It seems to me that the general tenor of this board is that people who are not officials have no business criticizing officials because they are not qualified since they have never officiated.

Yet posters on tbis board frequently complain about announcers, even though I haven't heard of any posters being professional announcers.

You have no idea how much work goes into being a television color commentator for a major sporting event. First, they must study the six words you cannot say on television. Second, they spend upwards of an hour getting their hair sprayed. (There should be a medical study investigating the link between hair spray and forgetting basketball rules.) Thurd, they get pounded with pancake makeup.

You have no idea.

Walk a mile in their patent leather shoes before you complain.
;)

Well they have plenty of time to do all of that because they don't spend any reading the rules! :D

Fowrth, I think they'd rather say the popular thing and go with the general public.

As someone who has been both a sports announcer (radio) and an official, I can tell you that being an official is 1,000,000,000,000,000000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0 00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0 00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0 00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0 00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0 00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0 00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0 00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0 00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0 00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0 00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0 00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0 00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0 00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0 00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0 00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0 00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0 00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0 00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0 00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0 00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times harder.

I thought there were seven. ;)

Hi Mark,

Boy, some of you have been on this board since the days of the old discussion board software... many, many years.

I spent two years as a PbP color announcer for the Fresno State women's broadcasts, and they truly do not know the rules. Many times I had to interject and remind my partner about such things as "They don't shoot player control fouls..." and explain the seldom-seen Balk in foul shooting (intentionally faking the foul shot to induce a lane violation). They are basically fans with a microphone, nothing else. They never study the rules; I gave our association's 50-question-test to my partner once and he failed with flying colors. Sad, but true. What was worse was he could have cared less.

Phil

I disagree.

We criticize their rules knowledge and their criticism of officials making incorrect calls when the calls are actually correct.

We don't criticize how they talk, their knowledge of the teams, their preparation or their ability to talk to millions of viewers without appearing nervous or scared. I could never do that.

So chill. :)

On a lighter note, I enjoy listening to CBS' basketball game announcers Verne and Bill.

I was doing a play-by-play of a HS football game with another guy from the station who supposedly knew about the game. One team had just scored to take a four point lead with less than two minutes to go in the game. My partner said on the air that he was sure they were going to take an on-side kick. I asked him why they should do this if they were in the lead? He thought for a moment and then just shrugged. Too bad we were on radio. It would have been really funny if fans were able to see that.

Believe me, every announcer has almost as many stories to tell as officials.

Jim -- In general, I agree with your philosophy. But I also know stupidity when I hear it and those guys today were unbelievably stupid. Just a few minor examples:

"What they should do is double team every one except Davis..." That's , let's see, 8 players on the floor?!?

"lackadaisical" pronounced as "laxadaisical". This is incredibly uneducated. Anyone who uses language for a living should be able to pronounce words like this correctly.

ditto for "prophesizing" instead of the correct "prophesying".

And then mis-pronouncing players names, the one I noticed today was "Obazuki" and "Ozbee-uki" and "Ozuki" for"Ozbuiki".

These kinds of "small" errors add up to a huge flop, in my opinion. Obviously, CBS doesn't agree. But I certainly can criticize these kinds of lapses, even though I've never been a sports announcer.

Well, sometimes it's difficult to pronouce odd names correctly, or names you do not usually come across in everyday life. How many other people do we know named Juulie, spelled with 2 u's?

Kind of nit-picky.....
 

While it's crucial for announcers not to mispronounce players' names, some of those other ones are the equivalent of a sports announcer coming to one of your games and picking apart your signals, mechanics, and the way you run.

AND....talking at the fast rate that sports announcers do, I'd really like to see someone use perfect pronunciation with the word "lackadaisical"

Well, sure, if it's you or me. But the guy is getting paid zillions of dollars to say the name a zillion times (not my name, the player's). He jolly well ought to get it right. I think it's offensive that he can't. And if he can't say it correctly because there's something physically wrong with his speaking equipment, then he ought to pronounce it wrong the same way over and over, rather than trying it several different ways as an experiment.

Re: Kind of nit-picky.....
 

There are lots and lots and lots of people who speak in public and speak very well and pronounce things correctly day after day after day after day. "Lackadaisical" isn't any more difficult than "laxadaisical" if you know in your head how to pronounce it and want to do it right. That's why I say it's uneducated. The guy doesn't even speak English well. If you want to compare it to signals, and the way I run, I will too. I've seen refs held back pretty severely because their signals and the way they ran looked weird, or were not proper. When Howard Cosell said things strangely, it was personality and it was criticized, but it wasn't because he was unconcerned about proper English. When whoever it was today says, "prophesizing" I think he may not have even graduated from high school.


