Has anyone noticed how difficult it is to watch the race on OLN when they have Bob Roll and his sidekick act as commentators? Their commentary has all the sophistication of a 7 year old child and their approach to the race assumes you have an IQ of 0.

I hate how he continually drones on and on (with his equally poor grasp of enunciation) about irrelevant topics. It's like he's having a damn conversation while we're watching images of a bike race. I've found myself pressing the MUTE button a lot of times.

Why aren't they using Phil Liggett? They have to bring him back or I'm gonna find this year's tour REALLY hard to watch.

Phil and Paul do commentary of the actual racing. They do a damn fine job of it too.

Phil and Paul do commentary of the actual racing. They do a damn fine job of it too.


Umm...are you sure about that? Because I'm watching the 8PM Prime Time version and it ISN'T Phil and Paul doing the commentary of the actual racing. It's Bob Roll and the other guy.

Record the LIVE coverage in the morning, or the afternoon replay; that's when we get Phil and Paul. I'm not sure why they have Trautwig and Roll doing commentary over the same pictures for the PrimeTime show.

Because I'm watching the 8PM Prime Time version

There's the problem... I would suggest you record the live version instead if you can't catch it in realtime.

Has anyone noticed how difficult it is to watch the race on OLN when they have Bob Roll and his sidekick act as commentators? Their commentary has all the sophistication of a 7 year old child and their approach to the race assumes you have an IQ of 0.

[...]

Why aren't they using Phil Liggett? They have to bring him back or I'm gonna find this year's tour REALLY hard to watch.

I agree, the OLN primetime coverage with Al Trautwig & Bob Roll is pathetic. It's basically dumbbed-down Lance-centric blather aimed for the lowest common denominator - OLN probably thinks the "All Lance All The Time" approach will attract those who will only bother to watch if Lance is in the lead.

Luckily, the live early-morning coverage still has Phil and Paul commentating, so if you can get up that early or remember to set your VCR, that's the way to go. For the primetime coverage, all Bob and that nitwit Trautwig are doing are basically reading off Phil & Paul's early-morning commentary, and adding in their own painfully moronic ad-libs.

If you do record the early-morning coverage, just be warned that it tends to go over the allotted time, particularly in the mountain stages (at least that's what I've seen in the past).

HTH, - jobob

remember to set your VCR, that's the way to go.

I finally joined the rest of my geek-friends and got myself a TiVo box. I never before found much use for something like that since I try to not be a slave to the TV. The only exception is the TdF. I used to do the VCR thing but TiVo is so much nicer... especially since I do a lot of travelling. My DirecTV receiver does have the ability to externally control my VCR so if the stages run long then I still won't miss the ending (assuming I had enough tape) and that worked fairly well but with TiVo there's no worries.

Has anyone noticed how difficult it is to watch the race on OLN when they have Bob Roll and his sidekick act as commentators? Their commentary has all the sophistication of a 7 year old child and their approach to the race assumes you have an IQ of 0.

I hate how he continually drones on and on (with his equally poor grasp of enunciation) about irrelevant topics. It's like he's having a damn conversation while we're watching images of a bike race. I've found myself pressing the MUTE button a lot of times.

Why aren't they using Phil Liggett? They have to bring him back or I'm gonna find this year's tour REALLY hard to watch.

For cryin' out loud. You'd probably beotch if they hung ya with a new rope. I like the different perspective Bob and Al give it. If ya don't like it, don't watch it.

Thanks guys. I can't catch the LIVE one because of work...so I guess I'll have to dig out the VCR to record the Phil and Paul commentary.

It's really a shame I have to do this - what in the world is OLN thinking??

Also, I'm relieved I'm not the only one who finds Bob Roll and Al Trautwig to be PAINFULLY to difficult to listen to. Them and this 24/7 focus on Lance Armstrong is really making watching this race a difficult experience - and I'm a huge fan of cycling and Lance!

Perhaps letting OLN know might help? I already wrote a short msg to
http://ww2.olntv.com/feedback.asp

For cryin' out loud. You'd probably beotch if they hung ya with a new rope. I like the different perspective Bob and Al give it. If ya don't like it, don't watch it.

Well, I don't think I can knock any sense in you if you somehow think this "different" perspective from Bob and Al is better than Phil and Paul.

If there were any other stations covering the Tour, I wouldn't watch OLN. But there aren't, so I have every right to point out flaws in OLN's coverage.

