News: ESPN $$ benefit from US advancing/General ESPN broadcasting critique

Ugh, Ekoku sounds like a bitter jerk, although he sometimes tells it like it is..

And I can't even say as a commentator that he at least knows the game well, if he fcuks up a simple offside rule.

 

I have one complaint about what has, in general, been a terrific job.

When they show the starting lineups, I think they should have a line under each player about what club they play for. It would help me assess the quality of teams like SoKo, Slovakia, Chile, etc.

 

Life is good!

1. I love the dark shading offsides replay feature. A vast improvement over ESPN's traditional bad angles and incorrect freeze times. Of course, maybe some of these bad calls wouldn't bother us so much if we couldn't see what was happening so clearly.

2. The FIFA feed has been beautiful to watch, especially in HD (3D next time?).

3. I didn't have to pay $200 for a pay per view feed.

4. I don't have to learn Spanish or Italian.

5. No one is trying to fill the "boring bits" with commercials.

ESPN has a lot of the top English speaking commentator talent, and Andy Gray is doing the evening review show on FSC. Anyone know who's calling the British feed, or are they just hearing what we are hearing?

 

I guess I'm different- I can't stand the number of replays and closeups. I just want to watch the game, I don't need to see Beckham sulking over Green's mistake in slo-mo. Yesterday they cut to a close up of an Algerian after Howard's throw to start our winning counter attack. It's fine when play has stopped, but don't cut away from action.

 

I'm in agreement with everyone here regarding the stellar work ESPN has done with the WC. Regarding the above quote, it doesn't matter in terms of Internet clips, of course, but one thing that I think makes the British announcing crews work so well is the fact that ESPN put so much effort (and money) into its studio coverage. That has a very international feel to it, as well, but it features American hosts, who clearly put a lot of work into preparing for their role.

Jesus, remember when Brent Musburger was a WC studio host? We've come a long way, baby.

 

I can't stand Chris Fowler, but other than that, ESPN's coverage has been killer.

 

You don't know how ecstatic I have been not to hear "Donovan puts it into the mixer" once this year.

I think ESPN has done a really great job. A all around. On a few occasions I've actually been more interested in the pre and post game commentary then the game itself.

 

Welcome to the world of sound bites and over-elaborate pre and post production crap. The Euro commentators, in particular, can barely begin their thought process before it's time for another commercial. Better to convince people they need to buy more detergent than educate them in the ways of football. God bless the US of Advertising!

 

I really hope you're not trying to imply that the lack of depth in analysis in the studio show is a uniquely American thing. I think throughout the world the broadcasters shy away from deep tactical analysis in favor of standing in awe on camera for specific moments of brilliance in particular games. They're lazy, and many of us have fairly short attention spans.

 

I think its beyond debate at this point that ESPN has done a stellar job covering this cup. Simply awesome. I hope they make boatloads of money on it and do it again in 2014 like this.

Re: the Color Guys - a color guy can really only add so much. Usually, in most sports, they suck. This group has been okay. Even Harkes. My favorite has been Mustoe. He's no Ty Keogh, but he's pretty good anyway.

 

The PIP stream is okay for me, on full screen. If it's on the small player it's a little too small to see, and if I'm doing anything else on my machine (like, you know, working), the quality of both streams drop below watchable.

But yeah, ESPN3 is pretty much the best thing ever.

 

Why do Americans have such short attention spans? Why are Americans consistently shown to be easily distracted and lack the ability for sustained concentration? Might the nature of US television and it's inherent schizophrenic "zapping" have something to do with it?

I am implying that other countries have greater in depth, lengthy analysis because that is what their cultures accept as normal in a televison (or radio) format.

 

Just want to echo the comment someone made that Roberto Martinez has been awesome. I've really enjoyed listening to him. ESPN is extremely easy to rag on, but they've done great for this World Cup. Also, I hope Ian Darke gets to call the final. Martin Tyler would put me to sleep within two minutes.

 

You're probably at least partially right about cultural differences. I think the ESPN coverage is perfect for the casual fan, and not much different from what you see around the major US sports. Highlights, experts making obvious statements about the game, and a little tomfoolery. Just enough so casual fans and women can watch and know enough to talk about it at work the next day.

