planetf1.com

This past year i've been watching several of the races multiple times, with different commentary. Not all races, not always the whole race, but enough to form an opinion about the quality of the commentating.

I want to compare four different broadcasts, show their strong points and their weaknesses. Three are in english, one is in german, my native tongue (although i can speak and understand english almost equally well).

The broadcasting teams are as follows:


Sky Sports F1
Simon Lazenby - Presenter
David Croft - Commentator
Martin Brundle - Expert / Commentator
Damon Hill - Expert
Ted Kravitz - Reporter
Natalie Pinkham - Reporter


BBC F1
Jake Humphrey - Presenter
Ben Edwards - Commentator
David Coulthard - Expert / Commentator
Eddie Jordan - Expert
Lee McKenzie - Reporter


SPEED F1
David Hobbs, Steve Matchett, Bob Varsha - Experts / Commentators
Will Buxton - Reporter


RTL Germany Formel 1
Florian König - Presenter
Heiko Waßer - Commentator
Christian Danner - Expert / Commentator
Niki Lauda - Expert
Kai Ebel - Reporter



- Commentary during the race -

Before the start of the season i would've never believed it, but Sky Sports and BBC are doing an equally great job. The departure of Brundle to Sky Sports was well compensated for by Edwards and Coulthard. Both commentaries build up the tension just before the race start, and when the lights go out, it's fast-paced and exciting commentary, with a great deal of background information during the race. Both commentary teams are quick to pick up on important moves, strategies and the finer details that the more uninformed viewer might miss. In fact, if you watch certain scenes back-to-back on these channels, sometimes the commentary is eerily similar, and almost always spot-on.

SPEED is falling markedly behind here. One problem is, they're always commenting from a studio in the US, where they basically don't see much more than the viewer on TV. Even with this excuse, the commentary is a lot less detailed than on BBC or Sky Sports. For example, they are failing to point out many things like a pit stop taking too long, only noticing it when it's force-fed to them by the replay. BBC and Sky are instantly on those things. Furthermore, their reaction to unforseen events is more often than not a "Whoa!" or some other expression of surprise, instead of BBC and Sky's excited waterfall of words that explain all the goings-on. So, excitement and tension isn't the strong point of SPEED, and they're also undermined by commercial breaks.

RTL Germany's race commetary efforts are hampered by their lead commentator Waßer. He is not the most professional; too "free and easy" with his choice of words and not objective enough. If someone drives into a german driver, it's not uncommon to hear things like "and the award of moron of the year goes to (other driver)!" There are many examples of this, and i often think, he would be better suited to do boxing commentary or such. Their expert, former F1 driver Christian Danner, is way better and more knowledgable, but he is just a co-commentator, as Waßer does much of the talking and also the leading in and out of the commercial breaks. Of which there are too many.

Rating:
Sky Sports - excellent+
BBC - excellent
RTL - mediocre
SPEED - mediocre


- Pre-race / post-race -

Sky Sports is doing solid work, with interesting videos, interviews, and talk in the pit lane. It's only when you watch BBC that you notice room for improvement, because their tone is more light-hearted and funnier, EJ and Coulthard being those responsible. They also present some nice videos and tidbits to get your appetite going.

SPEED, not much there, they just have one pit reporter on the ground, and there aren't any exciting features to watch.

RTL Germany have their full team on hand, but the presentation is a bit too "yellow press". This is compounded by expert Niki Lauda, who is sometimes ranting and raving about certain topics, and the other guys fail to reel him in.

Rating:
BBC - excellent+
Sky Sports - excellent
RTL - mediocre
SPEED - poor


- Pit walk / Pit commentary during the race -

Martin Brundle's pit walks are great, never boring. Sometimes it seems as if he is constantly bombarded by instructions on his headphones and doesn't really listen to anyone he's interviewing, answering with "ok cool" to anything they said. But then that's also fun to watch sometimes. Plus he seems to be friends with everyone on the grid. BBC have a little sharpening up to do, but it's by no means bad. RTL Germany sends out Kai Ebel, a jovial, flamboyant character that i'd liken to Eddie Jordan on ecstacy. He walks around in funny clothes and sometimes hands out a music CD or a football jersey to a driver before the race. SPEED, haven't watched much of theirs, but their reporter seems a bit too excited.