G'day,

I'm finding it difficult to feel sorry for you blokes!. You wanna try being a cycling nut & live in Oz!. Here we only get 1/2 hour of 'highlights' 12 hours after the stage has taken place!. I think we get 4 stages of the 3 weeks where we get the last 2 hours live........the grass is always greener folks!,

cheers,

Hitchy

i think it's perfect the way they do it. If you want the 'pure' commentary--
watch the *LIVE COVERAGE* in the morning. If you are interested, but
would like it to be more presentable with replays etc.. watch it in the
evening. If you still aren't satisifed--watch both!!

OLN's prime time coverage is geared more towards cycling n00bs who may be interested in seeing what all the hype is about, and I think they're doing a good job of explaining the nuiances of the sport. It will sound annoying to someone who knows everything already. I find myself watching both the live AM coverage and the prime time show.

My DirecTV receiver does have the ability to externally control my VCR so if the stages run long then I still won't miss the ending (assuming I had enough tape) and that worked fairly well but with TiVo there's no worries.

Hmmm... you might have a more sophisticated DirecTV/TiVo setup than I have, but if I'm recording a stage and it goes over time, the TiVo still stops recording at the end of the scheduled time, unless I set it in advance to keep recording, say, 30 minutes longer (which I routinely do for the live stages). Your setup might be different, but if not, just thought I'd warn you-- such a bummer to have the recording stop 5 km from the finish (been there, done that!).

Hitchy, you're right, we in the US are very fortunate to have daily coverage. Were it not for Lance's dominance in the Tour, our coverage would be on par with yours ...

Well, I don't think I can knock any sense in you if you somehow think this "different" perspective from Bob and Al is better than Phil and Paul.

If there were any other stations covering the Tour, I wouldn't watch OLN. But there aren't, so I have every right to point out flaws in OLN's coverage.

Knock some sense in Me? You elitist snob! God forbid someone should have a different view. I said I enjoyed the different perspective of Bob and Al, I didn't say they were better than Phil and Paul, but what if I did think that? I'm writing OLN daily to tell them how great I think their coverage is...... It would serve you right if you lost your OLN coverage next year....

Hmn... silly me, I never noticed that Bob is comentator in the prime time until reading this thread. But I rarely watch reply anyway.

I agree that many of them are not pro, but who cares, we are watching the race, though it's annoying, it's not big dea. Overall, just like Kristen Gum thread, I see many people discontent with OLN comentators. Peharps you guys who serious about cycling should learn French and move to France to watch TDF :D.

although I do like the oln comentary of phil and paul a lot, bob and all did sound like they were 5 years old...it sounded like bob was giving al a lession on cycling, cause he is a new comentator for oln......he doesnt know what is going on at all IMO. i think most of us here could do a better job with the cycling comentary, let al stick to "mainly" sports like football and baseball and hockey..............agree?

Thanks for letting us know that Phil and Paul only do live coverage. Now I know to tape it.

Phil and Paul are the best commentary duo in sports. No one knows more about pro cycling than Phil. Some of the obscure race results and facts they pull out of thin air just blow me away.

I like Bob Roll, and I enjoy watching the prime time coverage with his commentary. But only AFTER watching the live coverage with Phil and Paul. Cycling wouldn't be the same for me without those two. I'll echo what Laggard says. Phil and Paul are 10,000,000 cuts above the rest.

Thanks guys. I can't catch the LIVE one because of work...so I guess I'll have to dig out the VCR to record the Phil and Paul commentary.

It's really a shame I have to do this - what in the world is OLN thinking??

Also, I'm relieved I'm not the only one who finds Bob Roll and Al Trautwig to be PAINFULLY to difficult to listen to. Them and this 24/7 focus on Lance Armstrong is really making watching this race a difficult experience - and I'm a huge fan of cycling and Lance!

Perhaps letting OLN know might help? I already wrote a short msg to
http://ww2.olntv.com/feedback.asp

Phil and Paul do not do commentary exclusively for OLN. In fact, they also do, for example, commentary for ITV. If you bought the DVD of last year's Tour, you will note that it was the ITV feed they used. If you listen to OLN carefully, you will sometimes hear the "other" person commentating (Paul is actually speaking on OLN, but you can hear Phil also talking in the background) and this is because they are doing live feed for other programs at the same time.
Given that, I suspect that since the entire world is not on the same time, they are doing feeds in the US evening hours for other places...for example, I have two good friends from Australia who also get to watch some of Phil and Paul...they may be working elsewhere and that's how OLN can do the commentary with Roll and Trautwig.

