|
|
|
|
#1
10-18-2004, 05:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I hate baseball on Fox
(...I also hate the Yankees, but that's another thread).
We're stuck with Fox for the duration of the LCS's and the World Series, and I may not be able to take it. For Fox, the mantra "less is more" has no meaning. They believe more is more. Why have two graphics on the screen when you can have 2, plus a crawl? Who cares if the crawl is repeating what the announcers are saying? Why have just graphics, when you can play a song while showing your graphic? And make zoom-swoosh noises as you put them on & off the screen? Why just have 10 cameras, when you can bury a camera in the freakin' dirt in the basepath, and give us a gopher's-eye-view of Johnny Damon swinging and missing. (that added a lot to my understanding...  )I can't take any more....(sob) 
|
| Advertisements | |
|
|
|
|
#3
10-18-2004, 05:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
And Tim McCarver is a moron. Forgot to mention that.
Former catchers usually make good commentators, but not Tim. His grasp of the rules is remarkably shaky, for one thing. During an LDS game (teams forgotten) there was controversy over whether or not a batter was hit by the ball he had just chopped in front of the plate. No call was made, and the batter reached first. While they repeatedly showed the replays, McCarver kept spouting that the runner should've been called out, since he was hit by the ball. He didn't notice that it occured in the batter's box, and the appropriate call should've been "foul ball".
|
|
#4
10-18-2004, 05:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I like the buried cameras. Gives me a view no-one but worms have ever seen, and you can see different aspects of the batter's swing. The announcers could be better, but Vin Scully doesn't work the American League.
|
|
#6
10-18-2004, 06:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I can live with most of it, but the wooshes as graphics move around bites.
|
|
#7
10-18-2004, 06:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Oh, and I know there was a pit thread on it not long ago, but can we please quit it with God Bless America? I never thought I'd be pining for something like Cotton-Eye Joe or YMCA.
|
|
#8
10-18-2004, 06:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ahh, this is why I like baseball more on the radio than on the TV.
There are no graphics to be annoyed by, and the commentators tend to be of a higher caliber than their TV counterparts.
|
|
#9
10-18-2004, 06:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#10
10-18-2004, 07:11 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#11
10-18-2004, 07:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I listen on the radio whenever possible. I hate watching baseball on TV.
|
|
#12
10-18-2004, 07:35 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I agree with all of the above, PLUS I hate all the goddam crowd shots they cram in between pitches. Have you noticed that after the pitcher gets the ball you see - a close up of the pitcher.
- a closeup of some random schmo in the crowd. - a closeup of some other random schmo in the crowd. - a closeup of the batter - another fucking crowd guy - another one - another one - GAAAAH FUCK I WILL KILL YOU!! - and here's the pitch. strike one. - Let's see another fucking asshole in the crowd. Each shot about 1 second in duration of course. It's enough to induce cross-eyed gibbering rage, and it's non-stop for the duration of the entire ballgame! Also, I suspect that they don't show random selections of people either. When it was tied last night, every crowd shot showed somebody looking sad, or worried, or depressed. Was there really not a single happy face in the crowd at that point?? The crowd sounded excited and enthusiastic, but the only ones they actually showed were glum and subdued. I think that they pick those shots to support whatever they decided the storyline of the game should be, and the theme for the night seemed to be "the discouraged Red Sox fan". One of the local radio commentators (Brooke Ward) completely fell for it - he was talking today about how depressed everybody was in Fenway last night, as if the Fox crowd shots were a representative selection. I don't believe it! Seriously, though, those fucking 1-second shots drive me nuts. They should have 3/4s of the cameras taken away so that they would have to concentrate on the game on the field. Another thing that bugs me is when the go to Jeanie Zelasko for a "game break", and the "game break" isn't any earth-shattering news or live update, but just a routing announcement that the next game will be on such-and-such a day and time on Fox blah blah blah. Why do we need a special "game break" for that? Everybody does that, though, not just Fox.
|
|
#14
10-18-2004, 07:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Two gems from last night's game.
"The scoreboard out there is different tonight, they have different numbers up there than last night." "It's like a shutout!" (It was 4-3 at the moment.) God bless Kruk and Kuip, Miller and Flem. Us Giants fans are truly spoiled with our broadcast team (unlike Vin Scully who will wax poetic for half an hour about some girl eating cotton candy, never quite sounding like he knows where he is).
|
|
#15
10-18-2004, 08:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Geez, 14 responses and I'm the first to bring up "Scooter" the talking baseball? Thankfully they don't use that too often.