During the race, Sky Sports cut to Ted Kravitz in the pits every now and then. But more often than not, he will be interrupted by team radio or something happening on track, thus only managing to interrupt the commentary team's flow. To be fair, sometimes he does add some valuable information. BBC are more reserved with the pit reporting.

Rating:
Sky Sports - very good
BBC - good
RTL - good
SPEED - ?


Overall, i prefer Sky Sports (the Brundle factor) over BBC over RTL over SPEED. It remains to be seen what will happen on the BBC with the departure of Jake Humphrey. This could be the chance to get on top again.

This is all just my personal informed opinion, i'd be happy to hear yours. Maybe i could also show a bit of what else is out there on other channels, for those who are only watching one channel.

It's unfair to compare Speed to Sky/BBC, although this discussion is rather academic now that Speed has lost rights to F1 broadcasts in the U.S. next year.

As you pointed out, Speed only had Will Buxton and his cameraman covering the races on-site, whereas the others have entire teams covering the event. The amount of detail that's missed by not having multiple feet on the ground can be a huge detriment to broadcast quality and race commentating.

Will Buxton's energy and enthusiasm is great and he is very popular because of it. Bob Varsha, Steve Matchett and Dave Hobbs are also great because they have great rapport with each other. They may not be as quick or pick up on small details, but they make watching the races on TV fun, and that's what's most important, IMO.

I do admit that listening to the BBC broadcast via Fanvision at the race track has been great, and appreciate the constant updates from Jennie Gow on pit lane, for example.

Next year in the U.S., NBC/NBC Sports Network will be broadcasting the races and rumor has it that they are going to have more coverage and more feet on the street where it makes sense. I, for one, am going to continue to watch the U.S. broadcasts and will be looking forward to the banter between Steve Matchett and Dave Hobbs. Unfortunately Bob Varsha had to stay behind and the pit lane reporter has yet to be announced, although I'm pulling for Will Buxton.

_________________
twitter: @racer_nobu
blog: http://racingvacation.blogspot.com/

Tbh I would just watch whichever channel has Martin Brundle, I love the guy, he knows what he's talking about and I really enjoy his commentary.

_________________
A man exists for only a lifetime, a name lasts until the end of time.

I have been quite happy with a Sky Sports F1 i have to say.

Thankfully we here in Finland also has pretty damn good coverage of F1, especially when you emphasize that coverage as the paid channel that shows F1 in Finland was originally created around F1. Meaning we get all of the practise sessions live with commentary from a crew on the race track and all kind of coverage on the F1 weekend. Including other racing happening in that weekend, that's again commented on the track itself.

What i do like more are the commentators over at Sky Sports F1, especially the actual race commentators. Not too fond of the pit lane crew, especially Damon Hill. Martin Brundle is indeed amazing.

I think that Brundle is the deciding factor for a lot people. For me, I'd rather watch BBC because Brundle is on Sky! It's all personal preference, but I'm happy that in Britain we've got some of, if not the best coverage in the world.

_________________
There is no theory of evolution, just a list of animals that Chuck Norris allows to live.

You forget 5 live for Jenny Gow

commentary from James Allen and Jamie Alguersuari, Alguersuari is actually better than crofty

and they have had some great guests this year, I really enjoyed listening to John Watson

_________________

True. But Coulthard knows a lot. More than Brundle in some cases.

I would also agree that we have very good coverage of F1, but the commentating lacks the same sort of tension and action that SKYF1 has. (Probably because we're finnish )

I watch race on sky only for Martin Brundle Commentary : ). Does anyone here think EJ and DC will come to sky next year ?

This is super annoying. I saw a couple of sessions on SPEED and when someone goes off or even has an opposite lock moment, they all go Whoawhoawhoa into the mic. And usually, it isn't even a big incident. Croft would probably go, "And there's Alonso with a bit of a moment there".

I found them very poor compared to the BBC and Sky. In fact, the only thing I disagree with in your assesment is the fact that you label SPEED's coverage mediocre. I think it's awful. Hope NBC does a better job for our American friends.

Hockey and football (Virkkunen) have some awesome, passionate commentators in Finland so i would think MTV3 could do better in a sport where they have such a awesome coverage. Granted i really have no big problem with the current lineup, Sky Sport F1 just got better.