No one knows more about pro cycling than Phil.

More than you?
;)

G'day,

I'm finding it difficult to feel sorry for you blokes!. You wanna try being a cycling nut & live in Oz!. Here we only get 1/2 hour of 'highlights' 12 hours after the stage has taken place!. I think we get 4 stages of the 3 weeks where we get the last 2 hours live........the grass is always greener folks!,

cheers,

Hitchy

That's basically the way it used to be here.

I have a friend who lives in Melbourne, and I asked him, with all the Aussies in the race why they would not cover it more extensively. He thinks they are too cheap to buy the time...

Too bad.

I agree, the OLN primetime coverage with Al Trautwig & Bob Roll is pathetic. It's basically dumbbed-down Lance-centric blather aimed for the lowest common denominator - OLN probably thinks the "All Lance All The Time" approach will attract those who will only bother to watch if Lance is in the lead.


What have you got against the free market? OLN, which is owned by Comcast, is trying to expand its viewership. Last year, daily viewers of the Tour de France nearly doubled from the previous year, and all because of Lance Armstrong. This year, they are trying to get daily viewership up another notch.

Most Americans couldn't spell Iban Mayo or Jaan Kirisipuu or pronounce Jens Voight or recognize Levi Leipheimer of Floyd Landis if they tripped over them on the street. But everyone who has opened a newspaper, magazine, or watched television knows Lance Armstrong.

That is why the prime time rebroadcast is dumbed down; so the average American Lance-fan can understand what is happening in a bicycle race - possibly the first one they have ever seen.

The only thing that can come from this is increased viewership, which means increased sponsors which means MORE bicycle racing on OLN.

We should all be behind Al Trautwig and Bob Roll, cheering them on. For those of us who know the score, there is the live coverage in the morning and VCRs!

Well said.


What have you got against the free market? OLN, which is owned by Comcast, is trying to expand its viewership. Last year, daily viewers of the Tour de France nearly doubled from the previous year, and all because of Lance Armstrong. This year, they are trying to get daily viewership up another notch.

Most Americans couldn't spell Iban Mayo or Jaan Kirisipuu or pronounce Jens Voight or recognize Levi Leipheimer of Floyd Landis if they tripped over them on the street. But everyone who has opened a newspaper, magazine, or watched television knows Lance Armstrong.

That is why the prime time rebroadcast is dumbed down; so the average American Lance-fan can understand what is happening in a bicycle race - possibly the first one they have ever seen.

The only thing that can come from this is increased viewership, which means increased sponsors which means MORE bicycle racing on OLN.

We should all be behind Al Trautwig and Bob Roll, cheering them on. For those of us who know the score, there is the live coverage in the morning and VCRs!

i'm going to be contrary here for just a minute and say that i really don't like the job that phil and paul are doing on the tour -- particularly phil. i've enjoyed their coverage of other races in the past, and i think they've done some good tours, but they've definitely been slipping.

there's phil's usual trouble remembering racers' names [francis moreau?], but the thing that really bugs me is the way commentary/analysis is completely tossed out the window. in the prologue, the whole thing about armstrong "dealing a psychological blow" was laughable and obviously calculated for the non-cycling viewers.

i understand that these guys are anglos and the broadcast is aimed at an american audience that doesn't care about anyone in the race other than armstrong [i'm not talking about you cognoscenti, i'm talking about the broader audience that's also interested in the ultimate sports]. i also feel that the coverage has been compromised by the sponsors. all of the segment sponsors -- amd, subaru, trek, discovery network -- are current or future sponsors of the usps team, as is oln. it is perhaps inevitable, but i find that phil and paul are just doing their best to get the sponsors the most for their advertising dollar.

in the prologue, the whole thing about armstrong "dealing a psychological blow" was laughable and obviously calculated for the non-cycling viewers.

