You don't have to whip out a stellar ace or save a scary breakpoint. You simply have to talk about it! So how about doing it well?
Bad enough that the Australian Open is falling outrageously short of expectations (despite the fact that my expectations were pretty low to begin with). Other than the occasional Federer or Baghdatis thriller (cos the former is appearing more and more human and the latter that much decidedly surreal), the only reason I switch on ESPN2 is cos Dr. Phil or some loony who calls himself a comedian are the only competing factors on television (just to be clear, Dr. Phil doesn’t call himself a comedian but uncannily appears like one).
While sport is unequivocally pleasing to the eye (be it the artistic orchestration of a near-impossible serve and volley on grass, the sight of a wicket-keeper rise with the ball and nestle it in his palms or a QB’s impeccably placed 25-yard touchdown pass to a favorite receiver), often times it is all about the ears.
Yeah, and especially so when I am watching an early-round Roger Federer match where the exhibition is quite strictly, from one side of the court. While asymmetry is all good in Baroque paintings, on a tennis court, not so much.
So, while it is quite fitting (and sometimes, downright relieving) for an announcer to be speechless when Sampras churns out a phenomenal forehand winner at almost two sets down in a Wimbledon final, when you are watching a third round match sporting a world number one, you’d like to hear more than the squeak of Roger’s tennis shoes as he effortlessly demolishes his opponent, 6-3, 6-4, 6-3, throws in that high-powered ace, the amazing forehand pass and then the backhand half-volley for good measure.
If the commentators at the Australian Open think that tennis fans are watching the match to actually watch it, they’re sadly mistaken. The reason we are watching it is cos we enjoy the sound of a tiny ball being tossed back and forth in the background and more importantly, we like to listen to lesser mortals extol the exalted phenomenon that is Federer. And the feather in the cap is to take the necessary cues from crowd applause and look up just in time to catch that unbelievable backhand lob and smile. The rest of the time we are flipping through a magazine, browsing weblogs or focusing on the potato on our plates (I must say even the prosaic spud tries to compete in variety with the many forehands so artfully dispensed, but the broadcasters seem to be running out of adjectives).
And if I am fortunate enough to switch to NFL, I almost jump out of my skin because the contrast provided by the footballers is deafening. Joe Buck is going – he’s past the 40 yard line, the 30, the 20, the 10 --- TOUCHDOWN STEELERS! The tone, the pause, the modulation – in the right places at the right times. With intensity, with passion, with zeal. Almost as if he were on the field himself.
I know for a fact that I have watched some lackluster cricket matches just for Harsha Bhogle. And I am quite certain that Nirmal Shekar’s eloquent essays added an inexplicable dimension to my Sampras obsession in the ‘90s (not that I needed help in the area ;)).
So, obviously I am outraged when Patrick McEnroe says something lame like – He seems to be in a hurry to dismiss him.
Yeah? How about we dismiss you and send for your brother? Darn, we desperately need Johnny Mac down under!
Egotism ....a lifelong romance
Wednesday, January 25, 2006
Articulate!!! That’s your only job!
Posted by Karthika at Wednesday, January 25, 2006
Labels: Keeping the Eye on the ball
12 comments:
One of the most exciting commentators: Steve Slater for Formula1, on ESPN Star. Speaking of which, I guess you aren't exactly a fan huh? Slater (although horribly biased towards the scarlet fever) made the sport spectacular to watch. Same for the trio of Bhogle-Boycott-Gavaskar.
Of course you can't ignore Al Michaels on ABC covering the NBA finals. Sport does need some inspired commentating.
bang on target -- i dont watch 'sport' that involves machines. except for the teeny bit of liking you cant help when an indian is makin it big.
bias is really good in a commentator though. cos you really cant be passionate or intense without being biased :)
i dont know if i've heard Al Michaels but i doubt a good commentator could make that sport interesting ;) not to be unfair to basketball, its actually more fun on the court i think, cos of the fast pace. but i feel like it doesnt need a lot of analysis (i mean, how much can you say about a six footer throwing a ball into a basket ;))
but most other sport i seem to enjoy more on tv simply for the commentators. And then you hear cliff drysdale drawl as if he's on dope and you wanna kill yourself.
I disagree. Basketball is great with Al Michaels. With all the slam dunks and alley oop's and other high flying plays, there's plenty of excitement to be translated to the viewers especially with the crowd going crazy all around.
