--- Ed Leafe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jul 8, 2006, at 3:12 PM, Jerry Wolper wrote: > > > I will mention that ESPN is in a no-win situation. > If they aim their > > coverage at knowledgable fans, they lose the > newbies, while if they > > simplify for the casual fans, people who > understand offsides become > > frustrated. > > I don't think that that's true at all. It wasn't > simply a case of > "dumbing down" the coverage; it was saying > completely stupid things. > There are many different ways to approach their > coverage, but saying > things that simply are not true is not one of them.
May be many people are under-estimating the average American sports fan ability to understand the finer points of a simple game. http://www.forbes.com/2006/07/07/soccer-web-fifa_cx_lh_0710soccer.html And don't assume that the English commentators offer any better coverage than those on the other side of the Pond. Some BBC Radio reporters spend more time showing off than they do offering sensible explanations of the laws. Everyone assumes we all know every rule in the book, while many still can't explain off-side. I believe it is the lack of advertising opportunities in a match that stops it becoming more popular than other televised sports. Stuart __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
