# Phil and Paul



## bigmig19 (Jun 27, 2008)

Is it just me or are Phil and Paul notably invisible this year. I mean they literally never show them in person. They used to drop by the mobile studio or be shown in the box at the finish. Are they commentating from home...they are old.


----------



## Mapei (Feb 3, 2004)

They've been showing them every once in a while, They don't look bad, either. It's the younger dudes at the anchor desk, though, that the producers have decided should get the lion's share of face-time.

I also find it amusing that Phil and Paul seem to be given lengthy breaks every so often. Lunch? Restroom? Naps?


----------



## Horze (Mar 12, 2013)

Be grateful for Phil and Paul. Do you actually know how terribly bad almost all of the other commentators are? Discounting Carlton Kirby of-course.


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

Horze said:


> Be grateful for Phil and Paul. Do you actually know how terribly bad almost all of the other commentators are? Discounting Carlton Kirby of-course.


Are you calling Harmon and Kelly "terribly bad?"

And Phil and Paul suck. Badly. Both need to retire. Immediately.


----------



## ibericb (Oct 28, 2014)

robdamanii said:


> And Phil and Paul suck. Badly. Both need to retire. Immediately.


I can hardly imagine television cycling broadcasts without the voice of Phil Ligget, and his inherent 10-second delay to the action. It's like trying to imagine Monday night football without the voice of Al Michaels (now).


----------



## ziscwg (Apr 19, 2010)

cycling on TV is freakin boring without the commentators talking most of the time. 

They can stay where they are or do it from their bed at home. I don't care, as long as them keep at it. I want Phil and Paul to commentating as they close the top of their caskets.


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

Mapei said:


> They've been showing them every once in a while, They don't look bad, either. It's the younger dudes at the anchor desk, though, that the producers have decided should get the lion's share of face-time.
> 
> I also find it amusing that Phil and Paul seem to be given lengthy breaks every so often. Lunch? Restroom? Naps?


They're constantly having to send various services to commercial breaks only to welcome them back for 30 seconds...and then put them on commercial break again. Seriously.



ibericb said:


> I can hardly imagine television cycling broadcasts without the voice of Phil Ligget



I can, it is actually quite pleasant.

I know African Grey parrots with a larger selection of cliches to rattle off. Also could identify riders and intermediate sprint points correctly more often,


----------



## robt57 (Jul 23, 2011)

ibericb said:


> I can hardly imagine television cycling broadcasts without the voice of Phil Ligget, and his inherent 10-second delay to the action. It's like trying to imagine Monday night football without the voice of Al Michaels (now).


It will be a sad day, gaffs and all, when Phil's voice is silenced IMO.

Christian Vande Velde has a lot of potential IMO. As far as 'Al' Fish Hair and Steve Schlanger can both fook off AFAIC. We lost Fishhair... I don't see Jens really being optimal for US/UK media coverage ultimately. As much as I like Jens...

Rant off.


----------



## PBL450 (Apr 12, 2014)

ibericb said:


> I can hardly imagine television cycling broadcasts without the voice of Phil Ligget, and his inherent 10-second delay to the action. It's like trying to imagine Monday night football without the voice of Al Michaels (now).


Yep. Me too. For better or worse even. But I'm still lost without the voice of Ralph Kiner doing the Mets. Fell asleep to the post-game show, Kiner's Corner for most of my childhood.


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

ibericb said:


> I can hardly imagine television cycling broadcasts without the voice of Phil Ligget, and his inherent 10-second delay to the action. It's like trying to imagine Monday night football without the voice of Al Michaels (now).


I can. It's called Eurosport.


----------



## MisterMike (Aug 12, 2004)

Horze said:


> ...Discounting Carlton Kirby of-course.


did I miss your sarcasm tags here? IMO Carlton is the worst of the worst. I dread when I have to stream a race he's covering.


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

Horze said:


> Be grateful for Phil and Paul. Do you actually know how terribly bad almost all of the other commentators are? Discounting Carlton Kirby of-course.


I'd rather have the soundtrack of nails running across a blackboard thank you very much.


----------



## 55x11 (Apr 24, 2006)

robdamanii said:


> Are you calling Harmon and Kelly "terribly bad?"
> 
> And Phil and Paul suck. Badly. Both need to retire. Immediately.


Yes, Harmon and Kelly are not as good as Phil and Paul. Kelly knows his stuff but he can put anyone to sleep with his delivery.

Sorry but a big part of TV commentary is sort of like acting - how well can you deliver the line, can you make the audience excited, and another big part of it is getting audience engaged, especially some who may be new to cycling. 

