PDA

View Full Version : Impression of FOX's coverage?


Mr. White Sox
10-23-2005, 02:28 AM
I think it stinks. I'm not usually prone to agree with BP, but this quote says it all for me: STierce (Beaumont): What do you think of the postseason coverage so far, in terms of the broadcasts?

Gary Huckabay: Iíd say itís painful, but itís really worse than that. From the pregame show, where everyone looks and talks like a Xanaxed-out realtor, to the 2:30 breaks between every half inning, itís been unwatchable, at least for me. Iíve missed a fair amount of the postseason simply because Fox has managed to take some truly great, dramatic, world-class sport, and turn it into some sort of horrific suburb fest. Itís kind of the TV equivalent of one of those vile exurb malls, with faux faÁade architecture, nine hundred different soulless, Bed Bath, and Beyondesque retailers, usually clustered with a SlavLaborMart or some sort. Iíd feel worse about it, except that Iím amused by the convergence of the visages of Kevin Kennedy and the Plastic Burger King King weíre seeing all the time on commercials. Creepy.

The last straw for me was seeing a commercial during an inning; I believe there was only one out and they started showing that the game was "brought to you by"...
Absurd.
If the Sox weren't in this WS, I would be paying far, far less attention to it, despite being a huge baseball fan in general.

HotelWhiteSox
10-23-2005, 02:33 AM
I actually liked tonight's telecast, and I usually hate Buck. They talked a lot of Sox, recognized the crowd and atmosphere, and seemed to know their stuff this time around. Thumbs up from me

Banix12
10-23-2005, 03:00 AM
I will say i kinda liked that new pitching graphic they use, but other than that it was the usual substandard Fox Baseball coverage.

Did anybody catch that stupid WebMD update on the sox bullpen's "Rusty Arms"? My god that was dumb. It sounds like something out of "Operation". I was half waiting for "Take out Wrenched Ankle"

On the positive side, I didn't see scooter at all. Though I was in the kitchen for an inning listening to the radio.

And while I dislike them sticking advertising as the "bump" between the game an instant replays. I'll take the little AOL guy over last year when they used the Dodge symbol and the little Dodge jingle everytime they transitioned. The jingle had me screaming last year.

antitwins13
10-23-2005, 03:07 AM
I will say i kinda liked that new pitching graphic they use, but other than that it was the usual substandard Fox Baseball coverage.

Did anybody catch that stupid WebMD update on the sox bullpen's "Rusty Arms"? My god that was dumb. It sounds like something out of "Operation". I was half waiting for "Take out Wrenched Ankle"

On the positive side, I didn't see scooter at all. Though I was in the kitchen for an inning listening to the radio.


I liked how the acknowledged the atmosphere, but I too was disgusted by the "rusty arm syndrome" crap. I guess Cotts and Jinks put that to rest. Someone please start a defunct injury thread starting with rusty arm syndrome.

HotelWhiteSox
10-23-2005, 04:28 AM
I will say i kinda liked that new pitching graphic they use, but other than that it was the usual substandard Fox Baseball coverage.

Did anybody catch that stupid WebMD update on the sox bullpen's "Rusty Arms"? My god that was dumb. It sounds like something out of "Operation". I was half waiting for "Take out Wrenched Ankle"

On the positive side, I didn't see scooter at all. Though I was in the kitchen for an inning listening to the radio.

And while I dislike them sticking advertising as the "bump" between the game an instant replays. I'll take the little AOL guy over last year when they used the Dodge symbol and the little Dodge jingle everytime they transitioned. The jingle had me screaming last year.

Oh man, I had forgotten about that, the stupid ass "Hit it!" thing. I wouldn't buy a Dodge in my lifetime, but even if it was offered free, I might refuse it thanks to that promotion.

I agree that I'll gladly take their FoxTrax (version of K zone) over Scooter (no appearance :) ). And yes, the WebMD is stupid in general, they give no information on the injury whenever they do it, they just show location, comes off as stupid filler.

I guess I'm used to Fox's effects and noises, but that Prisonbreak graphic/siren is annoying. The only positive is it kind of reminds me of references to the 59 air raid sirens.

