|
31 Aug 10 - 12:07 AM (#2976428) Subject: BS: TV sports commentators: who needs 'em? From: MGM·Lion TV Sports commentators ~~ who needs 'em? These thoughts were prompted intitially by using the red button on Sky Sports yesterday to watch an alternative match to the one offered on the mainstream channel. I had never done this before. At first I didn't realise why I was enjoying the match so much more than usual. Then my wife pointed the reason out to me. THERE WASN'T ANY COMMENTARY. None of those pairs of facetious people making otiose comments on the play to draw attention to what we could perfectly well see or extrapolate for ourselves {as, e.g., "He has let three break points go; he can't be feeling too happy about that"}; no unasked information about the players' private lives or ages {"His wife is still in hospital after an unfortunate traffic accident"; "Her 27th birthday was the Tuesday before last" ...}. None of it. Oh the joy and delight of just watching the game and following the perfectly informative scorelines, with no more distraction than the sounds of the crowd reactions, the rackets on the balls, the linesmen's calls and the umpire's scorings. Bliss! And oh how much worse it has got since the second, and even sometimes third, commentator came in, so that now we have all sorts of facetious and irrelevant interchanges to distract us ~~ think of, or look out for, your own examples: I don't wish to become more wearisome than I can help. Moreover, tennis happens to be a game particularly well adapted to the pauses in the comments while the play goes on, notionally reserving them for the intervals between points. But more & more, under the influence originally of the egregious McEnroe, (a fine player but a self-satisfied, self-centred bore when not playing, who appears to think we have switched on solely for the pleasure and privilege of hearing him talk), the commentary is distractingly being permitted to spill over into the play ~~ there was a hair-tear-inducing occasion during last year's Wimbledon when he went on at length, through two entire rallies, about how difficult he found it to understand the scoring system in cricket ~ GRRR!. These remarks apply equally in general terms to soccer ~ the other game I watch most regularly ~ cricket, and no doubt to all the other televised sports which I rarely or never watch. But I am sure I have said enough regarding the example of tennis to make my point ~~ TV SPORTS COMMENTATORS ~~ WHO NEEDS 'EM?! What do other Catters think? ~Michael~ |
|
31 Aug 10 - 12:32 AM (#2976438) Subject: RE: BS: TV sports commentators: who needs 'em? From: MGM·Lion Should perhaps have specified it was the US Open I was watching. It occurs to me to anticipate a probable riposte of "Why not just press the 'mute' button?", by saying that the crowd reactions, calls, sound of the actual game like ping of ball on racket and running footsteps &c, are all part of the desirable atmosphere which I should not wish to lose. Would add too that some sports {e.g. soccer} can do with just one not over-obtrusive commentator to name the player on the ball &c ~ but, please, no more than that. ~M~ |
|
31 Aug 10 - 01:13 AM (#2976445) Subject: RE: BS: TV sports commentators: who needs 'em? From: John on the Sunset Coast Not I. The few times I watch sports, I turn down the sound. Most times they are not even calling the action as it happens...they're just nattering as you noted. |
|
31 Aug 10 - 03:49 AM (#2976489) Subject: RE: BS: TV sports commentators: who needs 'em? From: Leadfingers I'll take it one stage further - Television - Who NEEDS it ? |
|
31 Aug 10 - 05:52 AM (#2976525) Subject: RE: BS: TV sports commentators: who needs 'em? From: Tangledwood Let's expand it to commentators in general. The 2009 Edinburgh Tattoo aired on TV here a couple of days ago. The commentator spoke through what seemed to be about 90% of what is basically a musical performance. |
|
31 Aug 10 - 12:54 PM (#2976765) Subject: RE: BS: TV sports commentators: who needs 'em? From: Greg F. Or at least, TV "Sports" - who needs it, Leadfingers. Bread & Circuses, 2000 years on. |
|
31 Aug 10 - 02:00 PM (#2976814) Subject: RE: BS: TV sports commentators: who needs 'em? From: Little Hawk Exactly my reaction, Greg. (Surprise!) The last time I watched TV sports must have been about 30 years ago, I think. |
|
31 Aug 10 - 02:10 PM (#2976822) Subject: RE: BS: TV sports commentators: who needs 'em? From: gnu They can be a pain. But when they are good, they enhance the broadcast. Thread creep... Yankee football. A few years back, a great comedian, social satirist, political pundit, and writer was given a spot on Monday Night Football. It was the first time that a non-pro sports commentator or non-ex pro football player had been given such a job. He was to be the first "fan" commentator. He was excellent. His eloquence, his humour, his VAST knowledge of the history of the league, the teams, the players... it was almost shocking. I very much enjoyed his work and looked forward to listening to him as much as watching the games. He was let go at the end of the regular season. He had obviously made the rest of them look like dolts. |
|
31 Aug 10 - 02:22 PM (#2976831) Subject: RE: BS: TV sports commentators: who needs 'em? From: Q (Frank Staplin) I am old enough to remember the play-by-play calls on radio. The Rose Bowl was a ritual part of our New Years day feast and get-together. Since we were listening to a station over a thousand miles away (clear channel days and little electronic interference), we would groan when we missed a play or two. With television, 99% of commentary is no longer necessary, and I often mute the sound. Sports are important, since they let us tune out thought for a while- lets the brain recuperate. |