When I started watching Valencia 3^rd practice today I didn’t expect to be insulted live on air by a member of the BBC commentary team.

David Croft and Anthony Davidson were commentating on Schumacher’s return and at first the comments were even handed, especially from Ant. Making a comparison with Lance Armstrong’s return he made the point that  in retirement a cyclist was better placed to simulate the experience of racing than Michael.

Then it started to go downhill, we got the same tired clichés often reeled off by the anti-Schumacher types, stuff about how Michael always had a better car and less able team mate. Heavily hinting that these were the only reasons for his success.

I sent a tweet protesting this. Originally I was going to say “You’re always trashing Michael Schumacher’s reputation. With Brundle, is this sour grapes from ex drivers jealous that their careers are over?”

Obviously this was a bit rude so I changed it to:

“@5LiveF1 You’re trashing of Michael Schumacher’s reputation is extremely boring. You just can’t help yourselves.”

After I sent it I saw I hadn’t edited the beginning, not to worry, people make typos in firing off quick messages.

David Croft read my tweet and clearly riled by my criticism broadcast a personal on-air attack on my supposed poor grammar. Even Ant said that he thought his comments were harsh.

Perhaps David Croft isn’t used to getting viewer/listener feedback that isn’t fawning but that is no excuse for such unprofessional behaviour.

If they want their listeners just to send in comments saying how wonderful they are all and how fantastic the British drivers are then please say so and the rest of us won’t bother invading their Nirvana.

Finally, if you are going to take the moral high ground on matters of grammar it is a good idea to have your own house in order – glass houses and all that. So just for 5LiveF1’s resident grammar policeman, some gems from the 5LiveF1 Twitter feed.

@pastamaster39 I think Kerb height at turn 12 and 13 will be key, I wonder if they have been changed?

@f1_fans Great video’s though

2:29 PM Jun 4th via TweetDeck in reply to f1_fans

To all those asking we have not knicked @jakehumphreyf1 ’s we have our own! Good for reading tweets not great for sending them….

9:42 PM Jun 7th via TweetDeck

@kevcorbett No License Fee has been spent on the iPad. It is a personal one to help our commentary in case the Daily Mail is reading this!

10:05 PM Jun 7th via web

You have been involved in Motorsport for many years, known only to a few hardcore race motorsport aficionados and then you get your big break, promoted to the pinnacle of motorsport. Under the glare of the British media you are now a household name to millions of F1 fans. Your team mate is already well established and has legions of loyal fans.

Almost from day one the sniping starts. Your ability is questioned and any error magnified. The abuse becomes highly personal with hurtful comments on your appearance.

Despite this, you approach every race with the same enthusiasm and despite the difficulties, manage to maintain a positive outlook. The abuse continues. A cursory glance at some of the blogs and F1 forums will see your name and your reputation trashed.

With glee, there is talk of potential successors and sympathy expressed for your team mate being saddled with such an inept performer. This turns to near ecstasy when it is announced that your employer is turning its back on F1. Normally job losses are mourned, but it is perfectly fine to celebrate the loss of your prized F1 role.

This is nasty unpleasant bullying of the highest order. The narrative is set and few are brave enough to offer a contrary opinion.

And then Melbourne arrives. After the qualifying session your performance is starting to be reappraised. Perhaps the judgement has been too harsh in the past? The race is won and many of your erstwhile critics are eating humble pie. Your talent is recognised and more people are coming out to say that you really are rather good (even surprising themselves to admit it).

I write not of Jenson nor of Rubens, but the much maligned former ITV lead commentator James Allen.

We were barely into qualifying when it became clear that Jonathan Legard and Martin Brundle was not a match made in heaven. At times Martin Brundle struggled to get a word in and when he did, found himself being talked over. Jonathan Legard may be the BBC old hand, but Martin Brundle is the draw. Their working relationship may be new, but surely they had rehearsals to iron out roles?

A criticism levelled at James Allen is that he is a bit too enthusiastic, a bit hyper. However paired with a laid back Martin Brundle the opposing styles complemented each other. With Jonathan Legard having a similar speaking style to Brundle, the pair sounded very soporific.

Even after just the qualifying session I was wondering whether I wanted to listen to these two for the whole race.

Perhaps they don’t get on. This impression was enhanced when we saw them both in the commentary box just before the race, where Jonathan was trying to engage Martin in a guess the number of broken front wings game – already done to death on 5 Live. To quote Murray Walker “You could have cut the atmosphere with a cricket stump”

On some of the forums it has been suggested that Jonathan Legard sounds as if he is commentating on a horse race. Perhaps in preparing for the role he studied the F1 segment of Alan Partridge’s year of sport in the Radio 4 1991 Christmas edition of ‘On the Hour’?

James Allen’s absence from the commentary box denied the viewer a passionate voice for what was a remarkable race. Thankfully the BBC’s interactive service allowed you to change the audio and listen to the perfectly matched David Croft and Anthony Davidson, who gave every impression of enjoying the race and working with each other.

Hopefully the TV commentary team will get their act together in time for Malaysia. If not, they may need to give “The Cock” a call.