I usually have low expectations of Fox (national broadcasts from anyone in general for that matter!), so I guess that's why I came out liking tonight's.

Banix12
10-23-2005, 05:22 AM
I usually have low expectations of Fox (national broadcasts from anyone in general for that matter!), so I guess that's why I came out liking tonight's.

I actually used to remember the national broadcasts fondly before Fox bought the rights to baseball back in the mid ninties. Maybe it was because I was young at the time but I liked when NBC used to have the combo of Costas, Uecker, and the easily replacable third wheel of the group Joe Morgan. Even when ABC had that nightly game of the week I think on Thursday or Tuesday I liked it.

The game of the week used to be something I would look forward to as a child. Now Fox had to go and "Fox" it all up. They do Football ok but I remember when they goofed around with Hockey and they screwed it all up (robots?). They've been doing the same thing with baseball, too many Graphics and the advertizing has just gone insane on Fox.

I never minded the advertizing much before because I know it's necessary and it was usually relegated to the breaks and the transitions from the break but now it's actually interfering with the calling of the game, as Joe Buck can attest from getting interrupted midsentence by a "Prison Break" siren.

SOX ADDICT '73
10-23-2005, 07:25 AM
I have no opinion about the network's coverage in general (I mean, c'mon it's FOX - what did you expect? It's been a circus over there since its inception), but I wish we could get a break from the same stupid announcers as the ALCS. We shouldn't have to keep listening to Buck and McCarver complain that "Pierzynski stole first" A WEEK AND A HALF AGO!

I think the problem is that both of those douchebags were utterly convinced at the time that the call had been blown, and made a huge deal about it for the rest of that series (even though replays basically were inconclusive). Now they don't want to back down. I wish we could've gotten a fresh announcing team in there, who hadn't witnessed the "travesty" (a quote from Fox's Jeanne Zelasko, IIRC), so they could stop
:deadhorse: .

C-Dawg
10-23-2005, 09:09 AM
We shouldn't have to keep listening to Buck and McCarver complain that "Pierzynski stole first" A WEEK AND A HALF AGO!



That's right! They mentioned that right after he took Second in the 8th. For a minute there I thought my ears were playing tricks on me - "Did they actually just say that?" I was thinking.

johnny bench
10-23-2005, 09:42 AM
Impression? Dunno.

Saw the asinine Shoeless Joe intro, then proceeded to go on mute and listen to Rooney. That was a good thing because I didn't miss the home run call.

PaleHoseGeorge
10-23-2005, 09:49 AM
I missed half of it. There's no way I would listen to Buck and McCarver when Rooney is available on my radio.

TV on, radio turned up. And the TV delay gives me a chance to "see" every play twice, even more if Fox shows a replay. Just say "no" to Buck and McCarver.
:thumbsup:

Having Harrelson as guest in the radio booth was definitely a distraction, but I'm sure it's killing Hawk to be sidelined while this team plays in the World Series. I wouldn't begrudge tossing him a bone.

:cool:

voodoochile
10-23-2005, 10:57 AM
From a purely visual perspective it was a great telecast. They showed all of the "big plays" from many angles including the CC delayed break home to score the first run on the ground out. They used excellent graphic techniques to show you how the play unfolded then showed you both the necessary close ups and an excellent wide angle view which showed the entire play. They used both slow motion and normal speed to give both an excellent detail of the play and then how the play "felt" as it unfolded in real time.

I thought it was a heck of a broadcast to be honest with you, but then again, I don't do sound. Why people feel they have to have ANYONE telling them what is happening on the field is beyond me. Maybe it's because I have gone to so many live games where you don't have the benefit of announcers to tell you what happened that I don't think about it. Heck even when the captions are on, I rarely read them except when something very unusual happens and I want to see an explanation. Otherwise, I just watch the game.

whtsx1959
10-23-2005, 11:26 AM
Bring Back Scooter!

I hated that they missed Crede's HR when they were showing a taped conversation with the Astros pitching coach, I would've listened to it on the radio, but I'm in Boston this weekend.

