And there is the crux of the matter.
Each commentator has their own innate style and learned style of commentary. I don't believe I have ever heard of one commentator who has never received negative criticism on this forum.
Sometimes people just don't like:
1. The sound of the commentator's voice or the noises they make when speaking.
2. Their ability to predict what should or might happen or their ability to state what did happen.
3. The quality of their stories.
4. Their ability to keep the commentary on track and flowing.
5. Their ability to make the guest commentator look and sound knowledgeable and comfortable.
6. Their particular idiosyncrasies.
7. Their bias for a particular player or group of players.
8. Their inclination to monopolize the commentary.
9. Their inclination to talk about themselves nonstop.
10. Their lapses of concentration on the match at hand.
11. Their sluggish responses to what's going on at the table.
12. Those commentators who have a particular shtick that irritates you.
13. Those commentators who take the opportunity of sitting behind the mic to sell their personal product the entire time they are in the booth.
There's a lot more where that came from but you get the idea.
If people wanted a higher level of commentary, I mean truly wanted a better commentary product, they would need to pay a lot more money than they are currently paying.
One idea to improve commentary that I have always championed was something I learned from working with Dustin McCollum. He regularly fed information to the commentator via the headset and this in my opinion really made a difference in the quality of the commentary. It also helped that Dustin was not alone in providing the Live Stream. This takes more manpower and this means more money.
Also, it is impossible for commentators to sit in the booth hour after hour and sounding excited and fresh. Again, that means additional commentators which means more money.
The best commentators are usually the ones you hear infrequently. I know, I know, Billy Incardona is the best of the best, except for those couple of guys who don't like his style (you know who you are).
It's all good. Don't be mad at me Billy.
JoeyA
Yobagua, you make some good points, in your assessment of DD's skills, (or lack of them) as a commentator... As you can see, many think Danny makes so many errors in his observations, that he is borderline 'unwatchable', much of the time !..If he needs the little additional income it provides him, that is another matter entirely !
IMHO, a fitting analogy..... No big deal one way or the other, Mr. Wu !..Just bored, and felt like discussing one of my favorite subjects 
