Larry Rawson, Carol Lewis, Dwight Stones: Are you watching OLN?

just a headsup to the original poster. there is a huge difference between calling a meet in real time with faulty information on a feed, as opposed to calling a meet three days later when you already know the results.

Truer words never spoken. Those human hydroplanes really scoot, based on leg turnover. Go down to your local high school track and try to run one lap in 60 seconds. Believe me, those steeple barriers don't move. These Kenyans are going to go home and buy cattle.

"Just go down to your local high school track and try to run even on lap at that pace"

"It's on like Donkey Kong"

What's wrong with such commentating?

All you need to make a good call is enthusiasm and knowledge. After watching the m1500 call, I believe this is simply the original Eurosport feed, commentated live at the time.

"It's On Like Donkey Kong"???

When the idiot said that on a telecast a few weeks back, I almost cried while facing the reality we have egocentric fools (LED BY YOU, DWIGHT) in the press box.

Though they did say Warnier ran 49.31 at Paris lol.

also watch spanish television soccer..

GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLLLLLL!!!

I admit the commentators are better. But, please understand that when Rawson amkes those comments he is speaking to the track ignorant American who is hopefully watching with his track knowledgable freind.

Also, did you notice how HUGE the stadium was and how far away from the athletes the spectators were?

So I took some notes for the ESPN2 crew to work with:

1. Excitement!

You're commentating at the highest level of the sport and your voices should reflect it. Note the tone of seriousness when introducing the competitors. They aren't stumbling over pronunciations for godsakes; the elite athletes should be as familiar as starting quarterbacks in the NFL. As the race unfolds the voice builds in layers; normal cadence and volume at the outset leading up to quickening in delivery. You are shouting by the last few seconds of the race. I wanted to hand the commentator a towel at the conclusion of the race.

2. Play-by-play, not human interest

I really don't care what the Visa Champions are doing at the local middle school during the race. Likewise, I don't need to be made aware of a comparison at my local track, etc. These athletes are 100 levels above the viewer, no comparison necessary. I already appreciate what they are doing. Can you imagine Dwyane Wade's feats being related by telling me to imagine jumping over 2 of my couches stacked together or some nonsense? I also don't care what Dwyane Wade does off the court; if I did I'd google it. Just describe his actions in an enthusiastic way.

3. Knowledge of the Events and Athletes

As mentioned earlier, stumbling over pronunciation is unacceptable. As is not understanding when splits are incredibly fast or slow, when an athlete is breaking from their normal trend. Think about the staff of any NFL, NBA, or MLB broadcast. They know so much about their sport that the strategy speak usually goes slightly over my head. This NEVER happens with ESPN track broadcasts. The Rome men's 1500 was such a good example. The announcers were about to blow a gasket when the pace rolled 51, 1:48, 2:46. Dwight had little to say about it, and didn't understand the consequences of it. The OLN crew was right on top, recognizing that the rabbits had gone too fast, and the leaders would be fading down the stretch, but the fact that WR pace was on deserved to be recognized.

4. Historical References

The lore of the sport must be maintained. For example, the Carter/Wariner matchup should be built up by mentioning the athletes backgrounds and a little reference to the 19.32, 19.63, 43.91, and the 43.18. OLN had some good references to El G and to some old field event things.

So in conclusion, you all (ESPN2 track crew) seem like nice people who are enthusiastic about your jobs. You just need to tighten up your product... a lot. This isn't roller hockey filling air time on ESPN2, it's the greatest sport in the world.

Thank you Larry. I look forward to your commentary and the same with the other two. You all are doing great and I've been in this game a long time.

runn wrote:

I admit the commentators are better. But, please understand that when Rawson amkes those comments he is speaking to the track ignorant American who is hopefully watching with his track knowledgable freind.

If this is a "good thing", then why don't other sports telecasts do this? I'll tell you why, because they actually have a clue.

I can't wait for the next Super Bowl, when John Madden's colleague in the booth is allowed to say, "That's a heckuva pass. Go to your refrigerator and take out a melon and throw it 50 yards for pinpoint accuracy. It ain't easy folks!"

And it ain't good commentating either, dumbshit.

runn wrote:

I admit the commentators are better. But, please understand that when Rawson amkes those comments he is speaking to the track ignorant American who is hopefully watching with his track knowledgable freind.

If that's the case, then we don't need Rawson's blather. The uninformed can ask us and we can tell them about turnover or a high school track or whatever. There is one time every four years that the uninformed watch track in any numbers. Remember, we're not talking about curling or darts, we're talking about the third largest HS sport in the country. Besides, how complex is the damn sport anyway? You shoot off a gun, first to the finish line wins. I like it because it's so damn simple.

Someone needs to watch Phil Liggett call the Tour de France and take careful notes.

runn wrote:

I admit the commentators are better. But, please understand that when Rawson amkes those comments he is speaking to the track ignorant American who is hopefully watching with his track knowledgable freind.

Based on ratings for a typical track broadcast, the "track-ignorant American" hasn't watched T&F outside the Olympic games for a couple of decades. Problem is that our presentation of meets--with Rawson's inanity, multiple replays on sprints and hurdles, etc.--is alienating track-savvy Americans, too. I'll watch a meet when I happen upon one, but I haven't gone out of my way to watch track on American TV for several years.

Keep up the pressure. You may get what you want, better announcing. The number of video feeds, audio feeds, camera positions, spotters, grips, etc. are limited by money. Budget determines the quality of coverage, simple arithmetic of projected expenses set off by receivables from sponsors, advertisers, meet directors and the federations.

When I look at what you are doing here though, I'm afraid that you are barking up a tree in the red-neck white trash trailer park in Oildale, when you should be barking up the tree on Rodeo Drive and Wilshire Blvd ;-)

USATF, IAAF, the individual federations, race and meet directors waste money on patronge, nepotism. They pay full expenses for hundreds sometimes a thousand well dressed useless people sipping wine and eating cheese and quiche.

First- don't call me dumbshit, asshole.

OK, I did not say it was good comentating, moron, I told you what he was doing.

I have said many times, you ignorant fool, that the ESPN guys should watch OLN and learn.

I have also said, you mindless crap, that they should should watch the Tour de France on OLN to learn how to call a meet.

Lighten up, you immature, pimply faced, fool and realize when you are in a discussion, not an arguement.

Now, let's be nice.

EXCELLENT POINT. Phil kicks a*s.

I can live without the other guys that OLN has doing the tour commentary. Who's this Bob Roll guy anyway?

A classic comment by Bob Roll a few days ago. The question was asked why the sprinters don't do better at the longer stages and in the overall standings. In short his answer was (I will take some liberty as I do not remember the exact quote) the sprinters get geared up with all that lactic acid. If you went out early in a race at that speed your lactic acid would be so high you would become asphyxiated. I don't have the exact quote but it was high lactic acid = asphyxiated. Yikes, bad form.

Yes, Phil is great and he brings the viewer up to the level of the sport, not the sport down to the level of the viewer.

If the commentators talk to the audience like they're ignorant, they will remain ignorant and have no respect for the sport. Compare it to that line in Ferris Buehler where his friend said you can't respect someone who kisses your ass. In this case, the announcers are kissing the audiences ass and the audience will not respect the sport.

Not only is track the 3rd most popular HS sport, it is one of the most popular sports in the world period.

I read once (in T&FN or RW) that more nations participate in track than any other activity (except, of course, sex). More nations belonged (at that time) to the IAAF than any other organization in the world (including the UN) and that the IAAF, with their money and athletes were the wealthiest, strongest organization/nation in the world.

The fact that Americans are more interested in watching Poker than Track does not say anything bad about Track.