SOXSINCE'70
10-23-2005, 11:49 AM
Is there a polite way to say "IT SUCKS"????:angry: :angry:

Turn on Rooney and Farmer.Much better than listening to
Jack Buck's son and a former Cardinals catcher bitch and whine.
The TV delay is only about 2 or 3 seconds in the WS.In the previous
rounds,it was more like 10 seconds.

ChiFabulous1
10-23-2005, 11:54 AM
I lmao when they said the last time the sox were in the world series Fidel Castro took control of cuba.

The_Floridian
10-23-2005, 12:01 PM
It's just impossible to see a FOX broadcast being part of the sweep of baseball history. I mean, think about it...Russ Hodges calling "The Giants win the Pennant!" Red Barber and "Whoa Doctor!" Vin Scully's call of Gibson's shot in '88.

Can you imagine Buck or McCarver ever making a historic call like that? Me either.

All the angles are fine, but any TV network could do that. The bad commentary is an insult to anybody who knows a thing about the game, and the promotions are simply a pathetic attempt to turn the World Series into the Super Bowl.

When does FOX's current contract expire? Maybe someone else will take it? Anyone? Please?

bigsoxfan420
10-23-2005, 12:03 PM
Maybe my radio is magical or something, but the delay I heard was about a split second. At first I didn't even notice one, but then finally I noticed I would hear the crack of the bat just before I saw it. So I would venture to guess that statistically there was no difference between the broadcasts. Also I thought I was great that Hawk was in the booth. Come on you people didn't like the authentic He Gone calls. Especially when "Bad Bobby" struck out the side!

PaleHoseGeorge
10-23-2005, 12:13 PM
Maybe my radio is magical or something, but the delay I heard was about a split second. At first I didn't even notice one, but then finally I noticed I would hear the crack of the bat just before I saw it. So I would venture to guess that statistically there was no difference between the broadcasts. Also I thought I was great that Hawk was in the booth. Come on you people didn't like the authentic He Gone calls. Especially when "Bad Bobby" struck out the side!

The length of the delay depends completely on how you receive your TV and radio signal. I'm picking up Rooney directly from WMVP's radio transmitter. It's virtually instantaneous to the live action at the park. However I'm getting my TV signal via satellite (Directv). It follows the radio signal by at least 5 seconds.

It's great. I hear Rooney paint the picture and I know EXACTLY what to look for when the pictures pop up on my screen a few seconds later. Exactly how much did that pitch miss the corner? Exactly how close did Dye come to reaching that pop foul? Exactly how much is Farmer making an ass of himself (again) whining over nothing concerning the umpire? Etcetera etcetera...

Harrelson in the radio booth is a bit of a distraction since he is serving in a color role but play-by-play is his forte (if I can use the word to describe anything Hawk does). However like I said earlier, I wouldn't begrudge him the chance to add his comments to a Sox championship game. He's earned at least that much.

:cool:

MRKARNO
10-23-2005, 12:19 PM
It's just impossible to see a FOX broadcast being part of the sweep of baseball history. I mean, think about it...Russ Hodges calling "The Giants win the Pennant!" Red Barber and "Whoa Doctor!" Vin Scully's call of Gibson's shot in '88.

Can you imagine Buck or McCarver ever making a historic call like that? Me either.

All the angles are fine, but any TV network could do that. The bad commentary is an insult to anybody who knows a thing about the game, and the promotions are simply a pathetic attempt to turn the World Series into the Super Bowl.

When does FOX's current contract expire? Maybe someone else will take it? Anyone? Please?

Buck has had his chances to make historic calls, but he's proven himself unable to make anything but a generic call. Game 7 of the 2001 World Series comes to mind, but his call was something like "And the Diamondbacks have won the Wolrd Series." Find something new!

Brian26
10-23-2005, 12:20 PM
Question for you guys....

When Jenks came in during the 8th from the bullpen, did Fox show the feed from the cameraman running right behind Jenks' shoulder towards the mound? I noticed they had a camera right behind him as he left the bullpen and starting coming in, and it seemed like a great way to show what it felt like to come into the game.

The crowd was electric at that point.

