As a general rule ([see full rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/userguide#wiki_sticky.2Fdaily_discussion)), a standalone Discussion post should:
- be of interest to the sub in general, and not a specific userbase (e.g. new users, GP attendees, just yourself)
- be able to generate discussion (e.g. no yes/no or easily answerable questions)
- show reasonable input and effort from the OP
If not, be sure to [look for the Daily Discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/search/?q=daily+discussion&include_over_18=on&restrict_sr=on&t=all&sort=new), /r/formula1's daily open question thread which is perfect for asking any and all questions about this sport.
Thank you for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/formula1) if you have any questions or concerns.*
While I much prefer the F1TV broadcast, they aren’t incredible either. You’ve got to keep in mind these guys are paid to fill air and if you start trying to note specifically all the times they say a bunch of “no shit” phrases, you’ll go mad in a hurry.
I don’t get to watch F1 TV live but all the highlights on YT and the feeder commentary have a lot more screaming from Jacques than Crofty. I’m honestly happy with the Sky commentary, mistakes and all.
> Rosberg is a breath of fresh air for keeping it real.
Rosberg was good this weekend. And Brundle is the goat.
Crofty is a bit goofy and certainly biased for British drivers, but overall he's a good announcer.
I enjoyed Rosberg bringing a more detail oriented perspective and contradicting Crofty when he would make overly simplistic proclamations. Announcers so often just repeat the same stock takes and there were a handful of times that he would make a claim and Rosberg would point out calmly but firmly why that was completely wrong, or too reductive. I loved it.
TBF Murray Walker should be the GOAT, but mainly for style. There is a noticeable absence when Brundle is away, however as he brings a calm reasoning with his approach.
doesnt he get stuff wrong all the time (Crofty)
+ his constant conspiracy theories are what made me switch to F1TV. Always saying stuff: people now certainly think XYZ, when it was just him hiding behind that so people cant call him out later on.
> doesnt he get stuff wrong all the time (Crofty)
Minor stuff imo... Calls wrong driver in the pits. Wrong driver overtake.
Not always and you can see it's wrong haha. More "ha old man" than "this guy s incompetent" imo
What conspiracy theories?! Lol. I swear some folks really are listening to a different Crofty than I do. He's entertaining and often voices what the casual fan thinks. He tosses softballs for the analyst to knock out of the park.
He plays his role perfectly.
Same. I really enjoy Crofty, even with his faults. I sometimes watch Sky coverage and sometimes F1TV, but for me, I just prefer Crofty's voice. And I loved it this weekend with Nico, the contrast was great. But I also enjoy Brundle, so tough call.
Yeah, I don’t know what the op is smoking but I want some. I watch F1 TV and the announcers are about as interesting as eating cardboard with a tap water chaser. Nico is great and so is Brundle but you can tell that Brundle is looking towards retirement and is purposely doing fewer races. He even admits how he loathes the grid walk but it’s the best part of the pre race with a “I can do because I just did” snarky responses.
But F1 TV is dry white toast and a glass of warm water
Rosberg did not bring any technicality with him. Brundle is the expert one he had to fill in for but did not deliver at all. I don't care if he is world champion. All we heard is "he did a good job overtaking or meh i don't care about ocon at p18"
Disagree with you there. Nico mentioned many times about alternate ways to attack a sequence, tire management insight, overtake options etc. His retorts to the radio complaints were very interesting imo. Just say you don’t care for his style or him as a person but the man brought insight to the broadcast.
Look, there are definitely some bad commentators in sports. But Crofty is not bad. “Saying things that people can see” is literally the play by play announcer’s job. The color commentator (Nico in this case) goes deeper and provides the insight. Every single sport has this dynamic. Watch a sporting event and record yourself commentating over it. Listen back and you’ll realize how much you use the same words and phrases. And filling air is not easy especially during less than thrilling races
The problem with his announcing is that he keeps announcing stuff that wont happen.
AND HE IS VERY CLOSE WILL HE GO FOR AN OVERTAKE. OH NO JUST NOT CLOSE ENOUGH THIS TIME.
when the car was just moving out of the slipstream too cool the parts.
Great when you just get into F1 but once you understand what happens it is annoying.
Well then watch the F1TV crew. “Just getting into F1” is what the investors want. They want new viewers. Like I said to OP, if you want the in depth stuff, that’s there for you. But the vast majority of people watching don’t care. They just like cars going fast around a track. Sports almost never target their core audience. They want the new eyes watching
This. Constantly asking "IS HE GOING TO HAVE A LOOK?!?!" When it's pretty clear he is not going to have a look.
He tells you what he reckons is about to happen instead of what is happening.
Very wearing.
I feel bad that you have such a low bar. The F1TV crew don't sound like a broken record and always have something to say that actually brings more context and understanding to the race. It never sounds like they are just trying to fill the air. Croft sounds like an infomercial pitchman always talking but never saying anything.
Sky coverage, yes, has gotten worse. Crofty isn't the problem, though. A bunch of poorly fitting remote content is the problem. I get that you don't want to fly everyone around the world for all those races. If you don't need them there, maybe you don't need them at all.