I listen to Harmon and Kelly all the time. They are pretty good for experts (cycling junkies), but so, so terrible for newcomers and mid-level audience.
And so very boring!

Paul and Phil are much, much better - Phil may screw up sometimes, but if you are an expert, you will know better, and if you are not an expert you won't care. But they have excitement, animation and keep the coverage alive. I could literally doze off listening to Harmon and Kelly. Literally! I have done it in the past - fallen asleep watching their coverage. Every sentence Kelly says has the same monotone ring to it. I like his analysis but he is the most boring commentator I have listened to. He knows his stuff, sure, but that doesn't stop him from being so, so boring in his delivery.

So yes. People complaining about Paul and Phil are just contrarians.
If Paul and Phil were covering Eurosport and we had Harmon and Kelly on NBC the viewership would be way down and we would complain about Harmon and Kelly about 20x more than we do about Paul and Phil.

Going back to original post, I agree, they are phasing out Paul and Phil in terms of TV appearance. Perhaps it's deliberate tactic to give more face coverage to VandeVelde, who is really fantastically flawless lately, as well as Bobke.

I believe NBC may be grooming them to be the face of TdF and maybe global coverage in the next decade when Paul and definitely Phil will retire.

I hope VdV is working on his "suitcase of courage", "cat among the pigeons" and "dancing on the pedals" phrases. Bobbke had some catch phrases but they never stuck. (anyone remembers "Schluge?" "Tour Day France"?). 

Kirby, Harmon, Kelly never bothers with theatrics, diction, tone, delivery - they just talk into microphone in their boring monotone voices as they would normally do, and this is why they would never be very great or even acceptable for US audience. No "panache".


----------



## den bakker (Nov 13, 2004)

55x11 said:


> Yes, Harmon and Kelly are not as good as Phil and Paul. Kelly knows his stuff but he can put anyone to sleep with his delivery.
> 
> Sorry but a big part of TV commentary is sort of like acting - how well can you deliver the line, can you make the audience excited, and another big part of it is getting audience engaged, especially some who may be new to cycling.
> 
> ...


and this is why over the last 20 years all the attention on cycling has moved from europe to the US. Or something like that.


----------



## 55x11 (Apr 24, 2006)

Marc said:


> They're constantly having to send various services to commercial breaks only to welcome them back for 30 seconds...and then put them on commercial break again. Seriously.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Good for you. But I seriously doubt you could identify the riders better. For every mistake Phil makes, they ID riders I never heard of about 20 times faster than I could. I am sure it's true for most of spectators.

In any case, if they annoy you so much, just watch it on mute. You are a great expert, you don't need any commentating. Most people who follow cycling don't need commentating either, but I don't mind - I am not particularly annoyed at Phil and Paul, they are doing their job and doing it a lot better than I ever could. Do you really think you could do better than them talking non-stop for 5 hours every day for 3 weeks?

as to commercials, you could pony up and pay for NBC internet coverage if you hate it so much. OR, even better- just start a bit behind and fast-forward. this is what I do.


----------



## JaeP (Mar 12, 2002)

robdamanii said:


> Are you calling Harmon and Kelly "terribly bad?"
> 
> And Phil and Paul suck. Badly. Both need to retire. Immediately.


C'mon man. Although Kelly (assuming you mean King Sean) is one of my favorite riders, his accent is so thick he needs subtitles. Jens' accent I can understand. Harmon to me sounds like a bad stand up comedian; that wouldn't be so bad but it's hard to hear his commentary over all the 6pks he's opening during a broadcast (I keed).

In Phil and Paul's defense I have not heard "suitcase of courage" yet but I do like the new cliche of "done to dust".


----------



## Horze (Mar 12, 2013)

Phill and Paul any-day over Eurosport. P&P are just more interactive.

Sean Kelly comes across as old school and is factually wrong on almost everything he says whilst commentating..


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

Horze said:


> Phill and Paul any-day over Eurosport. P&P are just more interactive.
> 
> Sean Kelly comes across as old school and is factually wrong on almost everything he says whilst commentating..


So this explains why you believe Sky is clean. You're clearly off your rocker.



55x11 said:


> Yes, Harmon and Kelly are not as good as Phil and Paul. Kelly knows his stuff but he can put anyone to sleep with his delivery.
> 
> Sorry but a big part of TV commentary is sort of like acting - how well can you deliver the line, can you make the audience excited, and another big part of it is getting audience engaged, especially some who may be new to cycling.
> 
> ...


I don't frankly give a sh*t what a bunch of people who watch cycling once a year think about cycling commentary. THAT is the demo Phil and Paul cater to. Good for them. Doesn't change the fact that Phil is a senile, backwards fool (remember the "first Chinaman" comment last yea? The comments about "colored" riders?) and Paul's cliches are older than Phil himself.

