Melanie Smith-Taylor

[War_Admiral]

[QUOTE=MHM;6486680]
Wow. Really? Increasing rider safety is lowering the standards??

That’s a… very interesting view. :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

He shut up about that after a (non-Olympic, garden variety) cyclist was killed elsewhere in London & all the UK Olympic cyclists came out in the press the next day in favor of a mandatory bike helmet law (which England does not yet have). Plus I believe he received viewer complaints about those remarks. I didn’t complain about that but did about the KSA comments & I know others did too, so props to the BBC for being responsive! :yes:

[Crockpot]

Again, what’s wrong with the mute function? More fun to whinge?

Seems to be a beloved hobby of some here. lol

[Zevida]

@sunshinestate;6487660

Zevida, which did she mis-identify? I am confused by your post…

MST stated that the Dressage riders were doing a “free walk” and that it is in the test to give them a “break.”

There is no free walk at Grand Prix. There is an extended walk. It is an entirely different movement with different criteria and is judged differently. As different as a medium trot and a stretchy circle trot.

And the idea that it’s in there for a “break” is ridiculous. It is a movement as weighted as any other movement without a coefficient. It’s not there for a break.

[sunshinestate]

Thank you Zevida

[LulaBell]

[QUOTE=fooler;6487341]
Could she be better - yeah. But for pespective, listen to the woman on diving. She is far worse than MST.[/QUOTE]

That is so funny, my mom loves her! Very good chance it could be because she went to high school with her, hah.

There are probably more people who know zilch about diving that enjoy watching it during the Olympics than those who know nothing about SJ, dressage or eventing watching. Count me in the group that likes to watch diving but knows nothing about it, so any inane comments go in one ear and out the other. As far as MST goes, if you don’t like it, mute it. That applies to any commentator, obviously, not just her. I do think it wouldn’t be the worst idea to find someone else for dressage and eventing, but she certainly isn’t unqualified for SJ. Although I wasn’t a huge fan of her comment about the groom being in trouble for someone’s rein breaking.

[Velvet]

[QUOTE=Crockpot;6487719]
Again, what’s wrong with the mute function? More fun to whinge?

Seems to be a beloved hobby of some here. lol[/QUOTE]

It ruins it to mute it. I enjoy the sounds of the horse and the crowd.

Thus the reason this time around I’m watching the BBC. No need to mute.

Still doesn’t excuse NBC for hiring MST every single freaking Olympic games for all three freaking events when she’s only an expert on one of them, and the consensus is that she sucks as a commentator. :rolleyes:

[2bayboys]

One of the requirements of my job is to do television interviews when emergency situations occur.

In order to avoid the worst of the inevitable criticism from “expert” viewers, it is vitally important to thoroughly know the topic, anticipate talking points and rehearse them, and resist the urge to make offhand comments that could potentially offend. It’s also good to regularly do self-critiques by watching the videos after the airing. Professionals study and practice their craft in order to improve, and they listen to their audience.

I would think that MST would at least want to be considered a serious professional in this part-time career of hers.

[JoZ]

I have watched NO Olympic coverage of any sport or any commentator, so I can offer no opinion on MS-T.

However, I’m perplexed when people ask for “credentials” as if one must be an expert to critique someone else. Particularly when the person being critiqued is in the public eye by choice. If I didn’t like an actor or a writer, would you demand that I must be an accomplished actor or writer to have said opinion? I don’t have to be able to design clothes to know what I think is beautiful, ugly, shoddy, high-quality. I am the CONSUMER, the audience, the INTENDED. My opinion is what butters their bread. Why would I be forced to stifle it?

[Velvet]

[QUOTE=JoZ;6487883]
I have watched NO Olympic coverage of any sport or any commentator, so I can offer no opinion on MS-T.

However, I’m perplexed when people ask for “credentials” as if one must be an expert to critique someone else. Particularly when the person being critiqued is in the public eye by choice. If I didn’t like an actor or a writer, would you demand that I must be an accomplished actor or writer to have said opinion? I don’t have to be able to design clothes to know what I think is beautiful, ugly, shoddy, high-quality. I am the CONSUMER, the audience, the INTENDED. My opinion is what butters their bread. Why would I be forced to stifle it?[/QUOTE]

So, by your logic, they should be hiring someone off the street who knows nothing about the sport to give a commentary and help people understand the sport?

I realize that people who do not ride at the upper levels can watch and learn and often can see the difference between something that is done well versus something that is done poorly, if they have a fairly well developed knowledge.

BUT that same person could never give a commentary that explains how well something is performed and WHY it is performed well or is different than that of another horse. They also can not describe what the people are going through at that level. How hard it really is. And they often are not good judges, so people will not understand the judging as well either.

Why else would they hire coaches and former players to do commentary on football? They could hire arm chair QBs, but they would provide nothing in the way of life experiences and a full understanding of what is going on and why. They miss the emotional connection. The don’t understand the players feelings nor the the small things that are missed when they have no real life experience. I know people who played pee wee football. Um, I really wouldn’t want nor expect them to do commentary for the Superbowl!

