Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SanDiegoSteve
And while I've got a harangue, Joe Buck must know better than to call a foul ball a foul tip. Tonight he said, "That's a foul tip" when the batter fouled the ball off the edge of the catcher's mitt to the ground. I don't mind when they say "foul tipped in and out of the glove" or something similar, but to come right out and declare it to be a "foul tip" when it's not is just an unacceptable practice.
Why couldn't Buck just call it a foul ball, or explain what a foul tip really is? I'm sure he knows better. He could actually educate the uneducated fans out there instead of perpetuating their ignorance of the rules.
|
Steve, bad hair night?
Step back for a minute, read this post of yours. It is much to do about so little of importance. Joe Buck is not gainfully employed to educate, he is a performer. Television spectators do not slip into their easy chairs to watch a World Series ballgame for academic purposes. If you watch professional baseball on television with scrupulous attention to sportscasting detail, you have missed the elephants watching the ants go by.
As umpires, I would firmly suggest that we make higher quality representations of ourselves. We might best serve officiating and the game not by extended, microscopic criticism of broadcast performers but by acknowledging their mistakes with tolerance for their first job requirement.
Entertainment.
Would you (we) not have more influence if your tone is less sharp and the subject less mauled? I believe so.
Surely, a pointed but understated comment would do more than