Cool thanks for keeping me posted!
Cool thanks for keeping me posted!
bbg95 wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
1) ALL broadcasters, other than a handful EVER, suck.
2) It's not their fault that they suck. The job sucks. They are paid to TALK, and they often have a lot of time to fill. Unfortunately, because of that, they end up saying the same stuff over and over again and will say some very obvious things and some stupid things. Par for the course.
3) I never understand why people get so upset at what broadcasters say...unless they say something racist or some other inappropriate thing, who cares? I never tune in to hear what ANYONE has to say about a sporting event. I want to watch the event. Got an interesting fact about an athlete? Ok...that's mildly interesting. Want to give a play-by-play? Ok. I couldn't care less though about opinions or their observations. So what that someone wants to talk about "leg turnover"? I never understood why that was offensive to so many of you. So, someone says a running back (who doesn't) has "world class speed", or whatever. Most people are flawed and don't know much. Why get so mad about it when that is represented by a broadcaster?
Anyway, Jill Montgomery never bothered me. I couldn't care less about what she or most broadcasters have to say to be bothered. You shouldn't either.
That's great for you, but it seems a bit arrogant to tell other people that they shouldn't care. Like it or not, the quality of the announcers is an important factor in many people's enjoyment of a broadcast.
Meh. It shouldn't be.
THIS is the only broadcast you should be critical of:
DrGator wrote:
Opinionated guy wrote:
I felt offended for the 200 winner, an unheralded and fairly unknown sophomore, when after completing an NCAA 100-200 double, the first words from Montgomery's mouth was (paraphrasing) "Abby Steiner who dominated the 200 indoor is hurt and that allowed runner X to and others to have a chance." Nothing wrong with mentioning Steiner was tough indoor and hurt, but not at that moment and not in a degrading way to the winner and others. After all, getting to the line healthy is a major part of track & field. I thought it was very inappropriate.
What Flagpole said!!!
You are CORRECT!
Just got done running some uphill 100m repeats so now I have the speed endurance and VO2 to run the 10K on the track.
Now I just need to remember never to pass someone on a turn.
Please read, to get the proper context before replying.
I did not say that offended ME. I said I felt offended for the winner. The 19 year old NCAA 100-200 champ, deserved better than "well, she only won because so & so was not present, " as she crossed the line for her second title. In my mind that is highly inappropriate for an announcer to spew disparaging remarks concerning young adults on TV.
The comment was inappropriate and with poor timing, and if the winner was offended I understand.
just the facts wrote:
Please read, to get the proper context before replying.
I did not say that offended ME. I said I felt offended for the winner. The 19 year old NCAA 100-200 champ, deserved better than "well, she only won because so & so was not present, " as she crossed the line for her second title. In my mind that is highly inappropriate for an announcer to spew disparaging remarks concerning young adults on TV.
The comment was inappropriate and with poor timing, and if the winner was offended I understand.
I am not sure how my post is under "just the facts" and that is a registered account. I have posted under Just the Facts ma'am before but it was not registered. I tried to post this under Opinionated guy #2 but it said I had already posted under another name "Opinionated guy" and my post would not be accepted. Sorry for babbling but trying to understand the system.
socalcush wrote:
flagpole's partially right, but if you're going to repeat things, the cliches at least ought to be correct. sometimes they can actually get funny through repetition (i always still laugh every time i hear gut-check time during any sport broadcast).
but if every athlete you talk to in the lobby before their race says their training is going great (or as jill put it, "comfortable in their training"), then i'm purposely going to start misquoting them, or better yet, not quoting them at all, until someone finally reveals "my training's gone horrible. not sure why i'm here or how i made the final. wish me luck."
and why talk about workouts in a general sense at all? tell us about an actual workout by an actual athlete, and maybe that's interesting, but probably not. i think too many track announcers, while working correctly with the assumption that the sport is dying, feel like if the viewer just knew as much about the sport as they do, they'd like it, and commence to treat it like an instructional video. oh well...
but back to the point: i, like others, muted long portions of the broadcast. she really was like nails on a chalkboard for me, and i say that respectfully, because clearly she's worked hard doing nails-on-a-chalkboard thresholds and cut-downs all season, even stating that she's told us this all season, and this week she literally showed up...
Cush,
I enjoyed reading this ...good stuff!
I laughed, thanks!
When you have to mute to sound is when you know the announcing is deplorable.
Worked for 30 years in television. Did my fair share of color on televised track meets. Jill Montgomery was always tolerable but her performance over the weekend was horrific. It was Carol Lewis level awful. The BBC gets it right. And for those of you old enough Jack Whitaker was amazing as a track and field announcer. That being said if you are going to have a female in the booth Carrie Tollefson is plenty good. And all Dwight Stones needs is a good spotter to help him. He's really grown into the role as lead announcer.
Coach Jill will get you ready for NCAAs.
If she was citing actual known, specific workouts that some of the athletes had done recently that would have actually been interesting to a segment of the viewers instead of her 2-3 workout fits all needs. So much what she said was not only speculation of what might be going on in some training programs but often completely misstated as to the focus of a particular session.