Yeah, that's I was saying, I prefer DC. Brindle often annoys me just cause he's got the mentality of a 80's/90's driver and dome of his comments are a little behind the times.

_________________
There is no theory of evolution, just a list of animals that Chuck Norris allows to live.

Brundle is more old-school, yes. But i think he manages to keep up with the times well. What i also like about him, he seemed quite warm-hearted about MSC, finding nice words every now and then, wishing him to do well in the races. Coulthard was distinctly more critical about Michael, talking negatively on various occasions, which rubbed me the wrong way. I guess there's still some resentment from the past, something i also noticed to a degree when Damon Hill talked about Michael (well, it became clear to me that Damon still holds a grudge when he was FIA steward in Monaco 2010 and gave Michael the penalty for the late pass on Alonso ).

Anyway, both teams certainly do an amazing job. You only really notice this when you watch other channels.

Coulthard is too uptight, its as if he is trying to maintain his 'image' (can't find the right words!) if you understand what im saying, although it could be my dislike of the Scottish accent because i don't like Allen Mcnish either lol

_________________
A man exists for only a lifetime, a name lasts until the end of time.

When I had BBC and Sky as an option, after trying various combinations I settled on:
BBC for the pre/post race and Sky for the commentary, flicking over to Sky in pre/post when BBC had a feature I wasn't interested in and usually for Brundle's grid walk.

_________________

This is why I cannot watch F1 on speed, I dont have much higher hopes for NBC.

Also Speed constantly gets drivers wrong, many times never correcting themselves.

This instantly reminded me of Varsha's "Sebastien Alonso" call during the Abu Dhabi race.

Also, I remember the first time F1 raced at Abu Dhabi. They kept going "Whoa!" every time a car went into the tunnel at the pit exit because, thanks to the camera angle, it always looked like the drivers were losing the back end.

In their defense, they have to get up real early to do the broadcasts. They don't have the benefit of doing the coverage in the afternoon 99% of the time so they likely haven't been up for several hours before the broadcast starts.

_________________

I can only compare Sky and BBC but Sky are miles ahead.

Simply put:

Brundle > DC
Croft > Edwards

I know it's popular to support BBC over Sky but that's just the plain truth the way I see it. DC and Croft miss so much stuff between them that even I see instantly with just a TV feed and the live timing on my laptop.

Many younger posters dont realise how wide an experience Brundle has besides F1. Here is a quick scan


grass track, Hot Rod, Formula Ford, raced Tom Walkinshaw's BMW touring cars, won the BMW championship in 1980

Partnered Stirling Moss in the TWR Audi team in 1981 British Saloon Car Championship

Formula Three, five pole positions two wins in his debut season. won the Grovewood Award as the most promising Commonwealth drive

Second season British Formula Three,second to Ayrton Senna

1988 World Sportscar Champion, with record points
1990 Le Mans winner
European Touring Car Championship. IMSA, American IROC series 1990 and several more but you get the drift

_________________
I find television very educating. Every time somebody turns on the set, I go into the other room and read a book.

Marx (Groucho)

This sadly. To be honest though on the occasions where I've ended up having to watch a session on iPlayer because Sky hasn't recorded for whatever reason, I don't have a problem with the commentary at all. To put that into perspective I absolutely hated Legard (as we all did) so I do have the capacity to dislike commentary.

Still miss DC + MB in the commentary box. Unless something amazing happens those 19 races will be the best 19 races ever in terms of commentary, better even than Walker + Hunt.

_________________
Official Kamui Kobayashi Fanboy

Star Sports - Disaster in all aspects, except unintended jokes.

Yes, I know you only want to compare the four channels you mentioned, but you must never have watched an F1 race on Star Sports, and you are lucky for it.

_________________
Apparently religious people didn't like my signature, hah! Don't read it if you are so offended by it.

When one person suffers from a delusion it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called religion. - Robert Pirsig

forget about the live timing, I often see both BBC and Sky commentary teams miss stuff that you can see on the FOM feed. I always put it down to how much info they have to take in at once, I'm guessing they have the live feed, timing screen, driver tracker, pit cam, looking out the window, producers and pit reporters in their ears etc so they're bound to miss some things.

