Less is more.
How many people share my opinion that there are an excessive number of sports commentators employed on TV to tell us what we can see with our own eyes?
As a child, I used to listen to Test matches on the radio when a whole day's commentary was delivered by one man, Brian Johnson or John Arlott.
Their descriptions of what was happening on the field were brilliant: you could close your eyes and imagine yourself in the crowd.
If either had to leave the box for any reason, their place was taken by someone else for a short time, often Christopher Martin-Jenkins.
I'm retired and can watch Tests from beginning to end on TV. The number of cameras employed makes sure I don't miss a single detail of the game, but for some reason, the TV company thinks it necessary to employ an army of commentators, working in pairs, to tell me what I'm seeing for myself.
Their constant flippancy is aggravating and no help to anyone watching the game. They work for just 30 minutes at a time and are superfluous; why are they there?
Copyright 2014 Al Hilal Publishing and Marketing Group Provided by SyndiGate Media Inc. ( Syndigate.info ).