When I read statements like that, I have to dismiss all else written in your post. Of course, putting REAL TIME (over only 6k) on all your rivals IS a real psycological blow. Your anti-Armstrong bias is showing. Obviously, the real race hasn't even begun yet, but to simply dismiss the impact of putting 15+ seconds into Jan and Tyler makes YOU appear to be the "non-cycling viewer". :D

oh, come on, bac, do you really think ullrich had any real intention of doing well in the prologue? hes forte is the longer time trial, and i don't think he has ever won a prologue in his life. armstrong, on the other hand, has always done well in the tour prologue, and would have been expected to this time around. maybe i'm missing something, but how can someone be said to be "dealing a psychological blow" when he does exactly what he is expected to do?

my guess is that these guys are professionals whose psychologies are not likely to be easily injured by a prologue result with three weeks left to go.

Anyone else notice that Lance Armstrong is rarely refrered to as just Armstrong? 90% of the time it's Lance Armstrong. I don't know that there's another Armstrong in the peloton.

Did OLN issue a directive to Paul and Phil? Do Americans still not know who Armstrong is?

oh, come on, bac, do you really think ullrich had any real intention of doing well in the prologue? hes forte is the longer time trial, and i don't think he has ever won a prologue in his life. armstrong, on the other hand, has always done well in the tour prologue, and would have been expected to this time around. maybe i'm missing something, but how can someone be said to be "dealing a psychological blow" when he does exactly what he is expected to do?

my guess is that these guys are professionals whose psychologies are not likely to be easily injured by a prologue result with three weeks left to go.

I think the point of the "psychological blow" was not so much for the time he gained, as it was more about making a statement to the other riders. All we heard leading up to the tour was how armstrong struggled at the dauphine libere (sp?), struggled last year in the tour, and how other riders were thinking he was more vulnerable this year. The psychological blow was that he came out on the prologue and rode like a monster. he didn't win it but he came damn close, and a helluva lot closer than his rivals, like herpes-boy jan.

That is why the prime time rebroadcast is dumbed down; so the average American Lance-fan can understand what is happening in a bicycle race - possibly the first one they have ever seen.

You made some very good points, TrekRider. However, I would like to think it's possible to explain what's going on in a bicycle race without having to act as if the audience which is being targetted has the attention span of a five-year-old.

I'm sorry, when Al Trautwig was whining during Stage 1 about how little time the camera was spending on Armstrong, and Bob Roll snickered about how it was a French camera feed and 'you know how those French are', why couldn't they have instead taken the opportunity to explain how at this part of the race Lance is tucked in near the front of the peleton, surrounded by his teammates to ensure that he stays out of trouble until the more crucial stages, and as far as Lance is concerned there really wasn't that much to show at this point, but hey, once the race heats up so will he? Or that it would be downright dangerous for a camera to stay on Armstrong when he's tucked in the pack? Or even (gasp) there are almost 200 other riders that bear mention from time to time? Noooo, they take the easy yuk-yuk 'good ole boy' approach which isn't educating viewers, it's just perpetuating the Dumb Americun approach to sport in which if Our Guy isn't winnin' then it ain't worth watchin'. It's frustrating to see because they can do so much better (well, maybe Bob can), but I think they're just taking the lazy way out.


The only thing that can come from this is increased viewership, which means increased sponsors which means MORE bicycle racing on OLN.

To some extent, perhaps. But I think that might backfire. I think a lot of people watching the primetime show might be turned off by Bob and Al's commentary - even some of the newbies might recognize when they're being talked down to. I first started watching bicycle racing during last year's Tour when I first got DirecTV with OLN. I had never seen a race on TV before and I had no trouble following Phil and Paul's commentary, and they made a racing fan out of me (as opposed to just a LanceFan). What really comes through in their commentary is their respect for the sport and their respect for their viewers. If instead I had been introduced to bicycle racing by Al & Bob's primetime commentary, I might have tuned out after a couple of evenings. But that's just me.

I think Al & Bob could tone down the Dumb Americun approach and still do a good show. It's still early, maybe as time goes on they'll settle into it.

The only thing that can come from this is increased viewership, which means increased sponsors which means MORE bicycle racing on OLN.

When Lance and Tyler retire, so will cycling coverage on OLN. It may dissapear after Lance alone retires.

And unless more well known Americans start racing more classics, that too will go bye bye.

When Lance and Tyler retire, so will cycling coverage on OLN. It may dissapear after Lance alone retires.

And unless more well known Americans start racing more classics, that too will go bye bye.

Unfortunately, most people in America are new to cycling. While I agree that for us real bike nuts too much Lance is not always the best way to cover the race, it is absolutely the only way to turn more viewers to fans.

