Commentary team - 2 at a time Vs 3 at a time

[Dinx - the Jinx]

I'm not particularly liking the idea of 3 commentators on air at the same time. Initially it seemed like a novel idea but its not giving way for a 2 way argument. I particularly used to like Gavaskar and Ian Chappel going at each other, uninterrupted. Sample this - An Indian fast bowler bowls a bouncer and Ian Chappel goes 'he is getting frustrated' Sunny is quick to pounce 'when an Aussie bowls a bouncer, its aggression, whereas it is frustration when an Indian does it'. With the 3rd guy in the box, such interesting exchanges have become rare... your thoughts guys?

[vvvslaxman]

If Harsha Bhoglde is in the commentary box we should just have him and him alone. We should not give him an opportunity to start a conversation with anybody.

[Ram]

If Harsha Bhoglde is in the commentary box we should just have him and him alone. We should not give him an opportunity to start a conversation with anybody.

:hysterical::hysterical: If you did the same with Arun Lal, he will start conversing with the crows, mosquitoes etc. :wall:

[Jersey #10]

man they should put laxman alone in the comm box. It would be a comic show

[Dinx - the Jinx]

Harsha is okey dokey considering he is not a test player and made his career in commentary purely based on his knowledge and passion

[SLICKR392]

Manjrekar :mad:

[gaurav92]

LS :wall:

[Dinx - the Jinx]

guys - discuss 2 Vs 3. not who is the worst man in the box :)

[SLICKR392]

Finally!

[Sachin=GOD]

2 is much better. In a team of 3 usually one guy doesn't get to speak as much as others.

[I6MTW]

Whether it is 2 or 3 or 4. If one guy is VVS laxman then automatic fail in commentary box.

[Lord]

2 is better with 3rd guy chipping in with analysis like Sky team does