As for graphics, nothing beats TBS's Friday Night Xtra broadcasts...not even Fox.
|
|
#17
10-18-2004, 08:03 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I've never understood why baseball producers think we want to see some ballplayers entire face taking up the whole screen. It's disgusting.
Can you imagine if football was shown the same way baseball is? During the huddle, the camera would zoom in on the face of the quarterback, then pan to a close up of a linebacker's face while they stand at the line of scrimmage waiting for the offense. The two teams would line up, the camera would zoom in on the quarterbacks entire face while he does the cadence. It would then switch and zoom entirely on one of the defensive lineman's face. Then it would pan the crowd, zooming in on a few fans, then return to an ultra closeup of the quarterback. Then at the snap, it would suddenly zoom out and track the ball in the air. Once the play is done, if it was a success for the offense, the camera would do an ultra-closeup of two players celebrating and then pan to a dejected defensive player's face. If it was a failure for the offense, vice versa. The camera then pans the crowd, zooming in on a few people making interesting faces, then it would return back to an ultra closeup of the quarterback. And immediately, the NFL's numbers see a steady decrease.
|
|
#20
10-18-2004, 09:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I know this isn't really Fox's fault, but it's about at the point where I swear the Yankees-Red Sox game will go completely past the Cardinals-Astros game. When the heck did this game start? Like 5 PM EDT, right?
|
|
#21
10-18-2004, 09:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I listened on the radio when I was in Boston, but I'm in Chicago now, and relegated to the TV. All of the above bother me...but I'd also like to mention how much I hate the little "highlight reels" set to music that get played when they go to or come back from commercial (or whatever sets them off). It seems like instead of actually recapping the game they're collecting stuff to make a point about one team or the other--often "Ha ha, Red Sox are sucking" and "Oooo, aren't the Yankees great?" At least it looks that way to me. I'm biased though, so maybe I notice those more.
But if this really is the case, it seems a little unprofessional. Oh, for the days of the division series and coverage on ESPN.
|
|
#22
10-18-2004, 09:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#23
10-18-2004, 10:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
One more rant against that miserable piece of shit, Scooter. Tonight he actually explained what a brush-back pitch was. WTF? We just saw Pedro put Matsui on his ass and we need this amimated fuckwit to explain it to us like we're three years old? If the idiots at Fox wanted to explain what a brush-back was, all they needed to do was to replay the last pitch. It was a textbook example.
Also, am I the only one who thinks that those Budweiser commercials with Joe Buck assume a little too much? For instance, they seem to assume we think that Joe has any talent, integrity or knowledge of the game in the first place. Oh how I wish they had these games on ESPN. John Miller and Joe Morgan are soooooo much better than these asswipes. Well, they're not all asswipes. Al Leiter is OK.
|
|
#24
10-18-2004, 10:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
The Canadian station with rights is Sportsnet, but they just rebroadcast Fox. Cheaper than producing their own, I suppose.
|
|
#25
10-18-2004, 10:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
However, I will jump in and say that I think Joe Buck is a decent broadcaster, and Jon Miller in excellent. I think Miller calls a wonderful game, and Buck isn't half bad - not as good as Miller and not a tenth of what his father was, but he's solid. Certainly above the level of the knobs I have to listen to when watching the Blue Jays.
Regrettably, Buck and Miller are partnered with Tim McCarver and Joe Morgan, who are to colour work as Carrot Top and Pauly Shore are to intelligent comedy. Morgan is especially frustrating because he was probably the smartest ballplayer to ever play the sport - him or Barry Bonds, or maybe Jackie Robinson - but as a broadcaster he sounds like he's retarded. Worse yet, he's ARROGANT in his stupidity. At the beginning of Yankees-Red Sox Game 2, when the Yankees crowd was chanting "Who's your daddy?" the exchange between him and Miller went like this: MILLER: And the Yankee crowd is chanting "Who's your Daddy?" (laughs) MORGAN: That's because of what Pedro said. MILLER: (Explains story of PEdro MArtinez joking that the Yankees are his daddy, because they beat him a couple of times) MORGAN: You know, what Pedro said didn't mean that. (note that the meaning had never been discussed) It's hip hop slang, and hip hop slang sometimes has more than one meaning. (like, you know, most of English.) So the Yankee fans are chanting that but it's not what he meant. MILLER: (stunned silence) MORGAN: So, you know, he said `they're my daddy' but he didn't mean the same thing. (there has never been an explanation from Dr. Morgan as to what the first assumed meaning is) MILLER: (stunned silence) MORGAN: 'Cause it's hip hop slang (apparently Martinez is a rare idiot savant who only speaks in hip hop slang) and it has more than one meaning. MILLER: (stunned silence) MORGAN: You know, because he didn't mean that. (What? WHAT???) MILLER: Uhh, here's Derek Jeter... McCarver, on the other hand, is 70% John Madden, 20% Terry Bradshaw, 10% Harry Neale, and 100% slapnad. Buck and Miller have to struggle to be respectable when they're sharing booths with these people. Frighteningly, Al Leiter, despite being too quiet and not really knowing how to talk on the air, provides more valuable insights than Morgan and McCarver combined. David Justice, not so much.
