Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
In F1 they're usually great. More grounded observations / opinions, from either former drivers or at least people who have been around the paddock for decades. They feel more "objective" regarding what they talk about and what they'll allow themselves to hypothesize about.
I don't watch much NBA and NFL but the analysts / opinion guys seem goofy and way too loose with opinions. I think they're all entertainment so the more outlandish their statements the better the engagement.
In chess the players and analysts are all way above my level, but as far as I can tell, they do a good job at breaking down the position and giving you an idea of what super grandmasters are thinking. But this is more commentator and less analyst.
Funnily enough, my mind jumped to Martin Brundle as a classic example of a good analyst - or at least he was in the 90s and 2000s. He's still good, but it just isn't as new or exciting anymore - he was a fantastic counterpoint to Murray Walker's boundless enthusiasm with a lot of sensible chatter and in depth knowledge.
Another guy I quite like is Jimmy Bullard, particularly on Sky Sports News or Soccer AM - no bullshit, everything in layman's terms, and has a laugh with it.