And how he can get away with saying that the coach should double team everyone but Davis is beyond me. Don't viewers hear how bafflingly goofy that is?

I see your point about officials being held back because of signals, etc....but my point is that it's not a sports announcer who's judging them or holding them back.

I can see how it'd be possible to double-team everyone except Davis....the double-team is shifting....but Davis is "left alone"....it would be impossible to "double team everyone except Davis" ALL AT ONCE, but that's not what the announcer said...

It just occurred to me how this is a sign that the MSU/KY game was VERY well-officiated. THIS is all we have to talk about!! :D

Oh, and one more thing. It's spelled, "Azubuike."

If you're going to ***** about others mispronouncing it, at least learn how to spell it correctly.

Pot, meet kettle.
Kettle, pot.

As a former radio announcer, I can tell you it's inexcusable for an announcer to repeatedly mispronounce words in his or her area of "expertise".

As to sports announcers doing this, I have to admit I don't take it a seriously as our President always saying "nuke-u-ler".

Probably the two most mispronounced words I hear on an ongoing basis just in the business world are "realtor" (it is not "ree-lit-er") and "jewelry" (it is not "ju-le-ry").

Also, Juulie is not pronounced "Joo-ooo-ly" but is correctly pronounced "Fish-net". ;)

Back off, Trigger.

a) I'm not getting paid multi-millions to spell his name correctly, so this isn't a pot,kettle thing, see?

b) I've only seen it like maybe twice. I never knew the fellow existed until this week. That doesn't compare with how much time and attention an announcer should give to being sure he (or she) treats all people (and their names) with simple human courtesy.

c) Why are you so defensive about this? Are you the alter ego of Verne Lundquist? (I'm fairly sure I've gotten that spelled right, but if I don't, I apologize.)

Juulie,

Trigger was a bit harsh, but the comment was fair.

It's one thing for us to start hacking on Nance, Packer, and the others for being ignorant of the rules and passing it on to the public.

But when we start posting comments like yours, we have no more credibility than the "fanboys" we like to chase out of here.

Go back, take another look at your post, and imagine it was someone commenting on an official they saw. How do you think it would look? And what do you think your reply would look like? We can't have it both ways.

Commentators are not above criticism, but after a point, the criticism doesn't seem too fair.

Just my $0.02 (or $0.0015 US)

In general, I agree that announcers add to the confusion/ignorance of basketball rules. However, this weekend I actually heard an announcer get one right...man I wish I could remember his name to give him proper credit.

A PC foul was called on a drive to the hole. Announcer said something along the lines of "Great defensive play. [Player name] had established legal guarding position and is allowed to move backwards to maintain position. It is often confusing to viewers to see that call made because the player is not standing still. That was a great play and a good call."

So there is a least one person working the games on TV that knows at least one rule. :)

Far be it for me to give credit to any of the talking hair-dos but it was Raftery who made this statement. He does seem to be the "best" out of all them.
AAR

[Edited by Almost Always Right on Mar 28th, 2005 at 10:31 AM]

I strongly disagree. When Packer criticizes an official, he does so from complete ignorance. When I criticize Packer, I'm not working out of ignorance. I've studied English, language, public speaking, and debate. He's never studied the rules. I've DONE a good deal speaking both scripted and extemporaneous, and I can tell you that I know at least enough to say that Packer doesn't do a good job. I'm not being a fanboy who just wants to be on the winning side all the time. I'm speaking from experience, study and background. I think a better comparison would be if someone like my commissioner (who's never been an NCAA ref, but has studied and practiced reffing for over 50 years) were to criticize one of the NCAA refs. Yea, Howard's an amateur, but he knows a lot. If he said an NCAA ref was wrong about something, I'd listen. I've never been a national sports announcer, but I can tell you that his mistakes are beginners mistakes, and should not be allowed on national TV. I do have some idea what I'm talking about.

WHOA! Sounds like somebody's got their fishnets in a wad!

Actually, I agree with Juulie (as always). Packer is interested in one thing - promoting Billy Packer - not being accurate.

OK, two things - add promoting the ACC.

I actually heard Jim Nance using the term "ON the back" several times this weekend.

I'm sure many on this board were saying to themselves "You got it right!"

Once again kudos to Gus Johnson - what a fine job of announcing the games!