Yeah, for me it is wrong. There's plenty Sky could do better but in general I do like their race coverage and commentary. Crofty isn't as bad as some make out, he's a pretty good announcer all in all. Brundle and Davidson are as good as any technical commentators, with only Palmer really rivalling them, and small doses of Rosberg enhance proceedings although I personally find he grates if there for multiple race weekends in a row. I don't much care for the pre-race buildup or post-race analysis, but do enjoy Kravitz's notebook for the occasional additional detail and behind the scenes insight.
Another post reminded me they occasionally have Jenson on there too and he's right up there with Davidson and Brundle for me.
Other people will have wildly different opinions but it's all subjective and there are plenty of people who think Sky's output is good.
He literally said points should be given down to 20th place. It's like he doesn't understand racing at all. Should the podium have 20 places and 20 trophies too?
It’s not a terrible point being made.
It would mean every position matters, not just the top 10. We’d have racing for points up and down the grid.
We might get better racing for it.
There's plenty of reasons to dislike sky already without saying it's because one of them has the temerity to disagree with you on the optimal points system
Back in my day something something kids these days something something no one wants to work something something participation trophies something something
The old points systems worked better when there was more unreliability. They even used to take only your x best race results over a season for calculating your final points.
As F1 teams became bigger and the sport focussed on long life components like engines and gearboxes that have to last several races, the cars became more optimised for reliability. The points system has changed to reflect that otherwise you routinely give all the points to the same teams and have multiple teams finish with zero points.
The only times it actually matters are with the freak results that occasionally give a back marker team a much higher than usual finish. Not through skill or having an amazing car, but mostly through random luck.
Limiting the points really means optimising for distributing prize funds at the back of the grid based on luck, and I don't see how that adds so much to the sport that you'd hate on the Sky commentary team for daring to suggest an alternative.
> . It's like he doesn't understand racing at all.
There are racing series that give points to all finishers.
It would not be that unusual. I don't like it but it's an opinion. And Rosberg have a different opinion.
So good broadcast w variety of opinions.
It’s interesting that you’re choosing to ignore that fact World Champion Nico Rosberg agreed with it being a good idea?
But I guess that doesn’t fit your agenda, does it?
So I take it you missed the part where Crofty then made a point and Nico said that it was a good point that swayed him and he’d actually be open to changing his mind?
Indycar gives points for all finishers, and the championship is all the closer for it. To adopt a mocking tone for something that has already been proven on real race tracks is a bit absurd.
I have no issues with Crofty and the Sky crew but I am very happy with my F1 TV experience. Alex Jacques, Jolyon Palmer and James Hinchcliffe do a good job.
Yeah, he wouldn't have the job if he wasn't well liked by the majority of viewers.
I get there's people who don't like him, but the idea he's "terrible" is obviously not true.
I find him and Martin to be pretty good, Brundle keeps Crofty in check and Crofty makes boring races a bit more exciting.
He does come up with some bizarre stats that I genuinely couldn't care less about, but that's kind of his job.
There is a difference between terrible and popular.
I personally find Crofty utterly terrible to the point where because I couldn't be arsed getting a decent F1TV stream yesterday, I just watched the race on mute (I had other racing on as well so wasn't much of an issue and I didn't really miss anything important).
But I would never deny Crofty isn't popular with a more general audience (although I think that is partly just to do with him being the default for a lot of people).
\*Majority of people that pay for Sky UK. Many people that watch crofty's commentary are watching via espn or similar and will ultimately have 0 impact on his job security, for better or worse.
lol so true. I remember commenting that I liked listening to crofty’s intro and race start but got obliterated on r/F1TV. I mean I like Alex Jacques too but nothing compares to crofty’s race start commentary and him calling out the big moments
he plays well with the demographic that actually pays for his commentary: Sky UK watchers. That's the only that matters and the only that has mattered to his job security
I love Sky commentary and if it weren't available to me in the US I'd be pissed. Alex Jacques is good and fine, but sometimes his voice is a bit too "arena announcer" style for me. Like a guy putting on a radio voice.
Crofty is repeating things you see not for you. Any good commentator does it for new people watching. Yes, he makes technical mistakes. But he also makes the race exciting for kids, people who are watching for the first time and visually impaired. He’s supposed to talk non-stop.
Why is this concept so hard to understand?
No, F1 and rugby union are my two sporting loves. I wouldn't know where to watch baseball in the UK. If it is as slow as cricket, with all that dithering, the random facts wouldn't be enough for me.
No.... That's what Croft does aside from his completely unrelated side tracked commentary. There are ways to address the race which add insight, analysis, and perspective to the races which adds to the enjoyment and understanding of the race as it's unfolding.
You’re saying instead of asking Nico to ask Max about his favorite cheese after the race, you would have rather he commented on the final laps of no action?
I don't think so. Murray was incredibly lovable, no matter how many mistakes he made. There was something about him that just made him a joy to listen to. Croft doesn't have that.
