I know Dwight was catching flak for his commentary last week on the running events, but I really like his technical explanations on the field events. Showing exactly what Jen Suhr was doing wrong on her vault was excellent analysis. Educated anyone watching.
Now, if we could find someone to do similar things with the middle and distance events.
I do like Tim Hutchings. Good addition.
I have always admired his knowledge of the field events too. He definitely seemed a little overly concerned about the Ethiopian Dejen Gebremeskel racing without his shoe, and how that may affect his season / career. But, other than that, he was fine.
I didn't watch his coverage this weekend but I've always been impressed with his ability to talk about technical ability in the field events, primarily the jumps. I've never found him to be terrible discussing distance races but I'm sure we could find people better than him. He kinda gets screwed that the vast majority of meet coverage focuses on track events while ignoring the field events.
During the 1984 Millrose Games, Rod Dixon was the commentator, right off his NYC marathon victory.
Other than the 5k and mile, it was terrible. He stumbled for anything to say about any event. Billy Olson going for PV record?....nada.
Dwight Stones has been doing this for 30yrs almost. He is what a talking head should be - knowledgeable, and understanding that the viewer is NOT an expert, but vaguely interested. Anybody who thinks DS is bad does not understand TV.
Good to see another UCLA man like Dwight Stones live up to Jackie Robinson's expectations. Troy Aikman, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, John Wooden, Karch Kiraly, Ato Bolden, etc. lived up to Jackie's legacy as well.
Off the Grid wrote:
Dwight Stones has been doing this for 30yrs almost. He is what a talking head should be - knowledgeable, and understanding that the viewer is NOT an expert, but vaguely interested. Anybody who thinks DS is bad does not understand TV.
I understand TV and I submit viewers would be better off if Tim & Ato sent Dwight out for popcorn and hot dogs during ALL running races. You would think after seeing thousands of races over his career, DStones would have some understanding what takes place during races. He hasn't a clue. His 'insight' is off-key.
Track & Field is the most difficult sport to announce and Dwight Stones does a very good good. You can't be an expert in all areas of t&f and people sometimes nit pick minor things in the one area they know about.
Jackies Shadow wrote:
Good to see another UCLA man like Dwight Stones live up to Jackie Robinson's expectations. Troy Aikman, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, John Wooden, Karch Kiraly, Ato Bolden, etc. lived up to Jackie's legacy as well.
you get only 1/4 credit - he graduated from none other than Long Beach State University, along with Spielberg, Steve Martin, Misty May and Francie Larreu-Smith.
FWIW, my wife did not like Tim Hutchings. I think he may have been "too British", or something. She didn't like him calling every field "classy".
I don't think the head honchos at ESPN should put too much stock in her opinion, though. She is not a big track fan, and she never really liked Monty Python either. Tim doesn't play to her demographic.
Why do we need British commentators for US audience? Just get anyone not named Carol Lewis, Tom Hammond, or Dwight Stones and be done with it.
Actually - I like Marty Liquori as a commentator. Heck - they should get Jim Ryun and Marty Liquori to commentate the distance events for the Pre Classic. Especially if Lukas is racing the Bowerman Mile. I am sure Jim can give a lot of insight on being a HSer breaking 4.
Well, I liked Tim much better than the Larry Rawson of the past few years (and no offense to Larry). I'm fine with Dwight, and Ato and Lewis are fine, too. I'm just glad to see T&F on ESPN any time. Nice job ESPN.
I have always liked the British commentators.
It is their lanquage and they are quite good at speaking it.
DS is great for the field events, AB for the sprints. But there are only so many commentators that are needed. Hutching is good, as was Ovett (CBC a few years ago), for distance running, but neither really know the marathon all that well either. I like Liquori too and Masback did some for a while as well, both are literate and communicative, but everyone has their limitations. You won't find someone who can do it all effectively enough to please everyone.
Yes, we need someone knowledgeable about the sport but also someone with a little color such as a Howard Cosell to create some interest, controversy and entertainment. That's the ideal combo.
Dwight and Ato are cool. The others are to stiff, no talent, mumblers.
observerer wrote:
I have always admired his knowledge of the field events too. He definitely seemed a little overly concerned about the Ethiopian Dejen Gebremeskel racing without his shoe, and how that may affect his season / career. But, other than that, he was fine.
The problem with announcing something like the 3000 is "what is there to say". Having dead air is not something radio/tv people really want. I, too, grew tired of all the conjecture especially when it turns out he won the freakin' race--I can see American coaches training runners to run with one shoe. Sort of semi-minimalist.
A distance race seems to me like announcing a baseball game. There is a lot of inaction involved so announcers need to fill the gap. While some would say "just let there be silence" you are in the vast minority. (You can always turn the sound off, right?).