ranger
First XV
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2010
- Messages
- 1,594
- Club or Nation
I'd say its pretty much geographical location speaking rather than who people actually think is the better commentators.
Its pretty harsh to accuse me of being blatantly biased. I can assure you that its not just my "geographic location" talking, if thats how you make decisions, then good on you, but thats not how i work.
The reason im a fan of Nisbett is because;
-Has a clear, easy to listen to tone of voice
-He has great knowledge of the game. He is able pick up what tactics and team is using and hes able to identify flaws in a teams play and spot possible holes in a teams defence. Hes great to listen to because when a break is made most of the time he has already told how how and why it was going to happen. Its possible to listen to his commentary on the radio and know exactly what is going on.
-He has a sense of humour, but he doesnt get carried away and off topic with it.
-He is even-handed in his commentary, he doesn't take sides and he appreciates good rugby, no matter which team is making those plays.
-He doesn't just tell you what physically happens, he makes insightful and useful comments based on the issues that arise. If there's a substitution for example, he will tell you there is a substitution, and then comment on how the teams approach and tactics might change. He would comment on why the coach would make that decision and how the players roles will change.
Not because he lives in the same hemisphere as me. Some people, believe it or not, think a little deeper then that.