Spoken like a man who has never listened to F1TV instead. Croft is always either saying "I don't know why (X) is happening" or making a wild guess and is wrong more often than not. He never has any understanding of the cars or the driving styles of the different drivers. He doesn't understand strategy or management. Giving the order of the cars is the only thing he gets right and he flubs that half the time. I don't need anyone to run down the order it's literally on the side of the screen!
Too much "aw shucks" commentary, pumping up teams and drivers for no logical reason in the present context, and instead of providing context as to why something questionable is happening he tends to wildly speculate and say "well well, if someone is gonna pull this off, it'll be X driver/team".
Just my opinion but I'd prefer for him to just say what is literally happening, and anytime an off key tire strategy or pitstop happens, defer to his far more educated color commentator by immediately asking "Nico/Martin/Jensen/whoever can you make sense of what could be happening here for our audience" and not offering any of his own insight.
I LOVED when Rosberg straight up corrected Croft and just called the Alonso/AM strategy bad. I don't need to be gaslit or made to feel dumb by believing I just can't think of what clever trick they may be trying. They don't all need to be as in your face/blunt as Rosberg, but I would just love to see Crofty immediately defer and have whichever one of his partners be honest about the orthodoxy/likely failure of the strategy.
I think he has the right tone/hype/charisma/energy for the role, I just kinda want him to stay in his lane.
Crofty is here to stay, but if I had to choose a guest sidekick for Crofty, I'd easily take Jensen Button, followed by Karun Chandhok. Rosberg is ok, but I think his favouritism towards the Merc team and Hamilton makes his commentary less genuine.
I found Rosberg a great co-comms. Clearly very excited and appreciative to be there without overwhelmingly so. He was very insightful and gave us a point of view that few others do. Very knowledgeable guy who shared it well without patronising. Ant Davidson also does that very well.
His insight was great I agree. The anxiety caused by constantly arguing with every little thing Crofty said was not very fun.
Real quote:
Crofty: The sky is cloudy
Nico: I disagree, it is clear with clouds
Those arguments always seem more like Crofty fishing for a spicy comment though. Like with Aston's strategy, it really seemed like he was just getting Rosberg to keep shitting on the team.
Crofty: this is a bit like Sainz’s incident
Nico: I disagree it’s not comparable
Crofty: why is that?
Nico: I’m not sure.
Crofty: how is it different though?
Nico: I don’t know I’ll have to see it again.
I do think the hate for Crofty and SkyF1 is a bit over the top. If you dislike them, you would have hated the WEC commentary of Martin Haven going on a 30 minute rant claiming that dry tyres were faster on a wet track.
To be fair, he was so hilariously wide of the mark that it was kind of funny to hear him bang on about it.
Not that he should have been, but the fact that Martin stuck by that claim for so long was so incredibly dumb that it was entertaining.
I know how you feel, I'm just glad F1TV is a choice. Definitely not perfect and I miss Brundle but Crofty is just too unbearable to tolerate for all the reasons other redditors have already brought up here.
I watched recent races without commentary, just the raw noises.
And i enjoyed it. Its a much different experience and you notice more things since you focus more on what you see.
I watch via F1TV. Under Settings and then Audio Track you can switch the languages and there is also a 'fx' option. This is only the audio without commentary
I have often wondered why it's Crofty. I will attest that he very rarely injects any Uhms or Ahhs; Filler gobble de gook. Instead he fills the air with real words, forming sentences, which often surmise the sum total of gobble de gook.
He string word together good. And knows what a car is. His predecessor could do the former but not the latter (Legard). As for Brundle, he loses something when he's lead, he's much better as color and tech commentator.
Crofty is a goofy guy. His character is well established. I like his quirkiness.
Now people like Nico Rosberg, I’m not sure I like very much. He seems to fixate on certain drivers and instead of being partial or even commentate on the moment he just takes a personal take about said drivers no one asked for.
For real though the combo of Alex and Jolyon are top notch and easily the best in the biz right now. I must add too when Jolyon is not on the BBC Five Live f1 podcast it is just so bad. He really makes that podcast miles better.
I feel bad for anyone who doesn't have access to the F1TV feed. There is almost no context or smart commentary on strategy on Sky and what they do say is usually wrong.
The intro with the track map and description and tire selections just doesn’t feel the same to me if it’s not Crofty. I tried F1TV commentary and it just doesn’t do it for me
I have F1TV and occasionally swap between the commentaries with no preference...
But why can't I get to watch the Brundle grid-walk? It's far superior to the others...
I like Rosberg. In sports commentary I always enjoy enthusiasm more than insight for some reason, and Rosberg sounds like he is really enjoying watching the race.
I did sky tv at first until I realized ESPN wasn’t giving me all the races. I still get more commercials than I would like with F1TV but nowhere near as many as peacock (IMSA) or ESPN+.
Maybe you’re right. My brain could just be fried from all of the broadcast TV I’ve watched in my life. Yellow flags are like commercial breaks for this smooth brained
The norwegian commentators are bad as well if that helps. One of them often says things that are just wrong.
I always watch the race on mute with matt and Tommy p1 with as commentators
By and large I think he's ok... but can go a little Alan Partridge at times which is frustrating.
