Bad Broadcasting

You'd think I'd be on here to talk about tonight's rubber match at Fenway. Obviously there is a lot I could say about a Sunday-night, nationally televised pitchers' duel in Boston between the Yankees and Red Sox. All I will say for now is that, after missing the first two games due to work Friday and a wedding yesterday, I am very excited for tonight's game and hope it doesn't disappoint. I'd be shocked if it did.

Instead, I have to point out two pieces of crappy commentary from the past week; both on national telecasts. My good friend Space tells me broadcast critique could be my calling on this blog. So here goes:

Monday night was ESPN's first "Monday Night Football" game of 2009, a preseason tilt between the Giants and Panthers. First of all, I don't believe Monday Night Football even exists anymore. I know ESPN has been showing the games all along, because ESPN has had control of ABC's sports programming for some time. But once the show left network TV it was over.

I watched Monday only because I watch all Giants games. So I saw the debut of John Gruden, who I hope will be getting another coaching job soon. First, Gruden misinterpreted the concept of "down by contact" so badly on a Panther's fumble that it would make one wonder if he was qualified to coach Pop Warner. On a super slo-mo replay, it was clearly shown -- super slo-mo was not needed -- that the ball popped out of the ballcarrier's hand when the back of his hand hit the ground. "DOWN BY CONTACT" Gruden shouted. As any slightly-more-than-casual football fan knows, a ballcarrier is "down" when any part of his body touches the ground other than a hand or foot. Gruden should know this like the back of his hand. Pun intended. Needless to say, a fumble was ruled on replay and the Giants were awarded possession.

A silly discussion ensued about at what point the hand becomes the arm. Wrist? Forear? WHO CARES?!?! None of those things touched the ground. The hand did.

Gruden's worst offense, however, came at the end of the game. The only reason I, my father-in-law, or anyone else might have been watching were that we didn't feel like getting up and shutting off the TV. But we were. And, as most folks now know, the game ended when the Giants' Clint Sintim knocked a ball out of the hand of the Carolina quarterback Hunter Cantwell. It was caught in the air by the Giants' Tommie Hill, a guy trying to make the team, as are almost all the players in a preseason game with 10 seconds left. Hill returned the fumble or interception for a touchdown.

As Hill entered the end zone, Gruden's commentary consisted of goofy laughter, followed by the words, "What a finish! Monday Night Football on my birthday!"

I knew ESPN was unmatched in its ability to congratulate itself and make itself the news, but I didn't realize this skill now extended to individuals. I was going to write "individual broadcasters," but Gruden is not a broadcaster, and he never will be, even if he has a headset surgically attached to his head, if this is the kind of performance he is going to give. I know this was a fun moment at the least meaningful moment of the least meaningful game ESPN will televise this year. But for a member of the crew to mention his own birthday during the live call of a game-winning play at the final gun of an NFL game is unconscionable. Let's hope Gruden was told this and that things will not be this way for a whole season.

Just a few minutes ago, Chip Caray, whom I like, just committed what some print journalists refer to as an EYF. The practice refers to the concocting of a ridiculous synonym as a way of avoiding repetitive use of a word, even if that word happens to be a prominent part of the story. For instance, in a story about winter weather, you'll often hear TV weather people refer to snow as "the white stuff," lest they find themselves using the word "snow" 100 times. There is nothing wrong with using the word "snow" 100 times if it's appropriate 100 times, which, in a story about winter weather, it usually is. When I hear "the white stuff," I always think to myself, "cocaine?"

Perhaps Chip Caray does not wish to keep referring to players' batting averages "with runners in scoring position."After all, he's a professional baseball play-by-play man. He must use that phrase a thousand times a year. But that does not make it a good idea to do what he just did, referring to Jason Bartlett as "the man who has been the Rays' best hitter this year with runners at second third base."

What the hell is second third base? Does he mean "second and third base"? I'm sure they have a stat for that, but it's probably not that meaningful. Does he mean "second or third base"? If so, does exclude situations with runners at both of those bases?

Chip, I know what you mean, but that doesn't mean I'm going to forgive your murder of the English language. Just say "with runners in scoring position." And don't give me a bunch of nonsense about how you said what you said for the casual fan who might not know what "scoring position" means. You tried to get cute. It's not necessary.

And in case anyone wonders what EYF stands for, it was, according to legend, "elongated yellow fruit." Apparently somebody got tired of writing "banana" in a story in which a banana figured prominently. And what a story that must have been.