New Job
 

My son, who is a young official also wants to move into radio and TV broadcasting.

With that in mind, as we watched games, I would comment to him that what CBS or ESPN should do is hire an off camera, off mic, ex-official to whisper in the ear of the announcers the real rule or explanation when one of these situations arises.

I do know that all the announcers are encouraged to attend a beginning of the year rule explanation, but I wonder how many actually listen. To his credit, Packer has gotten better over the years, but he still sticks his foot in his mouth when attempting to explain what is going on.

So, I'm all for them hiring some ex, or even current official that can explain these situations.


goose

Everyone posting has very good points....WITHMUCHREGULARITY! ONIONS!! (I love listening to Raferty!)

[Edited by Junker on Mar 28th, 2005 at 11:24 PM]

Re: New Job
 

Two times zero is still zero.

Juulie,

I very much appreciate your comments in this thread. I, too, have a great deal of respect for language, and sometimes, just for fun, I like to play armchair linguist. I have a theory (maybe half-baked) about mistakes in language like saying 'laxadaisical,' and it seems to square reasonably well with some of what you've been arguing.

Essentially, my theory is that language is like sport: you play like you practice. By this, I mean that if one practices good fundamentals of language, then mistakes made under pressure--like, say, speaking before millions of people a la Packer, Raftery, Bilas, Bonner, et al--will be those resulting from trying to do "too much." Specifically, I'm saying that the fundamentals like word pronunciation and enunciation will be there for a person in just the way he or she has prepared for them to be. If one has made a habit of good speech, then even if one gets into trouble by trying to execute an overly complicated sentence structure, the errors should be of a syntactic or grammatical nature rather than of a more rudimentary kind.
So, I'm arguing that if one says "lackadaisical" in one's everyday speech, then when one's brain goes for that word under pressure, it will likely come out correctly.

Jay Bilas was a litigator before he was a basketball commentator. An indispensible part of his job was to execute skillful use of the language. He's spent a lot of years filling his up his well, and now when he needs to dip into it, he can do so without fear of a nuculur mess-up, or misunderestimating his on-air partner's ability to cover for him.

My claim, then, is that the announcers that make the mistakes of the sort you've been picking apart in this thread are people that generally don't care that much about good grammar, syntax, or diction; because if they did, they would practice it all the time. This is why I get so frustrated with students who get upset with me when I make language corrections in math classes. "This isn't English class; I shouldn't have to worry about that here."

So in case anybody needed a proof for the old saw about perfect practice making perfect, here it is.

I think you are absolutely right. The other thing I sense from your post is that you try not to judge people based on their use of language. I think that's where a distinction needs to be made. Bad use of language isn't immoral and doesn't necessarily reflect poorly on someone's character, and I don't think everyone NEEDS to use proper language all the time. I get annoyed with some of hte slang and (basically) patois that people use, but it's not an indication of what low-lifes they are.

My concern, as I've pointed out in this thread, is that a professional with a huge salary and national standing who is using language for a living should certainly do better than Packer does. His is one case where it speaks (!) to the character, showing that Packer is lazy, arrogant and conceited. He has the chance to make the world a better place, and he chooses instead to make it worse. In other words, he's a low-life, who prefers to wallow in his filth, and tries to convince others to do the same.

Yea, that's judgment, and it's based on language, which I just got done saying I don't think is good. In Packer's case, as in other similar situations, I think judgment is appropriate. He SHOULD be paying attention to his language, and he SHOULD be using English properly. My next-door neighbor would probably have an easier time getting his hot-water fixed if his English were more standard, but there's no "SHOULD" to his case. Judgment doesn't apply to him, like so many of us on the baord, or most people in the world.

Wow.

I heard he doesn't floss after meals too.

You sound vaguely like somebody else I've seen lately....Oh yes:

An Englishman's way of speaking absolutely classifies him,
The moment he talks he makes some other Englishman despise him.
One common language I'm afraid we'll never get.
Oh, why can't the English learn to set
A good example to people whose English is painful to your ears?
The Scotch and the Irish leave you close to tears.
There even are places where English completely disappears.
In America, they haven't used it for years!
Why can't the English teach their children how to speak?
Norwegians learn Norwegian; the Greeks are taught their Greek.
In France every Frenchman knows his language from "A" to "Zed"
The French never care what they do, actually, as long as they pronounce it properly.
Arabians learn Arabian with the speed of summer lightning.
And Hebrews learn it backwards, which is absolutely frightening.
But use proper English you're regarded as a freak.
Why can't the English,
Why can't the English learn to speak?