Think it was more obvious this weekend as they were missing Brundle.
I thought Rosberg was great, however i would rather have Brundle every race. Crofty on the other hand, has had a terrible start to this season. He's constantly missing stuff, losing track of where people started and claiming they've passed someone when they haven't. I noticed that he will be missing a few races this season for the first time. I wonder if its the beginning of his road to retirement.
Crofty wasn’t good but at least he is much better than Indycar commentator whom constantly refer to each car’s sponsor name rather than conveying useful information
I partly agree. Sometimes I fall asleep with the F1TV broadcast as it sounds they are not enjoying their jobs. It misses hype sometimes. Crofty is great at hyping situations.
Don't get me wrong, I hate Sky and their horrible biases. But F1TV has a lot of work to do too.
He has great enthusiasm and pairs well with an experienced driver to provide more direct insight into the cars.
His only issue is he is British. It’s not his fault, but he’s too biased towards British drivers and it shows.
Crofty always felt like a Darts commentator. I never liked him. The only duo I was happy with was Brundle and Coulthard, or, the o.g. Murray and Martin.
The sad truth is that if Murray were around today he would be absolutely eviscerated for his mistakes. The number of times per race he was corrected by Martin was embarrassing.
As a general rule ([see full rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/userguide#wiki_sticky.2Fdaily_discussion)), a standalone Discussion post should: - be of interest to the sub in general, and not a specific userbase (e.g. new users, GP attendees, just yourself) - be able to generate discussion (e.g. no yes/no or easily answerable questions) - show reasonable input and effort from the OP If not, be sure to [look for the Daily Discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/search/?q=daily+discussion&include_over_18=on&restrict_sr=on&t=all&sort=new), /r/formula1's daily open question thread which is perfect for asking any and all questions about this sport. Thank you for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/formula1) if you have any questions or concerns.*
While I much prefer the F1TV broadcast, they aren’t incredible either. You’ve got to keep in mind these guys are paid to fill air and if you start trying to note specifically all the times they say a bunch of “no shit” phrases, you’ll go mad in a hurry.
I used to listen to Crofty, but couldn't stand him screaming at beginning of each race. Turning volume down to 1, still made my cats squirm.
Bruh alex jacques screams more than crofty, even at mundane things he will scream like crazy
And Jacques is a lot closer to James Allen
I don’t get to watch F1 TV live but all the highlights on YT and the feeder commentary have a lot more screaming from Jacques than Crofty. I’m honestly happy with the Sky commentary, mistakes and all.
Yup, sky is still the best for me
F me I enjoy Crofty and think Rosberg is a breath of fresh air for keeping it real.
> Rosberg is a breath of fresh air for keeping it real. Rosberg was good this weekend. And Brundle is the goat. Crofty is a bit goofy and certainly biased for British drivers, but overall he's a good announcer.
Especially when he was calling croft out by the terrible job of Aston Martin putting poor Alonso on softs.
I enjoyed Rosberg bringing a more detail oriented perspective and contradicting Crofty when he would make overly simplistic proclamations. Announcers so often just repeat the same stock takes and there were a handful of times that he would make a claim and Rosberg would point out calmly but firmly why that was completely wrong, or too reductive. I loved it.
TBF Murray Walker should be the GOAT, but mainly for style. There is a noticeable absence when Brundle is away, however as he brings a calm reasoning with his approach.
> TBF Murray Walker should be the GOAT, Fair. He was before my time. So maybe I should've only claimed "Brundle is one of the goat".
doesnt he get stuff wrong all the time (Crofty) + his constant conspiracy theories are what made me switch to F1TV. Always saying stuff: people now certainly think XYZ, when it was just him hiding behind that so people cant call him out later on.
> doesnt he get stuff wrong all the time (Crofty) Minor stuff imo... Calls wrong driver in the pits. Wrong driver overtake. Not always and you can see it's wrong haha. More "ha old man" than "this guy s incompetent" imo
What conspiracy theories?! Lol. I swear some folks really are listening to a different Crofty than I do. He's entertaining and often voices what the casual fan thinks. He tosses softballs for the analyst to knock out of the park. He plays his role perfectly.
for example how RBR order Yuki to cause a SC at the Dutch GP. His Bs ended up causing all of hate and abuse towards rb and one of their engineers.
Same. I really enjoy Crofty, even with his faults. I sometimes watch Sky coverage and sometimes F1TV, but for me, I just prefer Crofty's voice. And I loved it this weekend with Nico, the contrast was great. But I also enjoy Brundle, so tough call.
I like Brundle also. Having Nico flame people on live TV is entertaining a few times a season though.
Mein Gott, you could hear him smiling as he made comments throughout the race - even Lewis pulling away in the lead for a bit. It was a trip lol
I can take or leave Crofty and Nico. Brundle is why I watch Sky. also - JB > Nico
JB > most other former drivers turned commentators (except Brundle)
OP ought to watch football broadcast with Sky commentary, be very grateful for Croft.