|
|
#27
10-19-2004, 12:02 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Morgan and McCarver seem to be suffering from the same disease -- they've had so many people tell them how smart they are, they seem to constantly be trying to outdo themselves to prove how smart they are, and they wrap back around to the stupid end of the spectrum. I actually enjoyed both of them in their earlier days as broadcasters, but they've both become insufferable.
I agree with the others who've been impressed with Al Leiter's work so far. And that David Justice was no better than OK. I've been really spoiled over the last dozen years or so with the Braves' broadcast team of Joe Simpson, Pete Van Wieren, Don Sutton, and Skip Caray. And I guess it's a good thing that Chip Caray's joining the TV crew for next year, but I'm disappointed that they've asked Sutton to take a pay cut as a condition for coming back next year -- I'd be surprised if he does, and I hate to see him go.
|
|
#28
10-19-2004, 12:35 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
#29
10-19-2004, 06:54 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'd like to lock Scooter in a bench vise and slowly saw him in half with a hacksaw.
McCarver blew the infield fly rule- when the Sox had men on first and second, none out, and Damon popped up a bunt. He said the ball didn't go high enough to trigger the infield fly rule. No, Tim. The infield fly rule does not apply to bunted balls. Posada could have and should have let it drop and gone for a 2-5-4 DP. That stroboscopic score display drives me bananas. Every stinking out, the team on the scoreboard flashes, turns into the logo, and then turns back again. And we're watcing the stinking game! Do we need the silly graphic to flash "Astros home run" as we see Beltran circle the bases? Enough of the praying fans, let's see more Jeannie! Silly side bar on Johnny Damon. Since he cut his hair, we call him "He-Man" in our house. The haircut looks remarkably like the old He-Man cartoon of the early 1980s.
|
|
#31
10-19-2004, 08:30 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Oh, and whoever came up with 'Scooter' should be tied to a stake in front of home plate while Beltran and Pujols take extended batting practice.
__________________
I love you, El_Kabong
|
|
#32
10-19-2004, 09:25 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
McCarver is the one who really gets to the Sox fans out here. He's constantly muddling the names of just about everyone on the team. He called Bronson Arroyo "Brandon Arroyo" at least 3 times, by my count, during Arroyo's start the other night. Terry Francona occasionally becomes "Derek Francona", and last night Tim Wakefield was rechristened "Winfield". Oh well. His stunning analysis of the game makes up for it, I guess.
McCarver brings about as much to the table as a waitress with no arms.
|
|
#33
10-19-2004, 09:39 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#34
10-19-2004, 09:47 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I'm not really on the same page as all of you. First of all, Joe Buck is probably my favorite play-by-play guy ever. I think he calls a great game, is original with his language, drops the cliche only when unavoidable. He brings a lot of humor to it, knows when to shut up (and McCarver even does sometimes), drops in the esoteric reference from time to time, CLEARLY knows his baseball history. AFAIK, Joe Buck was the inventor of the concise, "track. wall. gone." a GREAT home-run call which has been totally ripped off since -- so much so that I'm not sure he even says it anymore. As far as zooms and swooshes. Whatever. It's modern TV production. FOX might do a little more of it than other stations, but that kind of stuff has been going on for 10 years now. I'm almost oblivious to it. Baseball is different than football in terms of "shots" too. Football runs a play that can then be disected in slow mo while nothing happens. Baseball is a lot of nothing happening. I think the close shots of the faces of the pitcher and batter bring a lot to the game. I think they try to recreate being at a game a little between pitches. I mean what do you do? You look up at the Budweiser sign, look at the scoreboard, look at the kids banging on the wall, then you watch the pitch. Watch a classic baseball game on TV. Catcher throws the ball to the pitcher. Camera stays there in centerfield with that one shot of the battery until the next pitch. Every pitch. All game. Ho hum. I've liked Al Leiter, too, mainly because you only hear him once every two innings. He's had some really interesting things to say that really bring you into the game. Even small stuff like last night on the liner back to the pitcher. He says, "that looks really fast on TV but usually you have it all the way and its not that tough of a play." That's good stuff. McCarver might say stupid shit sometimes, but not every thing out of his mouth is dumb. I think most of the time he has something good to say. And he's pretty good with Buck. The other day Buck says, "we've seen Mel Stottlemyer more tonight than in the 1964 world series," and McCarver was cracking up.
