A challenging question can prompt a variety of responses from politicians in their attempt to save face. Criticising the interviewer is one such tactic identified in previous research. The focus here was on this form of personalisation: responses directed personally at the interviewer, often used as a substitute for a straight answer (i.e., playing the man, not the ball). Sampling online interview videos, our analysis revealed a broad range of personalisations: many critical, but also non-critical, including flattery, banter, and advice to calm down. These tactics are discussed as effective responses, which can disarm, wrong-foot, neutralise, or beguile interviewers, often shifting control towards the politician. Furthermore, personalised rhetoric appears more widespread than previously suggested—featuring in the communicative style of many mainstream British politicians. A new typology of personalisation is proposed, designed to fit within the existing overall equivocation typology for the benefit of future empirical research.