricket team either; we have a rich cricketing history, we've reached No.1 test/T20 status and won the CT all in the last 18 months.
 
Last edited:
MeanAndGreen said:
Strictly speaking that doesnt make someone a neutral. For example, an Indian will always follow Pakistan cricket more closely than English or South African cricket. That doesn't make PAK a better team than ENG or SA and it doesn't make it a more attractive proposition - its simply due to the history between IND and PAK. Same thing b/w ENG and AUS.

At the end of the day these are just unquantified statements based on personal opinion. The fact of the matter is that if you are being paid to voice your opinion on an international broadcast, at least go to the effort of mentioning the opposition and knowing their players. It's not like we're the Kenyan cricket team either; we have a rich cricketing history, we've reached No.1 test/T20 status and won the CT all in the last 18 months.
Click to expand...
It's not opinion based whatsoever, it's common sense.

These are the teams that draw and sell tickets. Why is it everyone wants to play these teams and not NZ, Pakistan, SL, WI etc.

There is no way for these guys to watch these players legally in NZ. Pakistan's matches are not televised.
 
Last edited:
I think there is much of a muchness about New Zealand commentators, one rarely hears any thought-provoking exchanges that stick in memory or makes one learn anything new about the game. It used to be rather different when Sky NZ employed Coney and Crowe in the box at the turn of the century, but sadly it seemed those two annoyed their paymasters due to being overly forthright and were consequently jettisoned.

People in England are extremely fortunate to have Sky UK as broadcaster, because their commentators are frankly nonpareil. The only other bunch of commentators that I love listening are to the West Indian trio of Ian Bishop, Jeff Dujon and Fazeer Mohammad, that would honestly sound so much better if the Caribbean had a successful cricket team.

I'd rank commentary teams as follows:

1. Sky UK
2. Sony/Ten's broadcast team in the West Indies
3. Supersport
4. Sky NZ
5. BCCI broadcast team
6. Sony/Ten's broadcast team in SL
7. Sony/Ten's broadcast team in UAE
8. Nine
 
Last edited:
Aman said:
Pakistanis follow Pakistan.

The teams which attract are most likely to grab neutral interest are Aus, India, SA and England.

I agree they overrate Kane, but they're trying to make him the next face of NZC and a star in NZ. He isn't, he's well below a dozen + rugby players.
Click to expand...

I think After Aus , Ind,... Pakistan would be pretty close with other teams like SA and England for neutral viewing mostly especially in LOI.
In tests SA are greatly followed and so are England but only in home games. I would say it is very true in tournaments especially if SA , England and Pak were all playing matches on the same day in a world cup, Pak will draw in a lot of neutrals. ( Not saying we are better than SA and England , just the element of unpredicatability that makes us a superior watch)
 
Aman said:
It's not opinion based whatsoever, it's common sense.

These are the teams that draw and sell tickets. Why is it everyone wants to play these teams and not NZ, Pakistan, SL, WI etc.

There is no way for these guys to watch these players legally in NZ. Pakistan's matches are not televised.
Click to expand...

Keeping aside which team or which players are popular, the fact of the matter is as professional commentators they should be paying just as much attention to the other team and its players. These are professional commentators that we're talking about, not your average cricket fan. I don't think I've seen too many commentators worse than NZ commentators who always just have their team on their minds. And the way some of the commentators speak of the NZ cricket team, you would think NZ was the next WI of the 80s.
 
Don't find them great to be honest. Sometimes it seems like they are having an occasional chat between themselves when the games going on, no real analysis, as some one mentioned before, basically pub commentary where you are just relaxing with your friends and talking away about the game.

It doesn't help when you have Waqar Younis as the Pakistani commentator who's commentary I do not enjoy at all.
 
Ian Smith and Simon Doull are decent. The rest are below average - in fact, there is something about Mark Richardson's voice I cannot stand! On the bright side, it's always amusing hearing kiwis trying to say "Six".
 
Convict said:
Jeremy Comey is great.
Click to expand...

Aman said:
He is, but he's not exactly someone casuals or the younger generation would enjoy listening to.
Click to expand...

Coney is the world’s best radio commentator. (And the man who, as NZ skipper, once pushed Richard Hadlee into a urinal for being self-centred!)

UP said:
They are boring.

In fact, cricket in NZ is boring. They need to play more in stadiums like Eden Park and Westpac Park. Seems like no one is in the ground even with sold out.
Click to expand...
I travel every couple of years from Australia to NZ specifically to attend matches at Wellington’s Basin Reserve.

Going to the boutique grounds is like an all-day picnic on the grass. I can attend a Stadium here in Australia, but when I spend a Test at the Basin the NZ economy probably benefits not just by selling $200 of tickets, but a $500 airfare, $2000 on accommodation and $500 on food and drink.

So the boutique grounds are probably economically as advantageous as the stadia, given the much lower cost base.
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">There are commentators<br>There are patriotic commentators<br>There are biased commentators<br>But the NZ commentators are on a different level of bias<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/NZvPAK?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#NZvPAK</a></p>— Saj Sadiq (@Saj_PakPassion) <a href="https://twitter.com/Saj_PakPassion/status/957542895262806017?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 28, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
The NZ commentaries are for the NZ people and they pander to their audience. I dont care what most commentators say bar Boycott, Chappell, Atherton and Hussain. They know the game and they are good at communication, outside that its much of a muchness.
 