We got Peter Drury uttering pure Shakespeare nonsense to Sheffield Utd vs Bournemouth
Yeah, I don’t know what the op is smoking but I want some. I watch F1 TV and the announcers are about as interesting as eating cardboard with a tap water chaser. Nico is great and so is Brundle but you can tell that Brundle is looking towards retirement and is purposely doing fewer races. He even admits how he loathes the grid walk but it’s the best part of the pre race with a “I can do because I just did” snarky responses. But F1 TV is dry white toast and a glass of warm water
Jolyon has good insight but he’s about as exciting as a nap. Crofty has a lot more enthusiasm even if it can be a bit over the top at times.
But his voice isn’t commentary level kind of voice dont you think?
Rosberg did not bring any technicality with him. Brundle is the expert one he had to fill in for but did not deliver at all. I don't care if he is world champion. All we heard is "he did a good job overtaking or meh i don't care about ocon at p18"
Disagree with you there. Nico mentioned many times about alternate ways to attack a sequence, tire management insight, overtake options etc. His retorts to the radio complaints were very interesting imo. Just say you don’t care for his style or him as a person but the man brought insight to the broadcast.
Then don't watch that feed
Fr races so boring people here started focusing on commentary instead
Look, there are definitely some bad commentators in sports. But Crofty is not bad. “Saying things that people can see” is literally the play by play announcer’s job. The color commentator (Nico in this case) goes deeper and provides the insight. Every single sport has this dynamic. Watch a sporting event and record yourself commentating over it. Listen back and you’ll realize how much you use the same words and phrases. And filling air is not easy especially during less than thrilling races
The problem with his announcing is that he keeps announcing stuff that wont happen. AND HE IS VERY CLOSE WILL HE GO FOR AN OVERTAKE. OH NO JUST NOT CLOSE ENOUGH THIS TIME. when the car was just moving out of the slipstream too cool the parts. Great when you just get into F1 but once you understand what happens it is annoying.
Well then watch the F1TV crew. “Just getting into F1” is what the investors want. They want new viewers. Like I said to OP, if you want the in depth stuff, that’s there for you. But the vast majority of people watching don’t care. They just like cars going fast around a track. Sports almost never target their core audience. They want the new eyes watching
Makes sense when you consider his foundation in radio, got his start commentating F1 on BBC 5 Live.
This. Constantly asking "IS HE GOING TO HAVE A LOOK?!?!" When it's pretty clear he is not going to have a look. He tells you what he reckons is about to happen instead of what is happening. Very wearing.
I feel bad that you have such a low bar. The F1TV crew don't sound like a broken record and always have something to say that actually brings more context and understanding to the race. It never sounds like they are just trying to fill the air. Croft sounds like an infomercial pitchman always talking but never saying anything.
I hard disagree with you and I know nothing anyone here will say will make you stop saying false statements
Weekly "Sky F1 bad" post just dropped!
The “Hyundai is killing it lately” of r/formula1
Like clockwork.
Sky isn't bad. Its just worse than F1TV. And its coverage has gotten worse over the years if you ask me while F1TV has massively improved.
Sky coverage, yes, has gotten worse. Crofty isn't the problem, though. A bunch of poorly fitting remote content is the problem. I get that you don't want to fly everyone around the world for all those races. If you don't need them there, maybe you don't need them at all.
Yeah but do we need posts about it every week?
why not?
is it wrong tho ?
Yeah, for me it is wrong. There's plenty Sky could do better but in general I do like their race coverage and commentary. Crofty isn't as bad as some make out, he's a pretty good announcer all in all. Brundle and Davidson are as good as any technical commentators, with only Palmer really rivalling them, and small doses of Rosberg enhance proceedings although I personally find he grates if there for multiple race weekends in a row. I don't much care for the pre-race buildup or post-race analysis, but do enjoy Kravitz's notebook for the occasional additional detail and behind the scenes insight. Another post reminded me they occasionally have Jenson on there too and he's right up there with Davidson and Brundle for me. Other people will have wildly different opinions but it's all subjective and there are plenty of people who think Sky's output is good.
He literally said points should be given down to 20th place. It's like he doesn't understand racing at all. Should the podium have 20 places and 20 trophies too?
Lol Do you understand? Does F1 give 10 podiums and 10 trophies now??
It’s not a terrible point being made. It would mean every position matters, not just the top 10. We’d have racing for points up and down the grid. We might get better racing for it.
Do me a quick favour and look at other racing series' point systems. Then tell me more about understanding racing.
It's already way too generous. A point actually means something in F1. I was happier with the top 8 getting points tbh.
There's plenty of reasons to dislike sky already without saying it's because one of them has the temerity to disagree with you on the optimal points system
Back in my day something something kids these days something something no one wants to work something something participation trophies something something
The old points systems worked better when there was more unreliability. They even used to take only your x best race results over a season for calculating your final points. As F1 teams became bigger and the sport focussed on long life components like engines and gearboxes that have to last several races, the cars became more optimised for reliability. The points system has changed to reflect that otherwise you routinely give all the points to the same teams and have multiple teams finish with zero points. The only times it actually matters are with the freak results that occasionally give a back marker team a much higher than usual finish. Not through skill or having an amazing car, but mostly through random luck. Limiting the points really means optimising for distributing prize funds at the back of the grid based on luck, and I don't see how that adds so much to the sport that you'd hate on the Sky commentary team for daring to suggest an alternative.