_________________
There is no theory of evolution, just a list of animals that Chuck Norris allows to live.

One note on Speed's coverage is there did seem to be a change when Will Buxton took over for Peter Windsor. This season, especially, they seemed to go to Buxton more for comment or question during the race. Whereas with Windsor, once the pre-race portion was over, he was basically non-existent.

I don't know if it was Buxton wanting to be more involved, but it was an improvement.

My biggest complaint with Speed is what is likely to be the case for any US outfit unless someone with clout when it comes to how the dollars is spent, is that the coverage really lacks the support, like having a greater presence at the event, or feeling rushed to get to the next programming (especially for those races that start around 6 to 8 a.m. Eastern, as its a given they are going to be in a hurry to get to the hours of Nascar pre-race.)

One issue with mistakes by the guys commenting in Charlotte, is that I'm not surprised given that they are unlikely hearing any of the directorial input from the site as to the cameras, who they are switching to, what they are trying to cover. So they are trying to react to whatever happens to appear on screen, which I'm sure isn't an easy thing. If they were able to tie into that info from the production facilities on-site, I'm sure many of those misidentifications would be reduced.

That's why while I feel Speed could have been much better, I also feel like a beggar when it comes to coverage, so the fact that Speed started showing races live unlike the delayed and condensed versions from ESPN, it was an increase in coverage, and then to have qualifying and some practice sessions was much appreciated.

If NBC Sports Network adds all practice sessions to its coverage as I've heard might be the case, and might go so far as a legitimate post-race segment (not just podium, interview and recap of results) then I'll turn my focus to wanting better quality, but for now, I try to remember that Speed and its other incarnations represented a commitment to bring us the races and more coverage than we had before. So personally, I'd like to see improved quantity of coverage, and then hope the quality will come along later.

The NBC Sports Network has seemed really hit and miss IMO, under the VS banner I think it did help some properties rise in popularity and expand coverage, while others like the NHL (which I think is a good comparison to F1 as its very much a niche sport in the US with a smaller than usual but very loyal following) it hasn't really promoted its stature (of course, the NHL's contract/labor issues have hurt a lot... but it is one of example of a way I think the switch couple be a negative for F1 fans in the US.)

If I was to compare Speed to other carriers worldwide, for sure its going to end up on the bottom of the scale, but if compared to others who have had F1 here, like ESPN and FSN, it represents a step in the right direction. I only hope NBCSN will lift it up a few more steps, as I'm a realist. Once you get past the top few sports properties here, a fan needs to count himself fortunate to get whatever he can as the 1 dominant force in US sports programming, ESPN, can count the number of sports it really cares about on less than 2 hands, and of those, there's a few that the network would rather spend most of its time even during off-seasons than other sports currently holding their championships. If Tom Brady or LeBron MIGHT miss a game with a minor injury that's a far bigger story at ESPN than championships in about 95% of other sports. With that background, that's probably why I view the Speed guys with a bit more charity.

QFT, amen brutha!

_________________
twitter: @racer_nobu
blog: http://racingvacation.blogspot.com/

I really wish that NBC will pick up their game commentary-wise, not just coverage-wise. I sense that SPEED's broadcasts are really cherished by american F1 fans, perhaps because it's a niche sport there and you're glad you had someone being dedicated to it over that many years. I really understand that sentiment, but better is the enemy of good (or mediocre), and i mostly ignore the multitude of free-TV F1 broadcasts i could watch here on RTL Germany (except for comparison purposes) and watch BBC or Sky UK.

Seeing how NBC took over David Hobbs (Mr. "Whoa!") and Steve Matchett from SPEED, there won't be much improvement in the commentary, and it's a bit of a shame for the american fans. I guess that they probably even omit some of the intricacies of the sport on purpose, to prevent confusing new viewers. But only educated viewers get the most out of F1, and you get the most education from good race commentary and good pre-/post-race analysis. I hope they do better on that, not just on how much they cover.

With the greatest respect, I haven't got the foggiest what you're talking about. What is a 90s driver's "mentality"? How are his comments "behind the times"?

_________________
"Where are all the good men dead, in the heart or in the head?"

Give 'em hell Dani!