Bob is very knowledgeable, but he has to use this style to cater to a different audience. As far as the prologue, that is a totally different topic, but I will agree with the commentators on this; It was an impressive performance by Armstrong, so Ulrich may have been right about LA playing possum a few weeks ago.


Cheers

I finally joined the rest of my geek-friends and got myself a TiVo box. I never before found much use for something like that since I try to not be a slave to the TV. The only exception is the TdF. I used to do the VCR thing but TiVo is so much nicer... especially since I do a lot of travelling. My DirecTV receiver does have the ability to externally control my VCR so if the stages run long then I still won't miss the ending (assuming I had enough tape) and that worked fairly well but with TiVo there's no worries.

I just got one last week. I actually let the coverage start in the morning before I start watching so I can skip the commercials and slow stuff.

I find your TV slave comment interesting since I believe TiVo can give you so much more control over what and when you watch TV that you're more of a slave without it!

-murray

p.s. I think you could get a 30 day return on a TiVo...Use it for the Tour and give it back ;)

I'm sorry, when Al Trautwig was whining during Stage 1 about how little time the camera was spending on Armstrong, and Bob Roll snickered about how it was a French camera feed and 'you know how those French are', why couldn't they have instead taken the opportunity to explain how at this part of the race Lance is tucked in near the front of the peleton, surrounded by his teammates to ensure that he stays out of trouble until the more crucial stages, and as far as Lance is concerned there really wasn't that much to show at this point, but hey, once the race heats up so will he? Or that it would be downright dangerous for a camera to stay on Armstrong when he's tucked in the pack? Or even (gasp) there are almost 200 other riders that bear mention from time to time? Noooo, they take the easy yuk-yuk 'good ole boy' approach which isn't educating viewers, it's just perpetuating the Dumb Americun approach to sport in which if Our Guy isn't winnin' then it ain't worth watchin'. It's frustrating to see because they can do so much better (well, maybe Bob can), but I think they're just taking the lazy way out.



My words exactly.

I have no problems with OLN trying to expand its viewership - but when it tries to do it at the cost of good solid commentary by Phil and Paul, then there's obviously something wrong. And if you somehow feel Al and Bob do a better job than Phil and Paul...then there's something very wrong with you!

When Lance and Tyler retire, so will cycling coverage on OLN.

Perhaps, but neither one of them were in the Giro or Vuelta and OLN covered those events :eek:

We'll have to wait and see.

-murray

oh, come on, bac, do you really think ullrich had any real intention of doing well in the prologue? hes forte is the longer time trial, and i don't think he has ever won a prologue in his life. armstrong, on the other hand, has always done well in the tour prologue, and would have been expected to this time around. maybe i'm missing something, but how can someone be said to be "dealing a psychological blow" when he does exactly what he is expected to do?

my guess is that these guys are professionals whose psychologies are not likely to be easily injured by a prologue result with three weeks left to go.

Well, Jan lost the prologue by just 2 second in the TdF he won in 1997. Jan then beat Lance in last year's prologue - the year he almost won his 2nd Tdf. Therefore, Lance taking 15 seconds in a 7 minute effort one year later should certainly worry Ullrich. Well, that fact, and the herpes outbreak. :D

off topic, OLN only give broadcast live in the middle of the race, not the beginning. Guess it takes too much time. By the time we turn on the TV since the stage 1, there was already a break. At least they replay that moment for us to see.

just be thankful guys, we can watch the tour on T.V., there was a time that we don't have it on T.V., just say amen to this guys,

Looks like Al & Bob start the primetime coverage and Phil & Paul finish it off. Personally, I like the different perspectives. I watch the live in the morning and the "Expanded Coverage" at night (gotta love being a teacher w/ the summer off :D ) and they're both useful. Bob and Al bring an approach that gives some decent background (Paul or Phil didn't talk how hard it was for ? to get back to the peloton once the cars have passed since he had to fight through the chaos of the general public following the race (Bob did)). Bob may be a nut and he may not be able to keep his hands down, but he's a damn fine commentator IMHO. Remember, when Lance had to decide for good whether to ride again or not, he chose Bob to ride with him in Boone. There's a reason there. Bobke gives a good "fun guy" perspective without leaving out the important stuff. Al is the weak link... (but he DOES have the best "voice" of the 4 :) )

