USL Season Premiere - Charleston Battery v Richmond Kickers Cheers - I like the commentator (whose name escapes me at the moment). Interesting that they're going with a sole commentator. Jeers - On the scoreboard, it's listed as away v home instead of home v away like everything else on FSC. They did this last year as well. I think it's a little odd that the USL seems to be moving to a more "Euro" style (single table standings, single commentator on broadcast, "Division 1" name) but isn't doing home v away, which even MLS does on their website now. Yes, I know ESPN does away v home as well, but they do that for every telecast, whereas this is unique on FSC.
I'm also noticing that the camera angles and closeups are much more Euro style than MLS coverage (especially on ESPN). Somehow it just feels right. It actually makes the game more exciting. I kept thinking to myself when there'd be highlights shown that the USL looked faster and more exciting. But realizing MLS has higher quality players I wondered how it could be. Now I realize that it's the presentation and camerawork. This could go a long way to proving ESPN hates soccer since they need to present more like this. And I really want MLS to go single table regardless if there's relegation or not. But it's not going to be possible until there are at least 16 teams (30 game season). Otherwise there's no possible way to have all the teams play each other equal times and still get in a longer season.
When ESPN is presenting, it's a much wider view of the field which makes the action look slower than it really is. You know what the big complaint is that kills viewership (or potential viewership) in this country, "soccer is boring."
Alright then, why is the angle at Highbury different (tighter) than the angle at the Riverside, for example? That's the basically the difference you are seeing between an A-League at Richmond and one at Charleston.
My word, he's even phrased it in the form of a question. I knew the whole Beau Dure thing was a elegantly established and executed cover up. It's Ken Jennings!!!
Its Andrew Bell, he normally does the radio/webcast for the Battery. He always does a great job for the Battery games and I'd say the best announcer in the USL.
FSC needs to make him their no. 1, and soon! He makes Bretos, Miles, Hopkins and the whole crew sound like 4 year-olds. It did grate on my ears, though, hearing a british-sounding voice say "soccer" and "two-nothing." Football and two-nil, please.
I thought he sounded familliar. I wouldn't mind seeing him on an MLS telecast. Actually, FSC needs to rent the USL production/announcing crew. So what he says "soccer" with a British accent? What's wrong with the word "soccer". Yes, how dare someone calling a United Soccer Leagues game use the word "soccer".
Andrew is the man. I have been listening to his PbP with the Battery for nearly six years on the webcast. Unfortantly, I'm working in the Tacoma, Wash. area this week and had to find a pub in Seattle; one small TV with no volume and missed hearing his TV debut. Gald to hear he did a good job and would hate to see him go but I know he would be successful.
Come on be realistic here, most of the camera angles MLS relies on are from NFL camera positions in GIGANTIC stadiums. There are plenty of stadiums in Italy and Germany and Spain that have the same types of wide angles because of the size of the stadium. This isn't ESPN's fault and it isn't very easy to move the main camera angles down into the seating bowl. This is a problem of architecture not of ESPN wanting to make soccer look as boring as possible. Think about this logically too. The people who work on ESPN's soccer broadcasts depend on making the broadcasts look as good and exciting as possible given the smaller budget they have to work with. Some of them like soccer very much from what I have heard but even if they do not, their very future as a broadcast producer, director, etc depends on providing a crisp broadcast. If your dream is producing NBA or NFL games, doing a crap job on MLS or national team games isn't going to help you achieve your goal.
I don't know why you guys are praising the camera work. They were invariably too close, losing track of the ball and not allowing you to see the play develop. A wider view of the field lets you see more of what's going on. Save the closeups for the replays. It seemed pretty clear to me that the production crew was not used to doing a soccer game.
The stadium plays a big part in the television view. The larger NFL stadium were built to broadcast NFL games not soccer. If you watch a game from the HDC or Crew stadium, it always looks much better than Soldier Field, Giants Stadium or Gillette. Charleston has a SSS, so the camera placement is better than at those monstrous stadiums. That is one of the reasons why EPL games look so great on tv. There is no running track, the fans are right on the action and there are no fences. These are huge factors in the presentation.
Second that emotion promoting this guy above the Max/Allen/Your Host Christian comedy show. Better yet, pair him up with Wynalda on ESPN2. Nil? Sorry, "nil" is not to soccer what "love" is to tennis, that is, part of the game's official vocabulary. It's British English that's become part of the furniture. In my first high school soccer broadcast last month, I took great pride in not saying "nil" the entire game. So there!