British Driver Supporter (and Daniel Ricciardo)

The reason I can't watch speed's coverage is every time anything happens everyone at once goes "whaooooooo" it gets very annoying very quick. That and the commercials. I could probably live with the commercials if the commentating was better and more accurate (mis-identifying drivers).

I suppose its a bit hard to explain. As an example, one of my big pet peeves with Martin is since the ban on team orders, you could hear him saying that he thinks the team should switch the cars? I know it doesn't matter now, but why say that on a regular basis, knowing it's against the rules? It's just things like that and the good old 'cheatings always been part of f1'

_________________
There is no theory of evolution, just a list of animals that Chuck Norris allows to live.

I saw both the Sky Sports and BBC coverage for a couple of races and I think I prefer Edwards and Coulthard.

The main reason for this is that I find that Coulthard provides better observations and insight into how the driver is driving and what he's doing in the car. I think it is simply a product of him having been in the sport more recently than Brundle, similar to when Allen and Brundle were joined by Button for Monaco. But it really adds something to the commentary for me because that's not something I know about.

Otherwise I agree that the commentary is spookily similar. Both commentary teams are good at picking out what's going on with laptimes and in the pits and keeping us up to date with what's relevant but might not be visible on track. I think Brundle is slightly better here, which IMO is product of his experience, but it's less important to me because I have laptop, iPhone app with track positioning and television running during the race so I see those things myself.

I've also found the Sky Sports coverage more sensationalist this year. I think their approach to the Vettel-overtaking-Kobayashi-under-yellows is a case in point. Fair enough initially they thought they'd seen something, but as professionals and experts they should have checked it out properly before turning it into a major story for discussion and it was pretty poor that they got it so wrong in the end. Would it really have been that complicated for them to ask an official about the lights or even a team boss before running with it? They went to all the effort of analysing it frame by frame with Davidson & Thompson so surely they could have actually had a think about the lights themselves. By the time they went to Pat Fry it almost looked as though they were trying to create a controversy and his disinterested and then irritated reaction said volumes.

That is all just my preference, though.

_________________
Formerly kai_

I empathise.

In Australia we get the main British feed (so ITV then BBC and now Sky). But we used to have our Aussie hosts commentating the occasional race and it was just awful. One of them had a habit every time a car had an incident of making noises to go with the incident so "oof, ahhp, thwack, eeeek" and then he'd go through it again on the replay. Most of their commentating was just recapping the positions and literally saying what was going on in front of them such as "Fisichella's behind Button on track going around the corner". Really? No shit sherlock. Every moment on track they'd be shouting down the microphones, even if it was just a bit of a wobble. "AND ALONSO'S LOST IT GOING AROUND THAT CORNER THAT COULD HAVE BEEN REALLY BAD". Ummm, no he just had a touch of oversteer.

Thankfully they've stopped that and now we just get the main British feed all the time.

_________________
Formerly kai_

When Brundle went to Sky I thought that was the end of BBC commentary but DC and Ben Edwards have been great. I like Brundle but there is a certain feeling of him and Croft sounding a bit too authoritative about things, obviously they're guys in the know and Brundle has a lot of driving experience but I prefer the slightly more friendly feel on the BBC this year.

I've said it from the beginning but Sky really need to let their hair down a little more. Their race coverage is fantastic but the pre race stuff could use the BBC's style and laid back way of doing things. I get the feeling that if the drivers had to get a drink with the media, they'd choose the BBC crew over Sky. That relationship needs to develop but Lazenby, Hill and Herbert just can't seem to match EJ, Jake and DC.

I disagree, I like Sky's professionalism, I got bored of all the larking about on the beeb pretty quickly... Ooooh Eddie Jordan's wearing an awful shirt for the fiftieth time, whoop-dee-f**king-doo.

_________________
"Where are all the good men dead, in the heart or in the head?"

Give 'em hell Dani!

British Driver Supporter (and Daniel Ricciardo)

I have watched F1 coverage on BBC, Sky, SPEED and Star Sports in Asia over the years. I am quite impressed with the quality of the Sky coverage this year though I don't find Damon Hill and Johnny Herbert adding much value to the coverage. Allan McNish and the Skypad are excellent features. I haven't watched BBC this year, but I do appreciate Couthard's insights and I like their post-race coverage (the forum etc.) marginally better than Sky's. Overall, I'd say BBC in 2011 and Sky in 2012 are about the same.