|
|
#35
10-19-2004, 10:00 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I love Krukow.
|
|
#36
10-19-2004, 10:02 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
The whooshy graphics don't need to be part of the broadcast. I don't see them on ESPN or local baseball broadcasts. This season has been the first that FOX has made the score graphic flashy and irritating. They suck.
|
|
#37
10-19-2004, 10:15 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#39
10-19-2004, 10:25 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I think they whoosh in and highlight whoever has the ball, or they whoosh it when they change the down or something. I've come to accept the "between batters" mini-commercials and the zooming in on the "budweiser" sign during the game. They know that between innings I'm on Monday Night Football and they gots to pay the bills.
|
|
#40
10-19-2004, 11:41 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Joe Buck: And there's Jason Bateman giving signs to Damon. I'm surprised Bateman has time for that considering his starring role on the critically acclaimed Fox show "Arrested Development" airing Sundays at 8:30. Tim McCarver: That Aaron Benton is one funny guy. Buck: And now to explain 3rd base coach hand signals, here's our little cartoon buddy, Scooter. Whooooooooooooosh At this point, McCarver has slowly but strongly entered the rarefied air of broadcasting irritation heretofore populated solely by Billy Packer.
|
|
#41
10-19-2004, 11:45 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Have you ever watched one of the old games rebroadcast on ESPN Classic? We were watching an old Reds game from the 70s and it was awesome. No lame graphics or sound effects, almost no ads or sponsorships, and best of all the commentators told you what was going on in the game and then SHUT THE HELL UP. Who was it that decided that every second of air had to be filled with yammering voices? Sorry, but I'll take "man of few words" Joe Morgan over "yakkity-yakkity-yak!" John Miller any day.
|
|
#42
10-19-2004, 12:00 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
After sending Poochie (no, wait, I mean Scooter) back to his home planet, I think a much better pitch demonstration technique would be to show Al Leiter showing us how to hold the ball followed by a few pitches at a target. Of course the bullseye for that target would be around McCarver's testicles.
|
|
#43
10-19-2004, 12:05 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#45
10-19-2004, 01:11 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
|
#46
10-19-2004, 01:21 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Jeannie Zelasko, sorry, just looks like a crack ho with that hair and lipstick, is as about as insightful, and needs to get off my screen. Kevin Kennedy is damn lucky he isn't selling used cars for a living. And what TV executive ever thought Tim McCarver was a net positive?
Put Buck and Leiter in the booth, alone, and drag everyone else out and shoot 'em, the Scooter guy first. Then maybe we'll have a decent broadcast.
|
|
#47
10-19-2004, 01:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#48
10-19-2004, 02:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Just for fun: Al Leiter has pitched in 17 games in 10 postseason series and has been on the losing side in only 2 of the 10 series he's played in. He has pitched for the World Champion Blue Jays of '93, the World Champion Marlins of '97 and the NL Champion Mets of 2000 (they lost to the Yankees). He also pitched for the Mets in '99 when they lost the NLCS to the Braves. In his four career World Series starts, he is 0-1 with an ERA of 3.76.
|
|
#49
10-19-2004, 10:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
OK, until tonight, I regarded Joe Morgan as an annoyance, but he's moved on to full-blown moron.
[seven replays of A-Rod plainly, clearly, blatantly swatting ball out of the Sox' glove] Joe Morgan: Well, he was running and pumping his arms. I don't know if you can call this. John Miller: He not only knocked the ball out of his hand, he knocked the glove off. Joe Morgan: Well, he was running and pumping his arms, so I don't know if you can call that. [close-up of outstretched arm hitting elbow] Joe Morgan: Well, if you look here, you can see that he was running and pumping his arms, so I don't know if you can call that. [cut to A-Rod saying, "I swatted the ball out of his hand, stupid."] Joe Morgan: I dunno, Alex, you were running and pumping your arms, so I don't know if you can call that. John Miller: You fucking douchebag; look at the goddamn tape! Joe Morgan: And as you can see here, A-Rod clearly knocks the ball out of his hand.
|
|
#50
10-19-2004, 10:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Normally I cut the guy some slack, after all, the guy's job is to bullshit for three hours, but Tim McCarver just said that Foulke's leadoff walk is just as bad as giving up a leadoff homerun. Now, it's 4 to 2. 4 to 3 with no one on and no one out, is much better than 4 to 2 with no one out and a man on first.
C'mon Tim, you don't need to overstate everything, do ya?
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
