Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

OMG!!!!!

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    I've said it before, but as much as the announcing can drive me crazy at times, the most frustrating thing for me in watching US meets is the production value. Others touched on it, but there seems to be a lack of comprehension of the sport on the part of the production teams. What else would explain the period during the men's 100m (I think) false starts where the crowd was going absolutely bananas for what I assume was Walker's AR, and the announcers, knowing that there would be no quick cut away to Dwight to keep us informed, had to pretend that nothing was going on.

    I'd like to think it is simply due to not having the tech stuff in place at non-championship meets to provide live coverage of both track and field events, but since Oly field events rarely seem to be shown live either, that doesn't seem to be the case.

    Nice noting of Jeff Demps in the men's 100m (though I'm sure the FB aspect had much to do with that), but besides a passing mention of her age, I was surprised at the lack of astonishment on the part of the announcing team that a HS Sr was leading at 600m against an international field. Once again, anything that doesn't agree with the predetermined story line (Mutola) tends to get ignored (see also men's 800m once Symmonds started fading).

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by rabalac
      I've been meaning to ask this question, this ridiculous practice of interviewing athletes at the end of a torturous race where they are struggling to breathe, is this an American thing? Do they do this in other parts of the world? Is it too much to allow say 10 minutes after a race so the athlete can breathe normally?

      Just asking.
      We Americans all have ADD. If they waited 10 minutes to ask these athletes for their words of wisdom we would forget who they were and what event they had won.

      Comment


      • #18
        not to dump on poor tom hammond et co. again, but they totally missed the winner of the men's 800 m race -- and his typical habit of calling the wrong runner as "so and so is running well in lane 8" in the middle of the race, when so and so is nowhere near the leaders...

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by bad hammy
          We Americans all have ADD. If they waited 10 minutes to ask these athletes for their words of wisdom we would forget who they were and what event they had won.
          True as that may be, it's utterly pointless to interview them when there isn't a coherent thought in their brain - all the oxygen went to their legs. All they can do is nod and say, "Yeah, I wanted to win, so I'm happy with the win, but I was hoping for a little better time. Hi, mom."

          Comment


          • #20
            Why did this Pre meet continue to use actual numbers on the bibs of all athletes? I thought it was plain to all IAAF meet directors (heck, all meet directors) that last names (or nicknames like MEB) were the way to go for athlete bibs. Gives fans an assist, differentiates the crop of Africans in the distance races, helps the announcers like Tom Hammond avoid mis-calls, etc. Maybe numbers were kept for all athletes this year so that Maria Mutola could run with her #1 for one final hurrah? If I had a vote, I'd say no more numbers at Pre.


            Originally posted by cacique
            not to dump on poor tom hammond et co. again, but they totally missed the winner of the men's 800 m race -- and his typical habit of calling the wrong runner as "so and so is running well in lane 8" in the middle of the race, when so and so is nowhere near the leaders...

            Comment


            • #21
              Very strange.... I took a couple of shots of Bekele during the morning because I had nothing better to do, adn he indeed had a number. But I also remember that during a bunch of the B races, I did some self-education by matching faces to the names on the bibs. So there must have been a mix. Since none of this was on TV, I'm assuming that everybody in the main part of the meet must have been back to numbers?

              (I agree on the names over numbers thing, but only if the names are big enough)

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by gh
                (I agree on the names over numbers thing, but only if the names are big enough)
                That's a big if. Too often, the names are too small to read, whether you're watching in person or on tv. Legible numbers are better than illegible names.

                Comment


                • #23
                  from the spectator standpoint (live-in-person or televised) a distincitive singlet is better than any bib.

                  By names big enough does gh mean big in the legible sense or big in the huge star sense?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Forget about the TV commentators. I like names on the bibs so I know who everyone is...

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by tandfman
                      Originally posted by gh
                      (I agree on the names over numbers thing, but only if the names are big enough)
                      That's a big if. Too often, the names are too small to read, whether you're watching in person or on tv. Legible numbers are better than illegible names.
                      I wonder if three letter would be enough? Thus Tegenkamp become TEG. Gebrselassie is GEB. Or even down to two letters for competitors within one event? TG and GB for the long distances but in the sprints Tyson Gay would be TG?

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Daisy
                        Originally posted by tandfman
                        Originally posted by gh
                        (I agree on the names over numbers thing, but only if the names are big enough)
                        That's a big if. Too often, the names are too small to read, whether you're watching in person or on tv. Legible numbers are better than illegible names.
                        I wonder if three letter would be enough? Thus Tegenkamp become TEG. Gebrselassie is GEB.
                        And as we all know, Tyson is GAY! (stupid joke, even for me!)

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          I like names but I'm with whoever voted for legible numbers over illegible names. Problem is, names and even most numbers are not legible from the head of the runway 150' away.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Daisy
                            Originally posted by tandfman
                            Originally posted by gh
                            (I agree on the names over numbers thing, but only if the names are big enough)
                            That's a big if. Too often, the names are too small to read, whether you're watching in person or on tv. Legible numbers are better than illegible names.
                            I wonder if three letter would be enough? Thus Tegenkamp become TEG. Gebrselassie is GEB.
                            That's been done, and yes, it works just fine. But even then, the size of the letters is important.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              The bottom line is that unless you have a ready source to crossmatch numbers against, they're completely useless. Printed programs are going the way of the dinosaur (and were usually a list of people not in the meet anyway) and w/ the advent of modern video boards, any listing of competitors in the event disappears within 5 seconds of introduction of the athlete anyway. So for most intents and purposes, small names are superior to large numbers.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by gh
                                Printed programs are going the way of the dinosaur (and were usually a list of people not in the meet anyway)
                                Yes and no. I've been to a number of meets in recent years where, in addition to the largely useless glossy program, spectators got start lists that were printed overnight and were pretty up to date. I think I'd prefer those with large bib numbers over bib names that are too small to read.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X