Opinionated guy wrote:
Flagpole wrote:
I never understand why people get so upset at what broadcasters say...unless they say something inappropriate
I felt offended for the 200 winner, an unheralded and fairly unknown sophomore, when after completing an NCAA 100-200 double, the first words from Montgomery's mouth was (paraphrasing) "Abby Steiner who dominated the 200 indoor is hurt and that allowed runner X to and others to have a chance." Nothing wrong with mentioning Steiner was tough indoor and hurt, but not at that moment and not in a degrading way to the winner and others. After all, getting to the line healthy is a major part of track & field. I thought it was very inappropriate.
Well, you didn't show your respect for Sturgis by calling her "an unheralded and fairly unknown sophomore" while mentioning Steiner by her name.
Still Like the Celtics better wrote:
Side note about Liquori - I think it was in the early 90's during the NYC Mini Marathon (I could have that all wrong), and some kook from the sidelines jumped on the course and started running right on the heals of the leader (can't remember who) to get on TV, and it was really starting to frighten the athlete. Liquori, who was doing the broadcast while riding on the lead vehicle, jumped off the truck and actually semi-tackled the guy on live TV.
I'd love to see a video of this.
This"If you don't understand the true essence of being a commentator you will end up like her - making it more about you by talking nonstop through the action and actually ruining the experience."
Let’s give Bob Roll a shot.
rojo wrote:
Still Like the Celtics better wrote:
Side note about Liquori - I think it was in the early 90's during the NYC Mini Marathon (I could have that all wrong), and some kook from the sidelines jumped on the course and started running right on the heals of the leader (can't remember who) to get on TV, and it was really starting to frighten the athlete. Liquori, who was doing the broadcast while riding on the lead vehicle, jumped off the truck and actually semi-tackled the guy on live TV.
I'd love to see a video of this.
Googled it, and found an article about the incident. It was the 1996 NY Mini Marathon, and Laroupe was the runner. Happened as she neared the finish.
https://www.nytimes.com/1996/06/09/sports/running-loroupe-wins-2d-mini-despite-the-distractions.htmlWhether your the lead announcer (I guess play by play) or color commentator, it's a rough job, only compounded by the fact that track and field junkies know how well the sport could be covered. When you watch some of the Diamond League events, you often get to see an entire race, you get lap splits, you get announcers (play by play and color) who talk about the projected pace, context, etc. There is so much that can be done with modern technology to make track and field appeal to the die hard fan and the casual fan.
Look at the coverage of college football and the national championship game. I think it was the command center broadcast. You had on the screen two views of the game (the televised view) and then an endzone or above head view. You had all sorts of stats going on relevant to the game. You CAN do this with track and field. Hell, you can even cover FIELD events while a longer race is going on, catching the critical moves (at least visually), while watching a field event competition. And they can be exciting (if you aren't excited watching the online video of Lewis v. Powell from Tokyo 91 you're a corpse ... or the shot put finals from Doha in '19). And if we can be forced to watch an entire 45 minutes of soccer without commercials - a dreadfully boring sport, because of on screen advertisement, then we can watch an entire 10000m. You can even work in advertisements during the race by the announcers.
That being said, go watch Vin Scully broadcasts - absolutely the best ever. Started in Radio where you had to paint the picture to the audience who couldn't see it visually. Just watch the calls for "The Catch", Buckner's error, Bob Larson's perfect game, or Kurt Gibson's home run. Perfect. The man knew how to call a game, tell stories, but ultimately let the action do the talking. We don't have enough of those men and women working out their craft before they're thrust into the light. Be an announcer at a track meet ... there are some phenomenal people who could transition to the booth very well.
Someone mentioned Jill's ability to speak to all events. Now, I can question this definitely, but that is a huge point. So you're stuck with either having multiple color commentators, or one person who knows very little about all events, or one that knows alot about a few, and almost nothing about most. Re: Jill - I think she was trying a lot more to explain distance events, probably heard a few things from athletes and coaches, and then terribly butchered it in translation. I get what she was trying to say, but that only made it that much more cringeworthy ... because the delivery was so incorrect.
With all issues track and field related, we can complain all we want, but what are we doing to actually develop and mentor good announcers who have to work at the craft and then move up to network roles. What are the powers that be doing to encourage appropriate coverage that is informative and visually appealing to the viewer? And do we care enough, or will we just complain about this, complain about the next paywall, complain about that $40 entry fee for a road race when we pay $100 for a hockey ticket, $24 for 3 Bud lights, and $10 for a crappy hot dog.
Godspeed to Jill Montgomery. I do appreciate her social media, and her attempts to mentor younger women into the world of sports commentary. Also, I'm sure she'd be absolutely fun to drink with and talk about her experiences within the sport. That said, we can and should do better.
I’d like to see Kara Gaucher and Chris Derrick do the distance events. Derrick has been very good covering Nike nationals in the past.
+1. Chris Derrick would be great.
bower man_ wrote:
I’d like to see Kara Gaucher and Chris Derrick do the distance events. Derrick has been very good covering Nike nationals in the past.
She is irritating.
Not as bad as Larry Rawson