Welcome to the free market economy. It seems the broadcast media limit their sense of social responsibility to attempting to influence presidential elections and pointing out pitiful situations where "somebody should do something."

When it comes to sportscasters, it's all about the money, Baby! Packer et. al. will be gracing the airwaves for exactly as long as they make money for their employers, and they will be speaking the way they do for exactly as long as somebody will pay them as they are.

[Edited by Back In The Saddle on Mar 29th, 2005 at 12:01 PM]

If I understand you correctly, the term you are using "ON the back", refers to an "over the back" call on the defender? If so, there is no such call. I feel a player can defend over the back as long as the player does not make contact which empede's the opponent to a disadvantage.

I am not too high on Jim Nance as a number one announcer and I think the old fella Verne is a much better announcer than Gus.

Give me some feedback. Thanks.

The word ON implies contact, which is what Nance was saying and why stmaryrams was applauding him.

To recap:

"ON the back" implies contact
"over the back" does not

Nothing wrong with "on the back", more precise than than "over the back". IMO nothing wrong with "over the back" either, it's all just fan-speak the announcers use. And I don't pay too much attention to the announcers, they're all just Billy/Dicky/Verne/Brent/Jim/Whoever to me. Except for Gus Johnson who I really do like.

[QUOTE]

Quote:

Originally posted by rainmaker His is one case where it speaks (!) to the character, showing that Packer is lazy, arrogant and conceited. He has the chance to make the world a better place, and he chooses instead to make it worse. In other words, he's a low-life, who prefers to wallow in his filth, and tries to convince others to do the same.

Well....I think that was both barrels.

Have they tied him to Osama Bin Laden yet?

The local sports radio station around here was having people call in with their least favorite announcer cliches and their favorite ones. I only caught a few minutes, but it was entertaining. It sounds as if most fans are sick of Packer too. I wanted to call and say that my least favorites were over the back and with the reach, but I had to get to work. Of course my favoite would be ONIONS! I can't even type that without laughing.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by canuckrefguy

Quote:

Quote: Originally posted by rainmaker His is one case where it speaks (!) to the character, showing that Packer is lazy, arrogant and conceited. He has the chance to make the world a better place, and he chooses instead to make it worse. In other words, he's a low-life, who prefers to wallow in his filth, and tries to convince others to do the same. Well....I think that was both barrels. Have they tied him to Osama Bin Laden yet?

I wouldn't give him nearly that much credit!

Well, see? There ya go...


Seriously, I guess what I wrote was a little harsh. But the arrogance is hard for me to swallow, and I don't understand people who think it's cool. Why is being ignorant, conceited and show-off-y something to be proud of?

I dunno, next time I see Donald Trump I'll ask him to get Paris Hilton's take on the subject.

ha
 

definitely a good call danref. In this society, loud mouth people who go against authority or conformist norms like not being a slut, not being snotty, and being domesticated (something Hilton does go against) are looked up at. Donald Trump has admitted his ego is huge, yet his show is one of the most watched shows and he is thought of as some business genius, when in reality his show is complete crap and not reality at all. It doesn't reflect the REAL business world. Fans that scream in congregations at officials during a game are much the same...extremely popular to their fellow fans. Officials are the authority figures and very easily get trashed. Packer knows this and he uses it to score points with the fans at home. I will say though that Packer is not like Hilton or Trump. This is because Packer isn't liked by even the fan base lol. Poor Billy.

Also, the language debate is ridiculous. People make mistakes. I don't think we listen to announcers for their knowledge and mastery of the english language. We listen to them for commentary and analysis on bball games (or whatever the sport is). It seems some of you are getting too picky and taking your hate for Billy out on his speaking skills, thus looking for another way to hate on him. The man sucks..but it isn't due to his speaking abilities.

[Edited by Hii on Mar 29th, 2005 at 04:37 PM]

Juulie, I think you're starting to lose perspective here, and are now attributing qualities to the man that are not supported by facts. While I find their commentary occasionally infuriating, I do not find Nance or Packer to come off as arrogant, conceited, or show-off-y (is that a word? ;)).

You're taking this dislike to a whole new level - one that is, judging by what I've been able to glean from this board, beneath you.

Just my $0.02

He is deliberately and with intent ignorant of the rules, and he actively resists any efforts to make himself more knowledgeable. Apparently, he feels the say way about the English language. Why should I like someone like that?

