I watched a good deal of the Tour of California this year. It was great to get a cycling fix so early in the season. I watched some of the hour-long shows and more of the live coverage for the last few stages.
Watching the race coverage, there are a few things that pushed my eyebrows together and
made my forehead wrinkle in wonder:
Do you think there were an unusually large number of men running like rabid dogs next to the peloton wearing Speedos? I dunno, maybe it was just me?
How about the costumed guys? I want to know how they go about selecting just the right costume to presumably get themselves on camera and hopefully not edited out for the footage that stays around for posterity? I think there were just too many of them and their (presumably) intentional affect is lost. One crazy guy running around in costume is a novelty, but a dozen or more kinda looses the effect – for me anyway.
What about the dude running next to the peloton, holding his infant outstretched as if the kid was a sacrifice to the cycling gods? Did you see the look on that guy’s face?
I totally missed the intended effect of Rasika Mathur. If she was to represent the person watching cycling, knowing nothing about cycling, but eager to learn more…well…I think she missed the mark. If she was intended to represent the female market watching Versus, totally missed the mark. If she was intended to provide comedic relief, then for my taste in humor, missed the mark. So I wonder, what was the goal of her segment?
Maybe I just don't get it.
What do you think?