SPEED, I was actually impressed with though it's mostly because my expectations were very low. Given the paucity of F1 fans in the United States, I expected the commentary to be highly patronising, but it's not the case. It's true that the commentators don't have the same depth of knowledge as their counterparts in BBC and Sky, but I still find them competent.

Star Sports though, is certainly the worst of the bunch. The target audience is the the casual Formula One fan, and consequently, there is more drama than analysis in the coverage. For instance, even by mid-season in 2004 when it was blatantly obvious that Ferrari were about a second a lap quicker than the rest, and Schumi and Rubens would run away at the head of the field at the start of a race, the "colour commentator", Steve Slater, was convinced that the speed of the Ferraris was because they were carrying less fuel than the others and would need to make an extra stop. A simple overtake for the lead of a race (especially by a British or Ferrari driver) is often described as "brilliant" while a more skillful move for 2nd or 3rd doesn't draw as much praise.

I like Jennie Gow =)

Sweet smile and very informative as well.

you must be joking...BBC commentary has been awful this year. Less informative, full of unnecessary screaming, yelling from Ben...

Sky 's commentary is the best so far with Martin being there.

Just a small update. On BBC, Jake Humphrey's replacement Suzi Perry is doing an alright job, but doesn't feel like a lead anchor to me. She seems to be up on all the F1 knowledge by now, but book smart is not street smart. That natural chemistry between the presenters isn't up to par yet, but we'll see what happens by the end of the season.

I've watched the Chinese GP with three different commentaries again, this time comparing certain scenes on Sky, BBC and Radio 5 Live commentary. Basically my first findings were confirmed again, Sky and BBC commentary is on the highest level, and matching each other in content, excitement and background information. Very rarely will one of them make a mistake, one example was the team radio to Kimi, "Do you need more downforce?" - "One turn." BBC understood it correctly, one turn more downforce with the tool on the front wing. Sky understood "What turn?" and thought Kimi made a joke again.

However, Radio 5 Live commentary was rather bad. Obviously, it's harder to comment for the radio, where they must put the picture into words. But that doesn't excuse some big mistakes. Example: Hamilton and Rosberg come into the pits at the same time, a planned stacked pit stop. BBC and Sky get excited, and both note that the second pit stop went rather well and they haven't lost much time. Radio 5 Live though start speaking of a "grave mistake" and accuse Mercedes of completely messing up on strategy etc... i couldn't believe it.

So, if you want the highest-quality commentary, there is still no alternative to BBC or Sky Sports.

I've been watching Sky's coverage this season but I did give the BBC a whirl in iPlayer yesterday. Suzi is fine to me. She certainly doesn't come across as patronising like Jake did half the time and she genuinely does have an interest in Motorsport, I don't think Jake ever did. They are still gelling together clearly but by the time of Canada I think the BBC team will be running like clockwork.

_________________
1994 1995 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

I've always said that F1 commentary teams should hire a 3rd guy whose job is to simply only look at what is on the screen. Sometimes the things that get missed are glaringly obvious and I would agree, it must be down to the sheer volume of information/data that is coming through.

A 3rd guy watching only what's happening onscreen would be a huge help. His microphone would mostly stay off though, so as not to clutter the airwaves with a 3rd voice. When something happens he could wave his arms up and down and then be allowed to talk.

_________________
"I am a believer, but I start each Grand Prix with 195 liters of fuel behind me," he explains. "I don't rely entirely on God, I rely on Prost."

I recall that when Allen and Brundle were commentating for ITV they had Mark Hughes in the commentary box with them as back-up. He used to provide data and other information that was relevant, which I assumed was to free them up to look at the screen so they didn't have to think about things like that. He was never heard and I just remember them mentioning it one day.

I would guess that BBC and Sky or at least Sky have something similar, although maybe not given that they do miss some glaringly obvious things and that could perhaps be because they are dealing with that information themselves.

I'm also fairly certain that the Sky team have earpieces in that connect them to the production crew and other members of the team and being fed information through them as well as commentating would probably be occasionally distracting. I think Brundle said something like that in China - "sorry, just had something come through my earpiece".

_________________
Formerly kai_