Giro d'Italia 2013, 4th-26th May - [Spoilers]

[Crackle]

Yes, it was a cannondale guy who crashed but the jury are saying that bike transponder data shows Wiggins was already gapped at the 3 km to go point, so he won't get those 17 secs back.

Ah right. I couldn't find anything besides reports which suggested he'd lost contact in the mist and rain on the bends and the only people referring to a hold-up, were Sky.

 

[thom]

Ah right. I couldn't find anything besides reports which suggested he'd lost contact in the mist and rain on the bends and the only people referring to a hold-up, were Sky.

something of an explanation

 

[rich p]

Wiggins has a bit of previous of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. He needs to be a bit sharper at the sharp end of the race.

 

[rich p]

Incidentally, the two Irish commentators gave no mention of Wiggins not being in the lead group when it was clear that the only Sky rider was Uran. Quigley's rider recognition under pressure is poor - bring back Dave Harmon.

 

[smutchin]

Some of the second-string commentators do make you realise how good Harmon is, for all his quirks.

 

[beastie]

Incidentally, the two Irish commentators gave no mention of Wiggins not being in the lead group when it was clear that the only Sky rider was Uran. Quigley's rider recognition under pressure is poor - bring back Dave Harmon.

If it was clear then why do you need Quigley to tell you? Are you watching it on radio whilst listening to the TV commentary? A bit like test match special on with the telly turned down, but you have gan slightly awry.

 

[thom]

He needs to be a bit sharper at the sharp end of the race.

To the point as always @rich p.

 

[Noodley]

If it was clear then why do you need Quigley to tell you?

I'm sure there was no "need" but it is rather good to have a commentator who knows what he/she is on about - if they make mistakes with the easy stuff then how are we gonna believe them when it comes to the more complex in-race "stuff". Credibility. Zero, if you make an arse of simple stuff.

 

[thom]

I'm sure there was no "need" but it is rather good to have a commentator who knows what he/she is on about - if they make mistakes with the easy stuff then how are we gonna believe them when it comes to the more complex in-race "stuff". Credibility. Zero, if you make an arse of simple stuff.

It's terrible innit. I advise anyone who's paying to watch it to demand a refund.

 

[400bhp]

It's early days yet but Evans has been in the final mix in the last two stages, he looks keen.

He needs to be - he'll go backwards in the mountains.

 

[rich p]

If it was clear then why do you need Quigley to tell you? Are you watching it on radio whilst listening to the TV commentary? A bit like test match special on with the telly turned down, but you have gan slightly awry.

It was clear to me but I was looking pretty closely. I'd wager that a lot of more casual and occasional viewers would have had no idea how to differentiate Wiggins and Uran at a distance. That's not meant to be patronising, but not everyone is a nerd, and many rely on the commentators to tell them what's going on. It is their job, after all, otherwise there would be no need for them.
Crikey, even I miss some nuances sometimes and appreciate the experts' analysis.
David Harmon wouldn't have missed something so crucial.
I don't dislike Quigley and he's a new boy who will get better. I've less sympathy for Kelly getting it wrong.

 

[beastie]

It was clear to me but I was looking pretty closely. I'd wager that a lot of more casual and occasional viewers would have had no idea how to differentiate Wiggins and Uran at a distance. That's not meant to be patronising, but not everyone is a nerd, and many rely on the commentators to tell them what's going on. It is their job, after all, otherwise there would be no need for them.
Crikey, even I miss some nuances sometimes and appreciate the experts' analysis.
David Harmon wouldn't have missed something so crucial.
I don't dislike Quigley and he's a new boy who will get better. I've less sympathy for Kelly getting it wrong.

Look on the bright side- at least it's not Carlton Kirby.

 

[beastie]

It was clear to me but I was looking pretty closely. I'd wager that a lot of more casual and occasional viewers would have had no idea how to differentiate Wiggins and Uran at a distance. That's not meant to be patronising, but not everyone is a nerd, and many rely on the commentators to tell them what's going on. It is their job, after all, otherwise there would be no need for them.
Crikey, even I miss some nuances sometimes and appreciate the experts' analysis.
David Harmon wouldn't have missed something so crucial.
I don't dislike Quigley and he's a new boy who will get better. I've less sympathy for Kelly getting it wrong.

I wasn't really being serious. Harmon is my preferred cycling commentator, with Kelly, Smith or Big Maggy all worthy experts. I thought Sean Kelly was a fair bit more voluble with Quigley though.

They all have their mkoments though. Remember Harmon @ the Ronde? Spartacus "literally killed" Sagan

 

[Peteaud]

When Kelly gets going i cant understand a word he says.

But i do like him tho.

 

[Pedrosanchezo]

Kelly drives me a bit nuts but there is something likeable about him. Why he says "decents" instead of "descents" is way beyond me.
My biggest gripe about the commentators is that they don't know anyones names!! Sometimes relying on the pop ups on screen.

"Oh, a crash and it's..........................erm.............................." Silence. Then 30 seconds later Kelly pitches in with the name.