[mayhew]

[QUOTE=Crockpot;6487719]
Again, what’s wrong with the mute function? More fun to whinge?

Seems to be a beloved hobby of some here. lol[/QUOTE]

In all fairness, this is a message board. The whole point of the place is to express an opinion. If someone disagrees with something someone else says then it is legitimate to offer another opinion. But getting worked up because someone expressed an opinion on a message board is a bit silly.

ETA: I don’t direct that at you specifically, Crockpot!

[FrenchFrytheEqHorse]

[QUOTE=Zevida;6487733]
MST stated that the Dressage riders were doing a “free walk” and that it is in the test to give them a “break.”

There is no free walk at Grand Prix. There is an extended walk. It is an entirely different movement with different criteria and is judged differently. As different as a medium trot and a stretchy circle trot.

And the idea that it’s in there for a “break” is ridiculous. It is a movement as weighted as any other movement without a coefficient. It’s not there for a break.[/QUOTE]

She also said that the “half passes at the canter are commonly referred to as the zig-zag by dressage riders”, which nearly made me spit out my coffee. Really, I think she was making stuff up as she went along just to fill up air time.

[Velvet]

Um, wow, I’m actually going to defend something she said. :lol:

She’s right. The canter half passes where you change direction every six strides (with a flying change and then back again across the centerline) is commonly referred to is a canter zig zag. :yes:

[FrenchFrytheEqHorse]

Professional dressage riders really call canter half passes “zig zags”??? As in, “now let’s practice our zig zags, Sally.”?

When she said this, I honestly thought it would be like me telling my friends jumper riders call figure 8s loopdy loos or hunter riders call courtesy circles whirly wees. I posted this to FB and even my dressage buddies laughed about it.

[Zevida]

[QUOTE=FrenchFrytheEqHorse;6488162]
She also said that the “half passes at the canter are commonly referred to as the zig-zag by dressage riders”, which nearly made me spit out my coffee. Really, I think she was making stuff up as she went along just to fill up air time.[/QUOTE]

Well that’s just ridiculous.

[QUOTE=Velvet;6488185]Um, wow, I’m actually going to defend something she said. :lol:

She’s right. The canter half passes where you change direction every six strides (with a flying change and then back again across the centerline) is commonly referred to is a canter zig zag. :yes:[/QUOTE]

I know that, but she’s still all mixed up. She makes it sound like a canter half-pass and a zig-zag are interchangeable terms. They aren’t. A zig-zag is a very particular half-pass pattern. All she had to say was “this half-pass pattern is a zig-zag” which has a totally different meaning than “half-passes are referred to as zig-zags.”

She’s knows just enough to bumble without being accurate.

[JoZ]

[QUOTE=Velvet;6488088]
So, by your logic, they should be hiring someone off the street who knows nothing about the sport to give a commentary and help people understand the [/QUOTE]

I don’t think you read my response correctly. I’m not saying the COMMENTATOR doesn’t need credentials! I’m reacting to the people who respond on threads like this with comments like “so you think you could do better?” or “tell me what you’ve accomplished before you go criticizing!”

Maybe I couldn’t do it better, maybe I’ve got no claim to fame at all. I’m not the person in the spotlight serving (in some form or other) the public. That doesn’t mean that my opinion is inappropriate.

[Sannois]

Wow…

I am amazed how horse people will eat their own.
Melanie Smith was an AWESOME Grand Prix Jumper rider back in the 80s. Some of you probably have never even seen her ride. Seriously? She is doing a wonderful job. Enjoy the fact that we have coverage of horse sports at all. Sheesh!:rolleyes:

[chancellor2]

[QUOTE=Sannois;6488306]
I am amazed how horse people will eat their own.
Melanie Smith was an AWESOME Grand Prix Jumper rider back in the 80s. Some of you probably have never even seen her ride. Seriously? She is doing a wonderful job. Enjoy the fact that we have coverage of horse sports at all. Sheesh!:rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

Bully for her that she was an awesome grand prix jumper. She was apparently good at that. She should stick with it. She sucks as a commentator. Just because she was good at one horse sport does not make her a good commentator.

By your logic, we could use a non-English speaking dressage rider to be a commentator. hey, they are awesome dressage riders. Who cares if they can speak the language?

[Sannois]

Oh Come on …

[QUOTE=chancellor2;6488318]
Bully for her that she was an awesome grand prix jumper. She was apparently good at that. She should stick with it. She sucks as a commentator. Just because she was good at one horse sport does not make her a good commentator.

By your logic, we could use a non-English speaking dressage rider to be a commentator. hey, they are awesome dressage riders. Who cares if they can speak the language?[/QUOTE]

Really?? Just enjoy the damn coverage and quit your griping! Sheesh people!

[Jeito]

I can hardly believe there is going to be TWO HOURS of dressage coverage this morning on television. I’m very low maintenance. I’m just over the moon about it

[MHM]

[QUOTE=Discobold;6488348]
I can hardly believe there is going to be TWO HOURS of dressage coverage this morning on television. I’m very low maintenance. I’m just over the moon about it :D[/QUOTE]

What time? Which channel?

TIA!