I would definitely like to hear more thoughtful expert analysis around the games, even during an evening show. I think FSC may be doing something like this, but apparently I haven't been interested in hearing thoughtful analysis enough to watch it and see if it actually contains any.

 

I'm sorry - I actually didn't mean to imply that we as Americans are the exclusive owners of the short attention spans. I really do believe that the analysis in other countries on-air is also weak. I think it's hard to do a proper job with this sport given that it is very fluid, and there are very few opportunities to gather your thoughts and, in fact, only a few minutes in between halves to actually process any replays.

 

My favorite color commentary moment came in the replay of the Donovan goal. Harkes started to say something that would have added nothing and Darke cut him off and talked about how "breathtakingly exciting" this moment was. It was awesome use of the main mike.

 

i agree that ian darke has been really good, much as i expected. still though, derek rae is my favorite. he and mustoe are probably the best combination. harkes is pretty much the only blight. that said, he's lightyears ahead of marcelo "..but it's tough" balboa.

 

Awesome coverage by ESPN.

I accept the commercial heavy pre & post-game shows because I remember watching world cup games that were interrupted for commercials.

I think the commentary is very good. I like everybody except:
Harkes: Oh, my, God.
Lalas: No one is more wrong more often. Though I think working with the others might be improving him.

I can accept some mistakes. Others I'm less tolerant of. Not understanding the math of group play while match day 2 in Group C was going down was fairly criminal. While ESPN was reporting in the wake of the 2-2 draw with Slovenia that the USA "will need help" to qualify it was extremely easy to realize that the USA completely controlled their destiny.

Overall though? You have to focus on how freakin wonderful the coverage is.

 

I didn't get that on first viewing because about 200 of us were screaming at the top of our lungs for about 3-4 minutes. But I got it on the replay. A great piece of work by Darke, that....

And you know, I think some who were down on the use of the English PBP guys as alienating our non-soccer-following compatriots might have been wrong in the end. Somehow, maybe only subliminally, hearing a worldly English PBP guy cut off the American color guy to simply say "It's a breathatkingly exciting moment; Hollywood couldn't write a better script than this!" hammers home to a lot of them the magnitude of what had just happened. It wasn't only big news because we scored and won. We did so in historic fashion.

I explained afterward to a baseball fan friend of mine who has been watching that he just saw the equivalent of a walk-off home run in the 7th game of a divisional series. Not quite the World Series, because that would be the finals (or at least the semis). But with the key difference that the whole world noticed (live, mostly!) and reacted to it, not only us. A moment which will be replayed in future promos in a lot of places for the next several years as a part of their "thrill of victory" montage. It's a small piece of genuine WC history.

 

Oh, I'll agree with the sentiment that Klinsmann has been under-used, but an informative, entertaining voice in limited opportunities. More of him in the knock-out stages, please. Not sure who he bumps. Maybe McManaman, but not completely.

 

ESPN has paid a boatload for the TV rights and has to make that back somewhere. I'm perfectly fine with a commercial heavy halftime (and pre- and post-game) as long as it goes along with no in-game promotional announcements ("this corner kick brought to you by Budweiser" type crap) or adds popping on screen in game coverage part of the action (not small ones next to the score bug).

Honestly, ESPN has exceeded my expectations by so much that's it is hard to give them too much kudos.

 

That's not the way I heard it Chris. Harkes started to say something and I think was totally overcome with emotion and Darke didn't cut him off but jumped in and gave Harkes a few seconds to get his act together.

Listen to it again. Harkes started to say something and cut himself off, and then Darke jumped in. I didn't catch that until I watched the game a second time.

At least, that is the way I heard it.

 

I just did some searches against this forum for Dave O'Brien. Man, there were a lot of unhappy people about the broadcasting team for the last World Cup. I was one. Here are a couple of articles linked to those discussions.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/richard_deitsch/07/20/media.arena/

This is from the WSJ and is very good.
http://online.wsj.com/public/articl...AeHQhPCU50_20060803.html?mod=tff_main_tff_top

 

Bring back Jack !!

 

Outstanding coverage by ESPN. And now that we've experienced Filet Mignon, we'll have to go back to Hamburger Helper for the MLS matches.