When "talking heads" are harshly criticized on the forum, you think:
 

I am interested in what the general feeling is among forum members towards the harsh comments directed at color commentators and such. Bashing these guys can appear to be widely accepted, but I wonder if the majority of members view "talking heads" with far less anomosity than it might appear?

It strikes me as disingenuous to knock those who are not qualified officials for complaining about officiating, then complain about play-by-play and color analysts, when none of us are qualified announcers.

It is helpful to point out mistakes made by announcers so that others may learn from this. I'm sure that a number of officials watching games learn incorrect rules based on what the announcers say. These are the officials that don't move up and don't care to open their rule book.

I do agree with Jimgolf that bashing a profession that is probably very difficult to work, is exactly what we would like them to stop doing. If I had to ramble on about everything and nothing during a 2 hour basketball game then I am sure that I would spew out a lot of nonsense.

My 2 Cents

Most criticisms about announcers are based on rules and mechanics knowledge. I think any criticism on this level is completely fair and justified. If you are going to talk to the general public at the very least make yourself knowledgeable about what you are talking about. I do not see criticism about other aspects of their job as it relates to the technical side of their job.

Peace

Yup. That's the way I see it.

I disagree. The officials who "learn incorrect ruels based on what the announcers say" are not likely to show up here to learn the correct rule.

imo, it's a wobw. (And, yes, I can, and do, just skip the threads)

Based on the comments so far, I believe we have to conclude that such a conclusion would be WRONG.

It doesn't take a qualified anoouncer to recognize they their lack of rules knowledge. Criticizing their bashing of officials and lack of rule knowledge has nothing to do with their ability to call play-by-play or add color to the game.

Further, while some don't like Pecker and Vitale, they does not necessarily mean they do a bad job calling the game. That's more of a personality dislike.

IOW, you've totally missed this point. :D

Just an observation, how come we don't see more referee's commentating. We certainly see players become commentators, why not a hall of fame official? We are apart of the game and I for one would love to hear from an officials prospective live.

The only people who would care to hear an official announce a game are probably other officials or that officials family.

I have a serious question concerning criticizing officials' calls. Is it most people's (who are members here) belief that we shouldn't criticize a fellow official amongst ourselves on this forum? I asked that because I have seen people called some pretty low names for questioning an official's call. I know they are good, but that doesn't mean that just because they do something they are automatically right. I know everybody doesn't think they are always right, but there have been times where it seems that is the case.

Ironically, I worked with an official this weekend in Vegas who just went to the NCAA and NIT tournaments. He told the two of us it is all about getting a break. He said what he calls isn't any different from what we call. If what he says is true - which I think it is - officials at the D1 level can make mistakes just like everybody else. So what are the rules of engagement when talking about those mistakes? If someone comes on this forum and says they made a mistake is that a lot different than seeing an official make a mistake on national TV and learning from it?

If a news caster gets on TV and starts spewing incorrect nonsense regarding certain laws, you can bet lawyers, police, judges, etc. are going to criticize this particular newscaster. When media personalities start making statements that are factually incorrect, they invite criticism.
If I, as an official, were to take a moment in the middle of a game and offer financial advice to one of the coaches based on my limited tax experiences as an official, an accountant could legitimately call me onto the carpet.

I don't have a problem with critiquing (is that spelled correctly?) another officials call or calls - I think we all do that on a fairly regular basis in our own games with our partners (and they to us) and when watching other officials work...what I have a problem with is when someone makes blanket statements such as "That guy is horrible. He shouldn't be doing xyz level of ball", or "I can't stand xyz official - he never gets anything right." What really pisses me off is when someone who isn't at that particular level trashes others who are without any knowledge of what that league/conference has told their officials to do...asking questions about calls or wanting to discuss/argue calls is a fantastic way to learn and improve - bashing peers is nothing but a sad attempt to make oneself look better at someone else's expense - I detest that...

OK. I really want to get this spelled out and I'm not trying to be anything other than genuine.
My next question would be to find out what you would consider bashing an official. All officials are not created equal regardless of what level they work. So if someone is not as good - across the board - as someone else I don't see what is wrong with pointing that out. Additionally, if someone isn't at that officials level, would you also throw out their positive opinion about an official? Again, not being a wise A$$, just asking questions.

Again, I see it as a difference between discussing calls and discussing the person...I don't care what level an official is at, if they want to discuss a call, I will discuss it with them...but the people who say "that guy's horrible. I hate the way he calls a game" really get no interest from me...

There's a difference.

You're not pointing it out. You're offering "your opinion" that he "is not good." Offering an opinion does not instantly create a "fact."

We can debate all debate long whether a rule was broken or not based on what the fact (rule) states. But offering an opinion in an incredibly negative manner crosses the line IMO.

Well, everybody has the right to criticize anyone else here. And anyone else here has the right to respond. And the moderators have the right to decide what criticisms and responses stay and what go.

And so it is written, and so it shall be.

I don't think that it's about criticizing any official's single <B>call</b>. We understand that there isn't an official anywhere at any level that won't blow a call every now and then. It's more about the posters that are doing nothing but questioning an official's integrity or fairness, or are simply just denigrating another official by intimating that official lacks the balls to make big calls, for instance.

Well, if they are questioning an official's integrity or simply just deriding that particular official, then fair is fair imo. They'd better be prepared to get the same back. I can think of one regular poster here, for instance, that is on a constant campaign to denigrate a fine D1 official, for some reason or other known only to himself. He's almost fanatical about it.