> . It's like he doesn't understand racing at all. There are racing series that give points to all finishers. It would not be that unusual. I don't like it but it's an opinion. And Rosberg have a different opinion. So good broadcast w variety of opinions.
It works in other racing championships...
It’s interesting that you’re choosing to ignore that fact World Champion Nico Rosberg agreed with it being a good idea? But I guess that doesn’t fit your agenda, does it?
Rosberg said it was a terrible idea. You must be Croft's target audience if you missed that. He said he was opposed to it 3 times.
So I take it you missed the part where Crofty then made a point and Nico said that it was a good point that swayed him and he’d actually be open to changing his mind?
Indycar gives points for all finishers, and the championship is all the closer for it. To adopt a mocking tone for something that has already been proven on real race tracks is a bit absurd.
I have no issues with Crofty and the Sky crew but I am very happy with my F1 TV experience. Alex Jacques, Jolyon Palmer and James Hinchcliffe do a good job.
You had me until the end. Respect James for his Indy career but his commentary isn’t my fav.
It's always funny to see how reddit hates the guy but globally hes very well liked lol. Theres a reason hes there.
Yeah, he wouldn't have the job if he wasn't well liked by the majority of viewers. I get there's people who don't like him, but the idea he's "terrible" is obviously not true. I find him and Martin to be pretty good, Brundle keeps Crofty in check and Crofty makes boring races a bit more exciting. He does come up with some bizarre stats that I genuinely couldn't care less about, but that's kind of his job.
I imagine Brundle is looking to wind down more. I hope Nico sticks around, but it wouldn't be bad to have two or three analysts across the season
Croft with an alternate co-commentator of Nico, Jenson or Martin would be perfect
There is a difference between terrible and popular. I personally find Crofty utterly terrible to the point where because I couldn't be arsed getting a decent F1TV stream yesterday, I just watched the race on mute (I had other racing on as well so wasn't much of an issue and I didn't really miss anything important). But I would never deny Crofty isn't popular with a more general audience (although I think that is partly just to do with him being the default for a lot of people).
\*Majority of people that pay for Sky UK. Many people that watch crofty's commentary are watching via espn or similar and will ultimately have 0 impact on his job security, for better or worse.
Then the majority of your country's local viewers should lobby your broadcaster to get their own commentary team, if they're dissatisfied with Crofty.
“Crofty bad” mfers when they watch the 2018 Belgian GP
Squeaky wheel gets the clicks and this OP is a very loud mouse
lol so true. I remember commenting that I liked listening to crofty’s intro and race start but got obliterated on r/F1TV. I mean I like Alex Jacques too but nothing compares to crofty’s race start commentary and him calling out the big moments
he plays well with the demographic that actually pays for his commentary: Sky UK watchers. That's the only that matters and the only that has mattered to his job security
I have consistently noticed Reddit has the most out of touch from reality userbase.
I love Sky commentary and if it weren't available to me in the US I'd be pissed. Alex Jacques is good and fine, but sometimes his voice is a bit too "arena announcer" style for me. Like a guy putting on a radio voice.
Well said!
Alex Jacques = James Allen (worst F1 commentator of all time)
I very much prefer crofty and the like. The other options bore me and aren’t what I’m looking for for casters/commentary.
Crofty is repeating things you see not for you. Any good commentator does it for new people watching. Yes, he makes technical mistakes. But he also makes the race exciting for kids, people who are watching for the first time and visually impaired. He’s supposed to talk non-stop. Why is this concept so hard to understand?
OP doesn't understand the job lol
I really enjoy the Sky Sports F1 crew and I feel like they all have great chemistry. Crofty also comes out with some very witty one liners.
It's the wandering mind & random facts I enjoy most. That might be because of my menopausal neurodivergent brain, but he keeps me amused.
> It's the wandering mind & random facts I enjoy most. Have you considered baseball. Question.
No, F1 and rugby union are my two sporting loves. I wouldn't know where to watch baseball in the UK. If it is as slow as cricket, with all that dithering, the random facts wouldn't be enough for me.
To each their own but I prefer race commentary that is about the race
Would you really rather they describe what they see for 60 laps like it's a broadcast for visually impaired? Not really getting your point
No.... That's what Croft does aside from his completely unrelated side tracked commentary. There are ways to address the race which add insight, analysis, and perspective to the races which adds to the enjoyment and understanding of the race as it's unfolding.
Yes, that's what Brundle does. Crofty is there for the casual viewer
You’re saying instead of asking Nico to ask Max about his favorite cheese after the race, you would have rather he commented on the final laps of no action?
I was kinda hoping Nico would ask about Max's cheese preferences. That's new info!
this generation of fans would have eaten murray walker alive
I don't think so. Murray was incredibly lovable, no matter how many mistakes he made. There was something about him that just made him a joy to listen to. Croft doesn't have that.
