English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I watched the Ducks vs Blackhawks game the other night. The announcers were slamming on Andy McDonald about not being able to take a hit. That kid had 3 deliberate shots to his head in one period. Only one got called. And McDonald got a 4 minute major for fighting. WHAT??? Ruutu smacked him intentionally in the mouth with his stick at the blue line! No call!! The Blackhawk announcers also whined about the refs calling the game FOR Aneheim. Uh, Blackhawks 15 minutes in penalties, Ducks 55! How could the refs be calling against the Blackhawks!!! I prefer to watch hockey games where the announcers are more even toward both teams. Its okay to be a bit one sided, but the worst I've seen are Chicago, Detroit, Edmonton and Vancouver.

2007-03-18 12:31:23 · 15 answers · asked by Claire52 2 in Sports Hockey

15 answers

The Blackhawks' announcers are just *****!

They are trying to find someone to blame for all of the loses that their shitty team gets.

2007-03-18 14:26:31 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 3

Buffalo is bad.
Unfortunately, if you listen or watch bradcasts that are regional in any sport you'll get a less than objective view point.
I used to do play-by-play for the college hockey team that was piped into the school and rebroadcast on cable tv. I can tell you that it's hard not to be a homer when you see the same guys every night. You interview them after or before the game and you become acquainted over time. This usually isn't the case with National broadcasters because they see different teams all the time they tend to focus more on the sport and the little details to fill the dead air.

2007-03-22 11:12:49 · answer #2 · answered by PuckDat 7 · 0 0

i admire Mike Emrick and Glenn Resch. They make an exceedingly stable team. rfile extremely knows of his stuff, Chico consistently grants humorous thoughts, they have interplay extremely nicely, and that they are the two passionate with regard to the interest. i'm no longer a great fan of rfile's voice. it is notably squeaky, noticeably whilst he gets extremely excited and his voice cracks lol. it is no longer that undesirable in spite of the shown fact that, and it is plenty extra effectual than having a guy who's unquestionably uninteresting. Chico's somewhat a homer in the direction of the Devils and goalies. it is no longer overboard, and easily adequate that it is extremely humorous. Bonus: i'm no longer a great fan of the Penguins' announcers. I keep in mind gazing a objective the place Crosby have been given a bypass on the some distance blue line, rushed up the ice, have been given previous 4 men, and scored and the announcers have been in basic terms chatting away approximately nonsense and entirely ignored the objective. And whilst it did take place, the only enthusiasm he confirmed replaced into by making his voice deeper. I propose, it quite is a notably surprising objective!

2016-10-02 08:34:36 · answer #3 · answered by serravalli 4 · 0 0

The Pens Announcers aren't that biased. Don't know WHAT the one was talking about or who they think our announcers are. Probably was cheering for the opponent and upset that the game was totally called for their team. Well then don't listen to the Pens broadcast. Seriously there is no reason that announcers can't be calling a reasonably even game. Yeah you are going to be a little biased, nothing wrong with that when you are the HOMETOWN announcer, but that doesn't mean they have to whine about everything. Heck here is a perfect example, The Pens vs Senators game. They were talking about how the Pens got lucky to get some of the calls. The one where the Senators were called for interference there was Stagie saying he understood the arguing because it could have been seen as incidental contact. To me it looked like Fluery was flat out run over but he was admitting that hey by the way the play went and where Fluery was it could have been taken as incidental and not been called. Oh wait they are the WORST according to some, silly me I though bad meant they were BIASED and called against the opponent.

2007-03-18 15:49:41 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 3

These guys are paid by the teams they broadcast for so, at best, they have to walk a very thin line. Most are unbearably subjective, however.

I was unfortunate enough to witness the Janssen hit on Kaberle and the Simon/Hollweg debacle on the offending team's broadcasts. It was pure comedy listening to these guys rationalize and tapdance around the gross severity of those acts.

Chico Resch is a bonafide schmuck, but Tweedle Dumb and Tweedle Dumber on the Island are truly a breed apart. Any duo that can make Jiggs McDonald and Ed Westfall look like pillars of objective broadcasting deserve are something else.

2007-03-18 18:24:50 · answer #5 · answered by zapcity29 7 · 0 1

Hometown announcers are supposed to be homers. It's part of their job description; they are playing to their audience. You have to remember that a lot of fans are homers, too, and they want to hear announcers that reflect their biased views. Kinda how talk radio plays up to a conservative audience, and the New York Times caters to a liberal audience. Banal anaogy, but you get the idea. It's good for ratings to be a homer.

The best evidence for this theory is NJ's announcer. He is not much of a homer, and neither is their color commentator. That's because they are in the New York market, and they are thinking maybe they will attract some Ranger fans to watch their games. In this case, the normal rues for being a homer don't apply, becase you are looking at a not-so-vanilla audience. But even Enrick is a little bit of a homer.

Also, don't confuse bias with just rooting for your team. Buffalo's announcer is kid of biased (complains about the officials, etc.) but he isn't that bad. However, he roots for his team (sssssssc-OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRREEEEEEE!!!!) about as much as any other announcer in the game. I guess that happens when you are the longest tenured home-team announcer in the game today.

2007-03-18 12:53:17 · answer #6 · answered by JK Nation 4 · 2 3

if you want a guy that has equal enthusiam for both team no matter who scores is Frank Mazzacco. He does college hockey for the Universtiy of Minnesota and he gives equal enthusiam to both teams even if they play Wisconsin or North Dakota.

2007-03-18 13:43:47 · answer #7 · answered by Jake G 2 · 0 0

Maybe because all of the good announcers are doing some of the more popular sports that pay better...

2007-03-18 17:25:02 · answer #8 · answered by ryan99n2000 3 · 0 1

Plain and simple, they're employees of the team.

Usually they're biased, but most will say decent things about the other team.

2007-03-18 16:33:00 · answer #9 · answered by Sarahrex 2 · 0 0

Some of the most bias/homer play by play guys...

Buffalo's announcer, Tampa, Colorado, Dallas, Boston, and the worst... PITTSBURGH by far!

2007-03-18 12:36:49 · answer #10 · answered by bwlobo 7 · 1 3

fedest.com, questions and answers