4th Gen. Sox Fan
10-23-2005, 02:39 PM
The length of the delay depends completely on how you receive your TV and radio signal. I'm picking up Rooney directly from WMVP's radio transmitter. It's virtually instantaneous to the live action at the park. However I'm getting my TV signal via satellite (Directv). It follows the radio signal by at least 5 seconds.

It's great. I hear Rooney paint the picture and I know EXACTLY what to look for when the pictures pop up on my screen a few seconds later. Exactly how much did that pitch miss the corner? Exactly how close did Dye come to reaching that pop foul? Exactly how much is Farmer making an ass of himself (again) whining over nothing concerning the umpire? Etcetera etcetera...

Harrelson in the radio booth is a bit of a distraction since he is serving in a color role but play-by-play is his forte (if I can use the word to describe anything Hawk does). However like I said earlier, I wouldn't begrudge him the chance to add his comments to a Sox championship game. He's earned at least that much.

:cool:

WMVP and Fox are synced up for cable broadcasts for the WS, unlike in the previous rounds, which I didn't mind

Lip Man 1
10-23-2005, 02:43 PM
They didn't show Aparicio throwing out the first ball and they blew it on Crede's home run.

I don't mind Buck and McCarver but for the millionth time to Fox, THE GAME IS WHAT MATTERS....not your crappy shows that no one over 30 watches (except for the Simpsons), not your B list celebrities and not your goof ball graphics that appeal to 8th graders...THE FRIGGIN GAME IS WHAT MATTERS.

Thank you.

Lip

buehrle4cy05
10-23-2005, 03:06 PM
I'm going to do a compliment sandwich. I say something good, then something bad, then finish it off with something good.

Something good: The overall camerawork. I like the little cameras that they put in the dirt, and their various other camera angles were excellent.

Something bad: Too many advertisements. That "Prision Break" ad in the middle of an inning was annoying and uncalled for. Who watching the World Series is going to say, "hey, that reminds me, Prision Break is on again!" (not me, because I don't watch it). They also showed a bunch of "celebrities" who are on FOX shows. Shameless self-promotion. Something that also annoys me is when they did a Chevy ad, they cut and zoomed in on the Chevy ad above the outfield concourse.

Something good: I'm very anti-McCarver, but he wasn't that bad yesterday. Him and Buck did an ok job.

However, on the whole, FOX's production of the game deserves a:

<Insert incredibly overused chunks tag>

because of too many advertisements for ****ty shows that very few people watch.

seanpmurphy
10-23-2005, 03:11 PM
All the angles are fine, but any TV network could do that. The bad commentary is an insult to anybody who knows a thing about the game, and the promotions are simply a pathetic attempt to turn the World Series into the Super Bowl.

When does FOX's current contract expire? Maybe someone else will take it? Anyone? Please?

Is it me or does Buck seem sort of dejected whenever the Sox do anything good? I just don't sense any enthusiasm at all. Get over yourself and try to show a little excitement in the job pays you probably way too much to perform.

The promotions were a joke. At least it provided time to go to the bathroom, grab a beer, or get some more chips and pretzels.

I agree with everyone else. Mute the television and grab a radio. Simple as that. We all know Joe Buck is still heartbroken over the Cardinals not making it to the World Series.

SOX > everyone

Mr. White Sox
10-24-2005, 03:16 AM
Buck has had his chances to make historic calls, but he's proven himself unable to make anything but a generic call. Game 7 of the 2001 World Series comes to mind, but his call was something like "And the Diamondbacks have won the Wolrd Series." Find something new!

How about Game 2 of the 2005 World Series. Unbelievable!
Konerko's homer was uninspired.
Podsednik's was anticlimactic.

Could any other announcer make the game of baseball any more boring? It's a disgusting dichotomy; we have the flashy, unnecessary barrage of graphics and advertising from Fox, and a morose, grumpy duo of ignorant announcers that should be broadcasting the game from an amateur pirate radio station, not a nationally televised television station.
/Rant

MikeLove
10-24-2005, 03:33 AM
a couple years ago i remember listening to Buck do bears games and stuff on fox and saying numerous times how i think he was probably one of the worst announcers ive ever heard. Then i find out later that he is actually supposedly "respected" and all that. boy did that surprise me. Id rather have some huston version of the hawk call the damn games. i was on the phone with my x today before the game started and they showed buck and she said "wow that guy looks like a huge douchebag" and she definitely hit the nail on the head! Why do they constantly talk about the calls made in the angels series?! Its over!

