Dear Editor,
A Dancea Lipson, writing in the Dominica News Online, asked a few years ago, “Whatever happened to cricket commentary? This person detailed that “It’s no fun listening to cricket commentary by the new crop of West Indian commentators. If you are a cricket fan, your alternatives are to either tolerate the cringing and sustained attack on your sensibilities, or watch the cricket on mute. Lipson enumerated: Just a few linguistic gems that come to mind: We saw him did; Fine leg and short leg is; He is a good debt (bowler); Just short of a good lengtt; the bowler gave him too much witt; The feeler was not in the right position. Etc.
Lipson continued: “As if these offences were not grievous enough, we have also had to contend with the voice and hair style of a certain Curtly Ambrose, who neither looks the part nor fits the bill. Over in England Darren Sammy has been doing TV commentary on The Hundred, (how did he get there?), and he repeatedly talks about the inning, instead of innings. Hell, is it a West Indian thing?” “These commentaries are listened to all over the world.” Editor, that is my dread and embarrassment too.
In “Rethink Cricket-CPL failed on the bigger issues,” (Oct 03, 2023), I made some comments on cricketing issues, and I think they fell on obstinate ears. However, this will not deter me in any way at all, as I feel compel to advocate for ‘betterment’ in the name of ‘using people who can and should do the job,’ and in ‘respect for listeners and readers.’ First, I hope readers will go back to Prescott Mann’s “There is hope for better Super50 commentary,” (October 31, 2022) and then recently, Deodat Singh’s, “Cricket broadcasting needs major overhaul,” (May 8, 2024). Also, bear in mind that my purpose is not to embarrass anyone, nor expose any kind of bias inhering in any single media entity.
I add and expand on Lipson, concerning the list of major language blunders, which will be excessively long, and its keeps growing. For now, what irks me is why must the world at large listen to Guyanese cricket commentators, shouting so many basic language blunders. I am talking about not realising and knowing, as well as not being willing to learn and be taught, after first being ‘carefully’ selected. I mean ‘relax-ee-a-tion’ does not exist, neither does ‘i-re-gard-less.’ It is basic; the words are ‘relaxation’ and ‘regardless.’ One can have ‘irrespective.’ Is this rocket science? What Deodat Singh pointed out is not even a thin slice of what goes on and obtains and what we are forced to ingest, either because of stupid nepotism, or leaders, who are bereft of what should be the minimum standard, deciding on and making choices on who should be involved.
I back Lipson: “A few questions: who selects our commentators? What prerequisites should potential commentators have before qualifying as commentators, and being unleashed on the helpless listeners? Is a facility with the English language one of these prerequisites? Why do almost all of them seem to be coming from one particular Caribbean country?” As a caveat, I am more particular about our Guyanese contingent. Surely we can do much better, can’t we?
This excerpt from another letter caught my attention: “The quality of cricket commentary from the West Indies appears to have fallen pari passu with the standard of our cricket (both are in the abyss). Mediocrity has become the standard. As we work to return our cricket to the standards of old, perhaps we can also pay attention to the standard of our cricket commentary?” I fully concur. And I add my suggestion, with the hope that Minister McCoy will engage, professionally, the help of some really qualified and experienced Guyanese, outside of the current Government lot, as these seemingly are ill-equipped, being picked for political reason. They will never be able to do the job.
Sincerely,
Gaylord Riley