Combined with the GB nut-swinging it adds up to them being unlistenable. And if being factually correct and historically accurate isn't enough and you need theatrics, you're probably watching the wrong sport. Try soccer instead.


----------



## BacDoc (Aug 1, 2011)

Sherwin pointed out a feed zone screw up by team Tinkoff, and that was a great observation. Sagan was way up from Contador and had 2 fingers up signaling for 2 bags so he could pass to Conti after the zone to keep him safer. 

Paul commented on the proper effort and thinking on Sagans part and the mistake of the guy who only gave him 1 bag. NBC did a nice job of replaying Sagan going thru the zone and the pick up.

I think I know a little about pro racing but would have missed that if Paul didn't bring it up. Stuff like this is what Sherwin does best. Given the occasional error, P n P still do a great job commentating on cycling IMO.


----------



## Horze (Mar 12, 2013)

@*robdamanii*

Suits you Sir. You do appear to be slightly opinionated after-all.

Let's agree that Hugh Porter is the absolute worst.


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

55x11 said:


> Good for you. But I seriously doubt you could identify the riders better. For every mistake Phil makes, they ID riders I never heard of about 20 times faster than I could. I am sure it's true for most of spectators.
> 
> In any case, if they annoy you so much, just watch it on mute. You are a great expert, you don't need any commentating. Most people who follow cycling don't need commentating either, but I don't mind - I am not particularly annoyed at Phil and Paul, they are doing their job and doing it a lot better than I ever could. Do you really think you could do better than them talking non-stop for 5 hours every day for 3 weeks?
> 
> as to commercials, you could pony up and pay for NBC internet coverage if you hate it so much. OR, even better- just start a bit behind and fast-forward. this is what I do.


Why on Earth should I pay NBC $30USD for 20 days of only TdF, when for $40 I get Eurosport streaming of ALL sports for an entire calendar year?

Talk about foolish waste of $$$

I'm not a commentator. P&P are paid big money to get it right. They don't even know the courses well enough (there's a ****ing book they can read out of provided by ASO), to identify the intermediate sprints at the right time. It is a safe bet that 90% of the spew from P&P is wrong.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

55x11 said:


> So yes. People complaining about Paul and Phil are just contrarians.


No some of use just get tired of the terrible coverage, the stealing of other peoples content and the Lance apologist tendencies. I would ,literally, rather listen to the moto/helicopter only RAI video feed.


----------



## QuiQuaeQuod (Jan 24, 2003)

I think doing hours of coverage a day for three weeks in a row is very tough. Especially when not much is changing most of the time.

They are not what they once were, more mistakes for example. But they do a good enough job for the average viewer, and make no mistake, the network wants more viewers. They have the hard core, they need the newbs.

I do think there are people who can call a race better, for me, or for anyone who is in the know. But I do find the traditional voices to be comforting, in the way traditional family food is comforting. It's not objectively great, but it hits the spot and feels good.


----------



## burgrat (Nov 18, 2005)

I am impressed with Phil this year. He is making a lot less mistakes than previous years. It will be sad when Phil hangs it up, Paul not so much. By the way Paul, the peloton is NOT "literally" exploding on the climb...


----------



## rufus (Feb 3, 2004)

First time I've ever seen anyone refer to Carlton Kirby's delivery as "boring" and "monotone".


----------



## 4Crawler (Jul 13, 2011)

Marc said:


> Why on Earth should I pay NBC $30USD for 20 days of only TdF, when for $40 I get Eurosport streaming of ALL sports for an entire calendar year?
> 
> Talk about foolish waste of $$$
> 
> I'm not a commentator. P&P are paid big money to get it right. They don't even know the courses well enough (there's a ****ing book they can read out of provided by ASO), to identify the intermediate sprints at the right time. It is a safe bet that 90% of the spew from P&P is wrong.


Yes, Eurosport is a real bargain, the whole year for about the price of two TDF packages. Plus you can get the same NBCSN coverage for free on Kodi/XBMC out of the Phoenix TV add-on, although there is no pausing or delayed playback option. And if you want, you can also get Eurosport 1 on Kodi most of the time. I end up watching that if I catch it in real time instead of firing up a VPN connection on my PC or tablet. I'm paying for the Eurosport subscription so it doesn't matter what source I view it from. Essentially the same live video from both sources, just different talking heads and fewer commercials on Eurosport. On the NBCSN feed, there are no commercials, but they put out a filler screen during breaks.