"AND A SPECCCTACULAR REVERSE TWO HANDED JAM BY DWAYNE WADE....."
"ITS IN!!!!ITS IN!!!!!THE 18 FOOTER FROM DIRK IS IN!!!! THE MAVERICKS WIN IT, IN OVERTIME!!!!!!!!!!WHAT AN AMAZING SHOT IN THE CLUTCH"
"HAMILTON WITH THE LAY IN....REJECTED FROM BEHIND!!!!! ALONZZZZZO MOURNINGGGGGG COMES UP WITH A HUGE PLAY...."
You get the drift...
Bias is annoying for the viewers because if you're Anti-Scarlet like I am it gets a bit tedious at times.I see - no machines huh? Machines make it even more spectacular to watch. I do agree that there's a lesser amount of skill involved (especially in the case of the Scarlet team which appeared to be driving jets a couple of seasons ago) and that tilts the balance in favor of the better teams a little too much.Its still exciting though!.
The only sport that I can't stand pretty much is Frickin Baseball. B-oring!
Even field hockey between the Hyderabad Sultans and Lucknow Nawabs would be more interesting...
Talking about commentary....the current crop are very very average to say the least. However, the unfortunate fact is, no one gives a damn.
After the exciting third set of the Davy-Federer match, there was digression towards talk of women's semi during the initial stages of the 4th set. It was particularly stupifying since Davy came out and broke Federer first game!....but again, I guess no one cares in this country.
FSN...Cant believe that you feel that skill levels are low in F1. They are actually phenomenally high. Its just that, it is not visible to the average spectator.
If there is a sport which lacks skills in the players...then its got to be American Football! But it offers wholesome 'entertainment', I guess....Hence the popularity.
And talking about exciting commentators, how about Tony Greig!!! The re-runs of Sharjah 1998 would just not be worth the watch when muted.
FS,
Yeah, that’s precisely why baseball has exclusive privileges to alcohol and hot dogs, to give people something to do while the players ‘contemplate’ their next move....
hehe, Al Michaels seems to have the classic touch of an american commentator. americans have all the attributes of commentating sport -- exuberance, sense of humor, high decibels...and it especially works great in team sports, i think.
bias is great when you share it, though. i love johnny mac's awestruck voice when he's talkin about Roger, for instance :) but it's not like he denounces his opponents or anything; he gives them their due; it just adds a flavor to the commentating -- more like an opinion column instead of straight reporting, i guess.
i think the only reason F-1 commentating is exciting is cos the commentators hafta roar at higher decibels than the machines themselves :D
dream-sporting,
I dunno about the technicalities, but NO sport that involves technology can be "more skillful" than the conventional "human" sports. i mean, they're complaining about graphite technology taking away from the tennis of yester years!!
and you're telling me the make and model of a car does not play a greater role than driving skill? who, exactly should take credit for that?
i sure think american football has a LOTTA skill -- true, it's more the coach and QB than anyone else, but they still breathe and dont run on gas -- the petroleum one, i mean ;)
but IMO nothing beats individual sport in testing skills -- you're on your own, you gotta be mentally tough, you gotta think and you gotta play :)
If the comparsion is between car and driver in F1, car wins hands down. No arguments! So, that argument is valid for those who do not enjoy the spectacle and the technology of the cars involved. But that cannot be held against the skill level of the drivers. Can it?
Just to give you an idea....these guys can lap within 0.2 secs of their laptimes on a 5 km lap! That is extraordinary. Trouble is, the best and the rest will differ in their laptimes by a maximum of 1 sec. And that is just not visile to anyone other than the experts, who can point out where exactly the 1 sec was gained.
Your point about the individual being all on his own is PERFECT. But special place has to be made for sports that involve 'car fails, YOU DIE'. Mentally tough, they sure are!!!