Waaaaay off base
 

Juulie ,
I usually really enjoy reading what you have to write but you are so completely off base here . I think the only reason you have not had more pushback to your posts (and there have been a couple) is because of your usually right on and express yourself in a respectful manner .
For you to take Billy Packer or any other BASKETBALL ANALYST to task for his use of language or mis-pronunciation of words (I do agree they should get players names right or if they can't just call them by their uni number ) is absolutely ridiculous . He was not hired because he speaks proper (according to you) english he was hired and remains employed because he knows the game of basketball (Or so his boss thinks) .
Please understand that 95% of the audience that listens to a basketball broadcast is not concerned with the "basketball analysts" grasp of the English language . He/she is concerned with the game and occasionally wants someone to explain strategy or rules to them.....or in Packers case what the rules aren't . In other words speak to your audience....and while it is probably not intentional Packer is doing just that .
BTW if Packer is on TV I turn down the sound becasue I don't like his analysis .
PLEASE do not take out a red pen and mark me for my many writing errors

Re: Waaaaay off base
 

Well, I'm sorry that you disagree. I usually appreciate what you say, too, and I don't like disagreeing.

Don't worry about me marking you down for any writing errors. You're not getting paid for your English as Packer is. Yes, he is getting paid for his "baskeball analysis" but that thought process (however flawed!) is conveyed and depicted by his language. He is getting paid for communicating. When he doesn't use communication well, he's putting forward a disrespect for the "game" (ie the rules, structure and boundaries) of language in general. Is it any surprise, then, that he also has such a blatant disregard for the rules of basketball? His flawed thinking about basketball is a metaphor in a way for his flawed thinking about basketball.

You are right that he appeals to the pre-adolescent viewers who like that chip-on-the-shoulder attitude. He confirms their childish desire to put one right in the face of the authorities. CBS pays him for this, because their only value is the bottom line, and they pander to their audience.

I just can't respect or even feel neutral about that. I don't lose a lot of sleep over it, since that whole view of life is so prevalent in our society that it's a nearly hopeless battle. But I can't keep from pointing out, in a thread called, "Defending the ANnouncers" that Packer's whole routine is indefensible.

Well, no he's not.

He's getting paid to fill the time between commercials in a way that doesn't scare off the viewers. Nothing more, nothing less, networks are in the business of selling viewers to advertisers. Apparently he doesn't scare off enough viewers so the advertisers keep paying CBS and CBS keeps paying him.

Pretty simple when you think about it.

Re: Re: Waaaaay off base
 

Juulie - I am in absolute agreement with you. Packer belongs in the same category as Dizzy Dean, who was chastised for saying things like "He slud into third base". At least Dean was funny. Packer isn't.

Bottom line, I can't imagine CBS losing a single viewer if Packer was replaced - except maybe Mrs. Packer and all the ACC fans.

Guys - I think I have some credibility here since I seem to be the only one on the board who has been both a basketball announcer and a basketball official.

Yea, I think you're right. I'm giving him way too much credit? Of course he's a cretin. He doesn't even floss! What was I thinking...

Credit?

Would you give a goldfish credit for eating the crumbs you drop in the water?

I've seen him floss. He puts the string in one ear and pulls it out the other.

Re: Re: Re: Waaaaay off base
 

Uh, one of two... I did it for 2 years for a D-1 school.

Keep in mind that these announcers have to learn jersey numbers and player names for up to 30 to 40 players. AND be able to recite those on the fly instantaneously as the action unfolds. It's a daunting task, and you can't blame them for stumbling every now and then. Sheesh, I mispronounced things many times, but always tried to never do it more than once.

I'll tell you, the one thing that irritates me to no end, is the term "Tobacco Road" anytime Duke, NC State, Carolina or Wake Forest play each other. NO ONE in North Carolina uses that term; they are trying to be hip cool and with it, and they are anything BUT that.

phil

Regardless of the play by play announcing, it was some pretty damned exciting basketball this past weekend.

AMEN!

ph

I guess if I have to explain that it was a joke, it wasn't a very good one.

I thought I might get some more items in the list of color commentary hardships, but instead I got a serious discussion. I guess I'll have to add more smileys next time.

If we are going to dress down Billy Packer for his grasp of the English language and how it puts out the wrong mmessage then how do we feel about Dickie V , Phil Rizzuto , John Madden and the like ?
Note that I am not comparing their rules knowledge nor their expertise of the game .
I just want to know if they should be taken off the air because of the way they talk .
Juulie - you are a good egg !
Yes it is a little slow at work...