MrRoboto83
10-24-2005, 03:34 AM
I hate ESPN, but they had much better camera work in the ALDS than Fox has had in the ALCS and World Series. ESPN had cameras everywhere during the game, on the concorse, upper deck, and had much better shots of the city.

Banix12
10-24-2005, 03:59 AM
I hate ESPN, but they had much better camera work in the ALDS than Fox has had in the ALCS and World Series. ESPN had cameras everywhere during the game, on the concorse, upper deck, and had much better shots of the city.
ESPN also doesn't load the screen with cartoony graphics and certainly self promotes less frequently and less invasively than FOX.

And while I think Berman certainly talked about Boston way too much, especially when it became clear that the White Sox were going to win in that last game, he at least doesn't talk like an emotionless robot like Buck.

The great announcers display passion for the game they are calling (just so there is no confusion here, I don't count Hawk as an all time great announcer though he does display a lot of passion). Some announcers feel that you have to keep an even temprament so you will not be rooting for either side so they end up being rather boring and plain in their calling. However I think you can actually get the same effect by displaying a great level of enthusiasim for both teams in the game.

The great announcers in the past also have all been very original and possessed their own style. That likely will never exist again on a national broadcast since television these days strays away from originality.

elrod
10-24-2005, 09:39 AM
A big beef I had was Fox nearly missing the first pitch of the inning a couple times. Ensberg's home run came a split second after a commercial break. And there was a Bagwell AB where the camera missed the first pitch. This has happened in the regular season, especially on WGN. But in the World Series, you'd think they wouldn't miss any action.

TomBradley72
10-24-2005, 11:43 AM
After attending last night's game....got home...had to watch some of the big moments via TIVO before crashing...amazing to me how "flat" the broadcast was compared to the game itself. Buck/McCarver did nothing to enhance one of the best World Series games in recent memory (overall "flat", very little excitement over some tremendous moments by both teams)....I also think the camera work was very limited in really capturing what was happening at the Cell...zero shots of the bleachers/upper deck as everyone was going nuts...if they have 85 cameras covering this...they seem to be using about 6 of them.

Buck/McCarver are no match for a top event like the World Series. ESPN's work was much better.

gobears1987
10-24-2005, 11:59 AM
Scooter was back.

"It goes very veeerrrrryyyyy sloooooooowwwwwwwww"

SOXintheBURGH
10-24-2005, 01:47 PM
Best thing about having TiVo = pause game, turn on John and End, play game.


No delay!

Then feel free to watch a White Sox winner.

Argalarga
10-24-2005, 02:32 PM
Buck and McCarver should never call another World Series. Buck sounds totally out to lunch and McCarver adds nothing. His "how does this keep happening?" at the end of Game 2 last night was indefensible. He sounded completely crushed that the Sox had won again.

Iwritecode
10-24-2005, 02:46 PM
I started to get annoyed when they kept showing a close-up view of Pettite staring in to get the sign from the catcher on every single pitch.

Also, did anyone understand what they were talking about when Iguchi was leading off from second? I saw where he would lead off and then take 5 or 6 steps backwards toward the outfield. They kept saying something about how good baserunners would start back there and then move up again. :?:

IMO, he was doing it so that if a grounder got through the infield he could hit third base on a slight angle and head for home faster...

Iwritecode
10-24-2005, 02:51 PM
From a purely visual perspective it was a great telecast. They showed all of the "big plays" from many angles including the CC delayed break home to score the first run on the ground out. They used excellent graphic techniques to show you how the play unfolded then showed you both the necessary close ups and an excellent wide angle view which showed the entire play. They used both slow motion and normal speed to give both an excellent detail of the play and then how the play "felt" as it unfolded in real time.