With regards to 'Am Football'...I am not the expert, but from what I see, it does not involve any specialized skills. Its all about the coach's tactics (when it comes from the coach, I call it 'tactics' and not 'skills'). And after the game plan is sorted out by the coach, its just about the QB throwing the ball, or some guy running with it. Am I right? But where they excel is the packaging of the sport...which definitely includes good commentary.
yep, no questions on the "danger" thing and speed is always exciting. but i really think they'd be better off on Survivor :D
Like Bill Maher says about Nascar “Where’s my medal for all the times I risk my life for a cheap thrill? If you made it safer we would just be watching traffic.” ;)
A sport on the other hand should be more about skill than the ability to be able to die, dontcha think?
about american football, yes, it IS about the strategy -- more often decided by the coach and QB. but it is also a LOT about the QB making a snap decision -- when he cant find a receiver, when he is blitzed and when he sometimes has to run the 10 yards himself. whether he should throw a short pass or go long and risk an interception at the 2 minute warning... If you should run the ball at 3rd and 10....if they should go for it on fourth down or kick a field goal. if they have to go for the 2-extra point to even score. lotsa thinkin, lotsa decisions, and many of them on the spot, the onus of most of which falls on the QB.
I think its really exciting, and guess what, they jus need their minds and bodies :)
dream-sporting. You couldn't be farther from the truth if you were strapped onto the spaceshuttle and lauched to the moon.
Football is all about VERY SPECIALIZED skills.Everybody has a role to play.Quarterback, halfback,fullback,runningback, Tight End,Defensive End,Linebacker,Kicker, Wide Receiver etc. Each player must perform his role, while carrying out the play and yet keep his offensive/defensive awareness in case some changes are needed in the middle of the play. The quarterback typically calls the play (some teams have the coach calling the plays) and the blockers should be able to read the wide receiver and go for a tackle (without pass interference mind you). Its all a very complex sport - it looks simple because a) there's 40 seconds in between plays b)The plays are over so quickly. However there's a lot going on behind the scenes.
Plus of course like Katrix says, its unbelievably hard to throw a spiral to an exact spot, to avoid risk of the pass getting picked off. I'm not saying football is superior, but there's definitely a lot you'd need to understand about the sport to fully appreciate it.
Now on to Formula1. I of course fully appreciate the skill level of the driver,but the number of skills needed for driving a high performance machine is definitely not as many as you'd need for a more physical sport such as tennis,boxing,football,soccer,cricket,cycling etc.
If you wreck a car you can always get a spare but you can't do the same when the only high performance machine is your living,breathing,aching human body.
In Every Second Counts, Lance goes through just how battered,bruised and beaten up people get at the end of a day at the Tour de France.Its unbelievable the physical pain that those athletes have to go through.
Of course the drivers have to focus,concentrate,lose a few kilos of bodyweight after every race, have their necks thrown about because of the Gforces and all that..but still they're IN a complex machine.
Besides, not everybody can throw a perfect spiral or make a 49 yard field goal, but most people can certainly drive a car ;-). [especially those scarlet aeroplanes from 2004]
Katrix
Too bad that you prefer to ignore the point I made prior to pointing out the danger involved in F1.
But yeah, I acknowledge that F1 is never going to endear itself to the technology bashers....it was never meant to!
FSN
I need to clarify what I meant when I said 'specialized skills'. I am aware that each position requires 'specific skills'. What I meant was that, these 'specific skills' are not 'special skills'!
you ppl describe in detail the role of a QB. well and good! But that is one guy out of 40(?). And that very same role is performed by every single football (for the de-fobbed, it is 'soccer') player on the field......does it need reminding that making an accurate 40 yard pass using one's feet is harder than when using one's hands!
If F1 is 'driving a car', then AF is 'throwing and catching a ball'. So, if 'most ppl' can drive a car, then 'all ppl' can throw and catch a ball.
If AF is all the nonsense you mention, then F1 is about on track battles at 185 mph,laptimes, RAIN etc. Anyone can do it ??!!!
I recognize the fact that AF provides wholesome entertainment. And obviously, catering to the masses is IDEAL in a lot of ways (think Vijay!). So, enjoy the spectacle for sure! But pls...lets not mistake that for 'skills'.
let me assume that the point i ignored was either the car winning over the driver or the fact that the speed of the drivers involves skill, and i acknowledge both completely.
I was just making a comparison with sports where you dont use any accessories. in a day and age where baseball players get penalized for taking steroids to build up their muscles, it is hard for me to acknowledge a "sport" where there is no physical activity at all. place it under "extreme sports" with bungee jumping and skydiving and i have absolutely no complaints.
that said, you're right. the most sophisticated piece of machinery in my house is a laptop :) and a car has always been somethin that simply takes me from point A to B and it was great as long as it did that and the heat was workin ;). i think techno-unsavvy is the term for it :) So, I am not exactly the F-1's targeted audience :D
Post a Comment