<<My take is that a hard-core fan of any sport is rarely pleased with TV
coverage, no matter how good it is. I suspect that if you logged onto
lists for any other sport you'd find a general dissatisfaction with the
product. And that includes the sports which hog the bulk of the network
sports time.>>
Not necessarily. I was formerly a member of [EMAIL PROTECTED], devoted to
idscussing the detroit tigers, an American pro baseball team, ad nauseum.
(Posts included discussing years in which Trammell and Whitaker had the
highest ratio of double plays to total chances w/ runner at first, and
years in which the number of ex-tigers currently active in the major
leagues with other teams was highest. Pretty geeky, Bill James-y, stuff)
When George Kell retired from regional TV coverage, the following *week*
on the list was pretty much devoted to "great george Kell and Al Kaline"
TV stories, and how great the two were on the call. All they did for
regional coverage was show the game, and Kell and Kaline called it like
pretty much every broadcaster does and told some stories about games and
days past. Very similar to what Jon Miller and Joe Morgan do, but with a
little less graphical, how-to analysis.
Doesn't seem to be any secret. Show the whole event. Replays when
necessary. Smart commentators who like the game, and can give both
relaxed color and some informed background. Baseball does it. Basketball
does it. Football does it. Hockey does it. Coincidence? I doubt it.
The Dude abides.
Dale
PS. On a related subject - if you are still reading - people always
knocked baseball because it is "sooo boooring." Now people knock distances
because they are boring. I have never found watching or participating in
either to be boring. Actually, there is too little time in each
to think, and as a result, most action is a conditioned, split-second
reflex based on intuition and hours of practice. If this is boring to
you, you are a boring person.