I thought it was a heck of a broadcast to be honest with you, but then again, I don't do sound. Why people feel they have to have ANYONE telling them what is happening on the field is beyond me. Maybe it's because I have gone to so many live games where you don't have the benefit of announcers to tell you what happened that I don't think about it. Heck even when the captions are on, I rarely read them except when something very unusual happens and I want to see an explanation. Otherwise, I just watch the game.

The only problem I had was Pod's walk-off. I had no clue where the ball was and how far it was going to travel and it didn't look like the camera did either. I was trying to judge it based on the outfielders but really didn't realize it was gone until I saw the group in the crowd dive down after the ball.

Most good anouncers will at least tell you if the ball has a chance. I listened to Rooney's call afterwards and he knew from the minute it left the bat...

Chisox353014
10-24-2005, 03:16 PM
Buck and McCarver should never call another World Series. Buck sounds totally out to lunch and McCarver adds nothing. His "how does this keep happening?" at the end of Game 2 last night was indefensible. He sounded completely crushed that the Sox had won again.

Yeah, that was really awful. He sounded like he had just seen a meteor land on his house or something.

Scotty Love
10-24-2005, 03:19 PM
I can't stand it. I watch the TV but listen to the radio.

Palehose13
10-24-2005, 04:01 PM
The Houston fans aren't too happy with Fox's coverage either.

http://p078.ezboard.com/fevilwontwinfrm3.showMessage?topicID=5075.topic

Fenway
10-24-2005, 04:08 PM
The Houston fans aren't too happy with Fox's coverage either.

http://p078.ezboard.com/fevilwontwinfrm3.showMessage?topicID=5075.topic


Those with TiVo and XM can simply slow down the video feed to match XM and Rooney and Farmer

and Sean McDonough wastes away doing NCAA football :angry:

Fenway
10-24-2005, 04:19 PM
I will give them credit for a great shot Saturday night

as the Anthem ended it showed a woman ( 40/50 years old ) crying as it must of hit her that her beloved Sox were in the World Series.

I want Mags back
10-24-2005, 04:29 PM
McCarver is the worst color man ever. Something will happen, my dad will make a comment, and then he'll repeat what my dad just said to me. he says the most obvious things

SluggersAway
10-24-2005, 04:41 PM
I wish they would give you the option of turning the commentary off. Then you could listen to the sounds of the actual game (the crowd, the umpire, the crack of the bat, the ball as it hits the glove...) without the inane blather of the Fox commentators. That would be ideal.

Of course, their ego's would never let that happen and the media seems to think America is too stupid to understand anything without them explaining it.

Jerko
10-24-2005, 04:48 PM
I will give them credit for a great shot Saturday night

as the Anthem ended it showed a woman ( 40/50 years old ) crying as it must of hit her that her beloved Sox were in the World Series.

Didn't I read that that was WSI's very own Steff???? You better edit out that age range there fens.:o: :o: :o:

Palehose13
10-24-2005, 05:31 PM
I will give them credit for a great shot Saturday night

as the Anthem ended it showed a woman ( 40/50 years old ) crying as it must of hit her that her beloved Sox were in the World Series.

That was steff. I would take Jerko's advice and edit the age range. :wink:

maurice
10-24-2005, 06:02 PM
Joe Buck is the Jim Belushi of sports announcers. To paraphrase Deuce, if his last name wasn't Buck, he'd be washing my car.

Also, did anyone understand what they were talking about when Iguchi was leading off from second? I saw where he would lead off and then take 5 or 6 steps backwards toward the outfield. They kept saying something about how good baserunners would start back there and then move up again. IMO, he was doing it so that if a grounder got through the infield he could hit third base on a slight angle and head for home faster...

You're both right. McCarver cited it as an indication that Iguchi wouldn't try to steal 3B. When trying to steal 3B, good basestealers (e.g., Ricky Henderson) often start out in Iguchi's position, then slowly move in towards the mound (to shorten the distance to 3B without significantly increasing the distance to 2B), and then take off for 3B without ever coming to a complete stop. Iguchi's positioning tended to indicate that he wanted an angle to round 3B and score on a single (rather than steal 3B).