Re: Quick game thoughts...

[Snoopy the Celtics Beagle <snoopy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I don't mind if the home team announcers are favoring the home team--after 
all, that's why they're there.  But as Ryan pointed out, the play by play 
guy should be trying to keep it to a low roar, concentrating on what 
actually happened, and leave wistful interpretation to the color analyst.

That's one thing that makes it interesting doing game reviews, by the 
way.  I have to balance my "inner Johnny Most" with a reasonably objective 
view to give people a realistic notion of what happened.  The C's 
announcers manage a reasonable balance most of the time.  The Pacers were 
unrelentingly unprofessional, inaccurate, and downright mean in their 
fanciful descriptions of the game.

At 08:30 AM 11/12/03 -0800, Ryan W wrote:

>--- Shawn Niles <shizzjr@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Can you elaborate on Indy's announcers? What were
> > they saying?
>
>Shawn,
>
>Honestly, I'm put most on their insanity out of my
>mind, so I won't be able to give you a compelling
>reason why I think they were so horrible.  Quinn
>Buckner and Al Alberts were doing the game.  One thing
>that stuck out was that every shot the Celtics took
>was a "heave" as described by Al Alberts' canned
>"play-by-play" voice.  Also, at some point in the 1st
>half, when Pierce was 3 for 6 in field goals, they
>said he was "struggling to make shots."  There were
>other factual inaccuracies I can't remember right now.
>
>
>Mainly I suppose it was the outward homerism that
>bothered me.  Of course, most on this list hates Tommy
>for that very reason (I don't btw, I love Tommy!), yet
>I think his brand of homerism is less egregious.
>First of all, Tommy is so over-the-top that it becomes
>caricature at some points, almost to the extent of
>performance art.  Plus, there is the always objective
>Mike Gorman to keep things in line.  They really do
>balance things out.  The Indiana announcers, on the
>other hand, both got into the homerism act.  In my
>opinion, the play-by-play man should be the straight
>man, telling it like it is in as objective a manner as
>possible (that said, the play-by-play man for a
>regional broadcast cannot help but skew that
>"objective" play-by-play broadcasting towards the home
>team, since he or she covers the home team for the
>whole season), while the color analyst can play it
>more off-the-cuff and personal.  It's like a stand-up
>act.  That's why players are color analysts and
>trainded broadcasters the play-by-play analysts.  The
>player can just be himself with his own unique
>personality, while the play-by-play man has a duty to
>perform up to industry standards.  Al Alberts, like
>every other lame Alberts brother, likes to tinge his
>play-by-play with subtle digs at the opposition (like
>the aforementioned "heaves").
>
>I suppose, in the end, it could probably be just
>me-the-Celtic-fan reacting to extreme Indiana-based
>homerism.  But I will stand by the fact that both men
>speak horribly (to my ears, aesthetically speaking)
>and have little knowledge of the game.
>
>Ryan
>
>__________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard
>http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree

Snoopy the Celtics Beagle
Please visit the <http://www.celticsbeagle.net/>Celtics Beagle Website