----------



## Oxtox (Aug 16, 2006)

back in the day, I used to hate Howard Cosell's sports commentary...thought he was a pompous ass who never competed in anything. then he went away. now, many years later, I'm nostalgic for him.

it'll be prolly be the same way with Phil and Paul. they irritate me now, but once they're gone...


----------



## Marc (Jan 23, 2005)

4Crawler said:


> Yes, Eurosport is a real bargain, the whole year for about the price of two TDF packages. Plus you can get the same NBCSN coverage for free on Kodi/XBMC out of the Phoenix TV add-on, although there is no pausing or delayed playback option. And if you want, you can also get Eurosport 1 on Kodi most of the time. I end up watching that if I catch it in real time instead of firing up a VPN connection on my PC or tablet. I'm paying for the Eurosport subscription so it doesn't matter what source I view it from. Essentially the same live video from both sources, just different talking heads and fewer commercials on Eurosport. On the NBCSN feed, there are no commercials, but they put out a filler screen during breaks.


Eurosport has a vanilla no-commentator/no-commercials/no-blanking-out/no-add-on-"features" just-damn-race-video-stream every day in Eurosport Player.


----------



## JaeP (Mar 12, 2002)

After all is said and done I do like the broadcast type of show (with the little rider profile featurettes, info-ad featurettes, side stories about the towns and its people of the tour, blah, blah, blah). Because if any of you say you can watch a live feed without any type of live commentary or break away, and prefer that, is just plain lying. Watching grown men pedal bicycles for 6 to 8 hours is as exciting as watching paint dry. So give me Phil & Paul and the greatest spectacle on two wheels!


----------



## Cinelli 82220 (Dec 2, 2010)

Sean Kelly is reason enough to go for Eurosport.

They also have Lemond's analysis.


----------



## il sogno (Jul 15, 2002)

When Phil and Paul talk attack strategy, they say that you should wait for the person or team who was attacked to bring back the attacker then immediately launch an offensive of your own. 

On the Plateau de Bielle , Nibbles, Quintana, Valverde, Contador, et al did exactly what Phil and Paul preach only to have Phil accuses them of "collusion." I can't help but think that he sees Froome's attackers as a bunch of sneaky Latin riders who will gang up on Anglo riders at the drop of a hat.


----------



## mik_git (Jul 27, 2012)

Mapei said:


> They've been showing them every once in a while, They don't look bad, either. It's the younger dudes at the anchor desk, though, that the producers have decided should get the lion's share of face-time.
> 
> I also find it amusing that Phil and Paul seem to be given lengthy breaks every so often. Lunch? Restroom? Naps?


I was wondering about this a while back, as we have coverage here on Australian TV and you would think the Phil/Paul coverage was "ours" but I knew they did coverage for other stations/countries and wondered how it worked. They had an interview with them just before the start of this years coverage and they were talking about how they had to do a whole bunch of intros and crossovers for all the international stations, complaining the (good naturedly) producers/directors (whoever runs it) making them do all this stuff and it took loads of time. eg when we come back from an add break we might have a local guy talking about some stuff, then "and now we cross over to Phil and Paul" and they'll be "thanks Joe Blow local guy...blah blah tour talk" and they have to do that quite often.

Although if i get told that Sagan will win this [every] stage one more time, my head may well explode.


----------



## Horze (Mar 12, 2013)

Lemond eh.


----------



## SNS1938 (Aug 9, 2013)

robdamanii said:


> Are you calling Harmon and Kelly "terribly bad?"
> 
> And Phil and Paul suck. Badly. Both need to retire. Immediately.


Agreed!!! I paid the $20 to NBC on my phone (stream to AppleTV when at home), and their commentary is terrible.

Can I really do EuroSport for $40 a year from the US? Or do I also need a VPN for $5/month or something to pretend I'm in the UK too?


----------



## 4Crawler (Jul 13, 2011)

SNS1938 said:


> Agreed!!! I paid the $20 to NBC on my phone (stream to AppleTV when at home), and their commentary is terrible.
> 
> Can I really do EuroSport for $40 a year from the US? Or do I also need a VPN for $5/month or something to pretend I'm in the UK too?


The yearly rate is 2.99GBP/mo. or about $60/yr. I think it's 4.99/mo for the month by month subscription. You'll need VPN or something like that. There are free VPN services apparently of varying quality, I pay $50/yr. for mine, gets me up to 5 connections to most any country I want. I have one PC, a tablet, my NAS and router on VPN connections and then I can switch any other device on and off VPN at my router. 

Until you have access to VPN, you don't know how handy it is. Works well on YouTube if there are geo-restrictions on a video you want to watch, just try a few different VPN servers until one works and you are good to go.


----------