BTW as for something "being wrong" with someone because they think Bob and Al do a better job that P & P, that's a bit too arrogant for my tastes. Remember, many people NEED the toned down coverage. If you want to reach more than a handful of hard core cyclists, you need someone to keep it simple. Phil & Paul don't do this anywhere NEAR as well as Bob does (Al just reads the teleprompter :D ). In that respect, Bob is better than the 2 P's. If you combine all of them, you get some solid coverage. Bob's comments about not knowing abot altitude training, etc w/ Carmichael offered a good perspective. Be careful what you wish for. If OLN cut out Bob and Al (and maybe even Kristen) the viewership might drop enough that they'd reconsider coverage, regardless of what number Lance is on. Bob and Al might well be what keeps some of the viewers glued while they watch 100 guys pedal at 90 rpms for an hour... If we lost those "casual" viewers, we might lose the TdF (or at least the classics and the other tours...) Stop looking down your nose and be thankful for the coverage. Worst case scenario: get out your VCR manual and learn to tape the live coverage...

Good points by everyone.

Bob and Al at night for the people who don't know a peloton from a pizza. Phil and Paul in the morning for the more devoted hardcore fans. Works for me.

Now if they could only get rid of Kirsten. :)

Good points by everyone.

Bob and Al at night for the people who don't know a peloton from a pizza. Phil and Paul in the morning for the more devoted hardcore fans. Works for me.

Now if they could only get rid of Kirsten. :)

Problem solved, she's not on in the morning except for the travel human interest stuff for a couple minutes during the pre race show :p

FWIW, yesterday's piece was about BEER! Nothing wrong with a good looking woman talking about beer! :beer:

-murray

But there CAN be something wrong with a good-looking woman after drinking a few beers :D

Personally, I really enjoy looking at KG and I think she's well suited for "color" commentary. Not the best cycling commentator, but she certainly gives me a chance to remember I'm a man after several hours of watching a bunch guys w/ shaved legs (espcially when the female/gay male motorcyclist cameraperson is zooming in on Ulrich's ass :D )

OLN, which is owned by Comcast, is trying to expand its viewership.

AHHH!!! So THAT's why I can't get it on WideOpenWest (my cable company)!!! WOW are in direct competition in my market with Comcast. Unfortunately, Comcast suck in every other respect compared to WOW!

Thank god for Nam :D

I like Bob, Phil and Paul. They don't need Trautwig. That said I love the live coverage but hate the "Roadside Tour" and the cutters. I'm very happy for the coverage at any rate.

i actually like the evening commentary better. it's not as boring.
There. i said it. :)

the 'voice' ---Oh my god!:) Youuuuuuu..

Phil and Paul do not do commentary exclusively for OLN. In fact, they also do, for example, commentary for ITV.

I was amazed the first time I fired up my TdeF DVD and got P&P commentating for ITV. I can't imagine how complicated it must be for these guys to follow and call the race from tv monitors and race radio, as well as remember who they have to do various "throws" and promos for.

I also think the TDF coverage has declined in quality somewhat during the lance years. The tour has become more popular, and lance is a big attraction, and OLN is trying to make it more accessible to a larger audience. So they've made it more commercial, more like, dare I say, Olympics coverage. It's become a bit of a star vehicle for lance. It's still great live coverage, though,and anyowe who is fed up with the prime time coverage and those weenies, just tape the morning coverage. I always do. However, remember to give your tape an extra half hour.

I do remember the coverage of the Giro and Vuelta are better, mainly because it's not a lance-a-thon and much more fun. I think coverage of the tour is suffering a bit, and I wish I could get Belgian French language coverage or france 2. But still, let's remember that cycling is barely covered at all on tv here in canada. OLN canada only shows the tour and no other cycling, so it's better than what we usually get. If I ever can afford it, I'm getting Dish TV.

Tonight, in the pre-race coverage, first Bob explained how the riders have catethers installed and connected to some (imaginary) evaporazation pad, so they don't need to go to bathroom even if they drink lot of fluids!!! This was an answer to a viewer's question. After that Al said (or was that Bob too?) how all the oversees riders appear like the poor and hungry children watching some rich banquet and this is because there are 10 Americans and I do not know how many Australians in the this years tour.

Having typed this all, I can not beleive anymore that they realy have said all that. Has somebody else heard that too?

Bob did the same thing last year. i.e. Answering serious questions with silly answers.

Bob did the same thing last year. i.e. Answering serious questions with silly answers.

Was that supposed to be funny?