ESPN's soccer coverage = the suck
Let's all get over the nostalgia that we have associated with ESPN and admit something about "the total sports network": it sucks ass. From their fellating of the 2005 USC football team (whom they had the gall to run a weeklong segment pitting them against the great teams in college football history before their Rose Bowl encounter with Texas), their choice to continue sending paychecks to Joe Theismann, and their painfully transparent marriage with ABC and all things Disney, the network is really a joke. Unfortunately, they have an amazing effect on sports in the United States and their influence is evident everywhere.
That of course, carries over to soccer, so it was of interest to see how they were going to present their exclusive coverage of the World Cup. I was curious how well they would present the tournament, because, despite still being a relatively small niche market, soccer is more popular than ever before in the United States.
After the first day, I'm somewhat pleased (though my expectations were extremely low to begin with).
Their normal camera coverage of soccer games is atrocious - way too tight, not enough angles or replays. EPSN has wisely opted to take in the global feed. Not that they had any choice, but they're allowing people who are competent and experienced in providing beautiful video coverage of games.
They're also allowing Tommy Smyth to do color commentary. He's by no means the best option available (he's really the Irish John Madden), but he can at least give insight into the teams and games.
Of course, the big games are covered by the absolutely awful Dave O'Brien and 'Celo Balboa, probably the worst commentary team in all of sports. You would think that a former US Men's National Team defender would know something about the game, and perhaps he does, but it's readily apparent that Balboa has a hard enough time mastering the English language which gets in the way of him giving the audience any sort of good commentary.
They treat the soccer audience like a bunch of morons, giving us the most basic ideas about soccer. They slow the game down, provide no excitement, and I honestly think that I know a great deal more about the players and teams involved than these two monkeys, who are provided with stat sheets and info about everyone involved. It's sad really, and makes for a far worse viewing experience.
On the plus side, the World Cup Live has been alright. Eric Wynalda is competent, knowledgable, and engaging enough to provide something that I don't already know. The studio hosts, some days it's Joe Resvine and some days it's Rece Davis , are good too. They've done their homework and ask interesting questions. Wynala's responses are predictable but tolerable.
Jule Foudy, however, is just terrible. She's a total bitch who doesn't understand anything about on-set chemistry. She's constantly talking out of turn, criticizing players and teams (she said Germany would have a tougher time against a "real team" than they did against Costa Rica.
At one point she laughed when Resvine mentioned Lio Messi's dwarfism. Yeah, a debilitating condition is really funny Julie.
Her insight is limited to comparing her experiences as a player on the women's national team with what goes on in the World Cup. Look, I know we have a good women's team that plays at a high level, but that's like Chris Berman comparing his experiences as a little leaguer to the major league.
And while I'm not discounting women's opinions on sports, I feel it is a slap in the face to have a woman on the panel. They're treating soccer as some second-rate sport. I don't see female panelists at ANY major sporting event - not at the Super Bowl, Final Four, the Master's, or Wimbledon. Soccer shouldn't be the exception.
If she provided some good insight into the games, it might be tolerable. But as it is, they're just lending credence into the widely-held belief that soccer is a second-tier, even "girly" sport.
For the next few days I'll be providing more evidence of the terrible coverage provided by ESPN.
That of course, carries over to soccer, so it was of interest to see how they were going to present their exclusive coverage of the World Cup. I was curious how well they would present the tournament, because, despite still being a relatively small niche market, soccer is more popular than ever before in the United States.
After the first day, I'm somewhat pleased (though my expectations were extremely low to begin with).
Their normal camera coverage of soccer games is atrocious - way too tight, not enough angles or replays. EPSN has wisely opted to take in the global feed. Not that they had any choice, but they're allowing people who are competent and experienced in providing beautiful video coverage of games.
They're also allowing Tommy Smyth to do color commentary. He's by no means the best option available (he's really the Irish John Madden), but he can at least give insight into the teams and games.
Of course, the big games are covered by the absolutely awful Dave O'Brien and 'Celo Balboa, probably the worst commentary team in all of sports. You would think that a former US Men's National Team defender would know something about the game, and perhaps he does, but it's readily apparent that Balboa has a hard enough time mastering the English language which gets in the way of him giving the audience any sort of good commentary.
They treat the soccer audience like a bunch of morons, giving us the most basic ideas about soccer. They slow the game down, provide no excitement, and I honestly think that I know a great deal more about the players and teams involved than these two monkeys, who are provided with stat sheets and info about everyone involved. It's sad really, and makes for a far worse viewing experience.
On the plus side, the World Cup Live has been alright. Eric Wynalda is competent, knowledgable, and engaging enough to provide something that I don't already know. The studio hosts, some days it's Joe Resvine and some days it's Rece Davis , are good too. They've done their homework and ask interesting questions. Wynala's responses are predictable but tolerable.
Jule Foudy, however, is just terrible. She's a total bitch who doesn't understand anything about on-set chemistry. She's constantly talking out of turn, criticizing players and teams (she said Germany would have a tougher time against a "real team" than they did against Costa Rica.
At one point she laughed when Resvine mentioned Lio Messi's dwarfism. Yeah, a debilitating condition is really funny Julie.
Her insight is limited to comparing her experiences as a player on the women's national team with what goes on in the World Cup. Look, I know we have a good women's team that plays at a high level, but that's like Chris Berman comparing his experiences as a little leaguer to the major league.
And while I'm not discounting women's opinions on sports, I feel it is a slap in the face to have a woman on the panel. They're treating soccer as some second-rate sport. I don't see female panelists at ANY major sporting event - not at the Super Bowl, Final Four, the Master's, or Wimbledon. Soccer shouldn't be the exception.
If she provided some good insight into the games, it might be tolerable. But as it is, they're just lending credence into the widely-held belief that soccer is a second-tier, even "girly" sport.
For the next few days I'll be providing more evidence of the terrible coverage provided by ESPN.
posted by stephen at 3:43 PM
1 Comments:
[]
Post a Comment
<< Home