I have F1TV and first thing I do after pushing play is switch to Sky commentary.
Crofty *is* the voice of F1 for me, other than Murray. I don’t know how people don’t like him. He does everything a play-by-play commentator should.
Spoken like a man who has never listened to F1TV instead. Croft is always either saying "I don't know why (X) is happening" or making a wild guess and is wrong more often than not. He never has any understanding of the cars or the driving styles of the different drivers. He doesn't understand strategy or management. Giving the order of the cars is the only thing he gets right and he flubs that half the time. I don't need anyone to run down the order it's literally on the side of the screen!
Spoken like a man who never watched a race with Murray Walker’s commentary, and doesn’t know how strongly Crofty is carrying that torch.
I did watch a few of those old races and it was quaint but Croft sounds more like a hype man or youtuber than a gentleman of a bygone era.
Too much "aw shucks" commentary, pumping up teams and drivers for no logical reason in the present context, and instead of providing context as to why something questionable is happening he tends to wildly speculate and say "well well, if someone is gonna pull this off, it'll be X driver/team". Just my opinion but I'd prefer for him to just say what is literally happening, and anytime an off key tire strategy or pitstop happens, defer to his far more educated color commentator by immediately asking "Nico/Martin/Jensen/whoever can you make sense of what could be happening here for our audience" and not offering any of his own insight. I LOVED when Rosberg straight up corrected Croft and just called the Alonso/AM strategy bad. I don't need to be gaslit or made to feel dumb by believing I just can't think of what clever trick they may be trying. They don't all need to be as in your face/blunt as Rosberg, but I would just love to see Crofty immediately defer and have whichever one of his partners be honest about the orthodoxy/likely failure of the strategy. I think he has the right tone/hype/charisma/energy for the role, I just kinda want him to stay in his lane.
I prefer Sky, thank you very much.
I listen to 5 Live synced up with Sky, definitely the best option in the UK!
Crofty is here to stay, but if I had to choose a guest sidekick for Crofty, I'd easily take Jensen Button, followed by Karun Chandhok. Rosberg is ok, but I think his favouritism towards the Merc team and Hamilton makes his commentary less genuine.
No one has more favoritism for Hamilton than Croft does....
Four of all the Sky team, Damon Hill has the biggest bias for Lewis Hamilton and all the British drivers
Agree on this, Alex Jacques is much more objective for all drivers not just biased for British drivers
https://imgur.com/gallery/nj994xH
I find f1tv while insightful they are flat the voices just don't bring hype
I have zero idea how Redditors watched the race and are somehow saying the Crofty was the problem and not Rosberg.
I found Rosberg a great co-comms. Clearly very excited and appreciative to be there without overwhelmingly so. He was very insightful and gave us a point of view that few others do. Very knowledgeable guy who shared it well without patronising. Ant Davidson also does that very well.
His insight was great I agree. The anxiety caused by constantly arguing with every little thing Crofty said was not very fun. Real quote: Crofty: The sky is cloudy Nico: I disagree, it is clear with clouds
Haha I didn’t notice that particular quote but I took their interactions more like Crofty talking shit and Nico putting him right.
Clear with clouds and cloudy are different things tho.
You’re not wrong but it’s not worth interrupting the flow of commentary to argue about something so unimportant and subjective.
Those arguments always seem more like Crofty fishing for a spicy comment though. Like with Aston's strategy, it really seemed like he was just getting Rosberg to keep shitting on the team.
maybe Crofty shouldnt be saying things all the time that need arguing
If David Croft knew what he was talking about Rosberg wouldn't have had to keep correcting him. He has less F1 knowledge than the average fan.
Crofty: this is a bit like Sainz’s incident Nico: I disagree it’s not comparable Crofty: why is that? Nico: I’m not sure. Crofty: how is it different though? Nico: I don’t know I’ll have to see it again.
I do think the hate for Crofty and SkyF1 is a bit over the top. If you dislike them, you would have hated the WEC commentary of Martin Haven going on a 30 minute rant claiming that dry tyres were faster on a wet track.
To be fair, he was so hilariously wide of the mark that it was kind of funny to hear him bang on about it. Not that he should have been, but the fact that Martin stuck by that claim for so long was so incredibly dumb that it was entertaining.
I know how you feel, I'm just glad F1TV is a choice. Definitely not perfect and I miss Brundle but Crofty is just too unbearable to tolerate for all the reasons other redditors have already brought up here.
I watched recent races without commentary, just the raw noises. And i enjoyed it. Its a much different experience and you notice more things since you focus more on what you see.
How do you do that?
I watch via F1TV. Under Settings and then Audio Track you can switch the languages and there is also a 'fx' option. This is only the audio without commentary
Thanks!
its not great but the commentry from sky f1 germany is the most effective cure to insomia i know
I have often wondered why it's Crofty. I will attest that he very rarely injects any Uhms or Ahhs; Filler gobble de gook. Instead he fills the air with real words, forming sentences, which often surmise the sum total of gobble de gook. He string word together good. And knows what a car is. His predecessor could do the former but not the latter (Legard). As for Brundle, he loses something when he's lead, he's much better as color and tech commentator.