Not all of them are biased. Styris when asked if Fakhar was out he said in his opinion yes. Then when Ish dropped a ball which bounced on the ground the other commentators took a jibe at him by saying "Styris would have given that out", followed by many chuckles.

Also our performance has been so bad that there weren't many opportunities to compliment us, however in the past couple of games the commies have been raving and gushing galore.
 
I just enjoy experiencing their culture: the thick kiwi accent of the commentators,the broadcast/scorecard graphics are also significantly different from what we're used too at TenSports, the beautiful landscapes, windy weather conditions...A great insight to a country very much isolated from the rest of the world geographically all while matching a cricket match...

I particularly enjoy Ian Smith and Mark Richardson's style (again because of the thick kiwi accents)
 
Today when Taylor was given out caught behind I actually thought the NZ commentator who I think was Ian Smith was going to burst into tears.

Pathetic standard of commentary.
 
They’ve been very good. Constantly trying to play up Pakistan despite the shambles of the odi series
 
Bewal Express said:
The NZ commentaries are for the NZ people and they pander to their audience. I dont care what most commentators say bar Boycott, Chappell, Atherton and Hussain. They know the game and they are good at communication, outside that its much of a muchness.
Click to expand...

Chappell has regressed significantly
 
Saj said:
Today when Taylor was given out caught behind I actually thought the NZ commentator who I think was Ian Smith was going to burst into tears.

Pathetic standard of commentary.
Click to expand...

Garbage commentory ...very biased and sometimes too annoying wanna mute tv when they were moaning for nothing and making Fakhar out to be right.
 
Sarwar89 said:
I think Mark Taylor is also brilliant.
Click to expand...

Mark Taylor is the best of their lot. The rest, including Neil Harvey are just too canned. Taylor’s is excellentin rest matches to explain fielding captains psyche
 
Very very biased. Worst commentators in world cricket.


Third umpire gives out a clearly grassed chance and Scott Styris says something to the effect of: aisi cheezien tou cricket mein hoti rehti hain.... what the heck :danish
 
Syed1 said:
Very very biased. Worst commentators in world cricket.


Third umpire gives out a clearly grassed chance and Scott Styris says something to the effect of: aisi cheezien tou cricket mein hoti rehti hain.... what the heck :danish
Click to expand...

No biggie. We don’t want automatons in the com box. Besides if your only complaint came in the last game of an 8 match tour, then they’ve done very well
 
Saj said:
Today when Taylor was given out caught behind I actually thought the NZ commentator who I think was Ian Smith was going to burst into tears.

Pathetic standard of commentary.
Click to expand...

How about "You beauuutyyyyy" or " Come back Fakhar Zaman!". Even Waqar admitted that he was very down during the ODI series. As professional as you want to be there will always be a bias for your country and countrymen.
 
I do not see the issue with biased commentators. They are not umpires - they do not need to be neutral. We all know that NZ commentators will want NZ to win, so what's wrong if they're honest about it?
 
Pete Rose said:
No biggie. We don’t want automatons in the com box. Besides if your only complaint came in the last game of an 8 match tour, then they’ve done very well
Click to expand...

That was just one example... and not my only complaint.
 
DeadBall said:
Not all of them are biased. Styris when asked if Fakhar was out he said in his opinion yes. Then when Ish dropped a ball which bounced on the ground the other commentators took a jibe at him by saying "Styris would have given that out", followed by many chuckles.

Also our performance has been so bad that there weren't many opportunities to compliment us, however in the past couple of games the commies have been raving and gushing galore.
Click to expand...

I agree. Past two games they were raving at Pak bowlers restricting NZ batsmen for runs, the fielding, and the fact that Pak had runs on the board for their bowlers to play with. Regarding Fakhar's decision, Waqar made a good point of how can the on-field umpires give a soft signal when they are too far to see the fielder at the boundary line. At the very least, Fakhar's wicket was fishy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

BouncerGuy
West Indies tour of New Zealand (2025)
Replies
74
Views
801
RedwoodOriginal
RedwoodOriginal
The Bald Eagle
New Zealand (92/1) crush Pakistan (91) by 9 wickets in the first T20I game and lead the 5-match series 1-0
8 9 10
Replies
746
Views
20K
daytrader
daytrader
Cricket Warrior
New Zealand (330/6) defeat Pakistan (252/9) comfortably by 78 runs in the first match of the Tri-Nation ODI series 2025
14 15 16
Replies
1K
Views
29K
Aqib_mustafa
A
The Bald Eagle
New Zealand (362/6) defeat South Africa (312/9) comfortably by 50 runs to advance to final of ICC Champions Trophy 2025
9 10 11
Replies
820
Views
20K
jnaveen1980
J
Cricket Warrior
New Zealand (320/5) defeat Pakistan (260) comfortably by 60 runs to clinch triumph in the inaugural match of ICC Champions Trophy 2025
37 38 39
Replies
3K
Views
47K
Shafi
S
Back
Top