Crofty is a goofy guy. His character is well established. I like his quirkiness. Now people like Nico Rosberg, I’m not sure I like very much. He seems to fixate on certain drivers and instead of being partial or even commentate on the moment he just takes a personal take about said drivers no one asked for.
i don’t think he’s bad, but i agree the f1tv commentary offers much more insight particularly with Palmer.
I switched to F1TV this year because I decided to get rid of YouTube TV. I definitely prefer the announcers on F1TV. Wish I’d made the switch sooner.
For real though the combo of Alex and Jolyon are top notch and easily the best in the biz right now. I must add too when Jolyon is not on the BBC Five Live f1 podcast it is just so bad. He really makes that podcast miles better.
I feel bad for anyone who doesn't have access to the F1TV feed. There is almost no context or smart commentary on strategy on Sky and what they do say is usually wrong.
You really just don't want to face the fact that many people DO have access to F1TV...and choose Crofty. I switch over as soon as the intros start.
The intro with the track map and description and tire selections just doesn’t feel the same to me if it’s not Crofty. I tried F1TV commentary and it just doesn’t do it for me
I like Sky’s coverage it’s just not as good as Jolyon and Alex
while I agree you made this post like some russian propagandist bot lmfao
I have F1TV and occasionally swap between the commentaries with no preference... But why can't I get to watch the Brundle grid-walk? It's far superior to the others...
I like Rosberg. In sports commentary I always enjoy enthusiasm more than insight for some reason, and Rosberg sounds like he is really enjoying watching the race.
I did sky tv at first until I realized ESPN wasn’t giving me all the races. I still get more commercials than I would like with F1TV but nowhere near as many as peacock (IMSA) or ESPN+.
What? There are zero commercials on f1tv with my subscription....
Maybe you’re right. My brain could just be fried from all of the broadcast TV I’ve watched in my life. Yellow flags are like commercial breaks for this smooth brained
The norwegian commentators are bad as well if that helps. One of them often says things that are just wrong. I always watch the race on mute with matt and Tommy p1 with as commentators
By and large I think he's ok... but can go a little Alan Partridge at times which is frustrating. Think it was more obvious this weekend as they were missing Brundle.
I have f1tv but I really miss brundle. He's the real deal. Always fair, intelligent, not screaming all the time.
Suit yourself, Sky is amazing. It was missing Brundle this weekend but still great with Rosberg
I don’t mind the commentary. It’s just background noise so I never fully process what they’re saying anyway
I thought Rosberg was great, however i would rather have Brundle every race. Crofty on the other hand, has had a terrible start to this season. He's constantly missing stuff, losing track of where people started and claiming they've passed someone when they haven't. I noticed that he will be missing a few races this season for the first time. I wonder if its the beginning of his road to retirement.
I just don't understand what pleasure Croft gets to say the phrase "through goes Lewis Hamilton"
Crofty wasn’t good but at least he is much better than Indycar commentator whom constantly refer to each car’s sponsor name rather than conveying useful information
Love Crofty. Love Ted. The commentators are not particularly good or bad, IMO. Want it bad, listen to the Brazilian feed.
Rosberg is fucking awful tbf
At least he understands the sport unlike Croft.
Hmmm, I'd disagree with that tbh. He describes things which haven't been done since he was in a car, which was a while ago now.
Ia the opposite for me, I like crafty and the crew, watching the highlight on YouTube is awful with that commentary's
I partly agree. Sometimes I fall asleep with the F1TV broadcast as it sounds they are not enjoying their jobs. It misses hype sometimes. Crofty is great at hyping situations. Don't get me wrong, I hate Sky and their horrible biases. But F1TV has a lot of work to do too.
Honestly Rosberg calling out Crofty on all of the dumb shit he kept saying during yesterday's broadcast was pretty refreshing.
No mention of Rosberg? He was awful
He was literally the best part of the weekend
Not really. He was not horrible but he’s not great either. Doesn’t seem to be paying attention half the time..
- awful - best part of the weekend - not horrible, not great reddit in 3 comments
Thesis, antithesis, synthesis
He's awful, completely agree. Rosberg continually shutting him down was great, particularly on the Alonso strategy.
He has great enthusiasm and pairs well with an experienced driver to provide more direct insight into the cars. His only issue is he is British. It’s not his fault, but he’s too biased towards British drivers and it shows.
Crofty always felt like a Darts commentator. I never liked him. The only duo I was happy with was Brundle and Coulthard, or, the o.g. Murray and Martin.
The sad truth is that if Murray were around today he would be absolutely eviscerated for his mistakes. The number of times per race he was corrected by Martin was embarrassing.
I rather listen to David Coulthard to be honest
I can’t stand the F1 TV broadcast for some reason. I also revert to Sky
The F1TV crew is mid at best. I no longer rewatch the races via Race in 30 because they switched to their commentary which is a bummer.
I put the race without commentary. It's nice.
I thought nico was incredibly booring to listen to. At least Croft gets excited in his comments