Posted on 07/06/2006 8:55:05 AM PDT by stainlessbanner
The World Cup is generating record television audiences for soccer in the U.S. But some diehard fans think the coverage deserves a red card.
Walt Disney Co.'s ESPN and ABC have been hit with complaints from soccer devotees that their telecasts are unsophisticated and mistake-ridden. The popular Web site Big Soccer has a thread titled "Pick your favorite insane thing said by the announcers so far."
A major gripe: ESPN selected an announcer, Dave O'Brien, who had never called a soccer game before this year to serve as the tournament's lead play-by-play man. Some English-speaking viewers have switched to Spanish-language Univision, which has out-rated ESPN and its sister cable network ESPN2 on average for the tournament in Germany.
< snip >
"They're trying to give us all this information to show us how much they know," says Steven Cohen, who has bashed ESPN on his "World Soccer Daily" show on Sirius Satellite Radio. "All they're showing us is how much they don't know."
< snip >
The soccer executives opposed the appointment of Mr. O'Brien. Their argument: using an announcer unfamiliar with the sport might not help ratings but certainly could hurt them. "Would you ever put a guy who had never called a sport before ... in the World Series, the Super Bowl or the Olympics?" a senior U.S. soccer executive says. "Never."
(Excerpt) Read more at post-gazette.com ...
I'm a huge soccer fan; it's by far my favorite sport, and I have to admit that I do think it's getting to the point where FIFA needs to recognize that defenses are starting dominate a little too much now.
I appreciate low scoring games too - probably the most exciting match I've ever seen is the 0-0 draw the USA got in Mexico City in WC qualifying a few years ago, but I do miss the 3-2 and 4-3 wars that teams used to play. Those games are pretty much a thing of the past now, especially when you get to knockout play, and I don't think that's a good thing.
Again, I do appreciate the tension of a 0-0 1-0 type game, but when every game or almost every game ends like that I think it needs to be addressed.
As any true Red Devils fan can tell you, EVERYONE is supposed to root for Manchester United. Then if you're in the north, and you have anything left over, a bit of a cheer for "City" is okay, too.
They keep reporting about the spectacular ratings they're getting for the games. Wonder if they're counting Univision in that count?
After you do let me know how many of those "Most Watched" say Super Bowl, and how many say "World Cup".
I am done now. I don't come to FR to insult people, but I do return in kind.
er ah....it's nil nil
Here's a good history of Manchester City
http://www.mcfc.co.uk/default.sps?pagegid={CFE9542C-55A3-4F75-A396-D3C46CC44FC3}&pcpageid=14770
and a good history of Manchester United
http://www.manutd.com/history/heritage.sps?itype=489&icustompageid=1041
Although they're in the Premier league now, City have spent much of their existence playing "minor league ball". United's the bigger draw, even now.
However, in soccer, that is every game, and it is not a rare gem to be savored, it is continuous boring running back and forth.
I will be totally honest. I actually love to watch soccer every once in a while. But I get infuriated when every single time there is an excitng play it is called back for offside, or some moron writhes around on the field looking like he just got shot or is trying to win the Academy Award.
A team should be rewarded for a great move or a quick clearing pass, not penalized because the Defender was either too slow, completely fooled or just stopped to draw the offside.
There is no such thing as a true attacking style in soccer. The only hope is get enough people forward to get the defenders to make a mistake so you can get a foul close in or a corner kick that will allow you to run a Set Piece and score.
That is the difference between Baseball/Football and Soccer. The first two reward and are by nature Agressive sports. Soccer is a Passive sport. Sort of like the difference between Americans and Europeans.
More people watched the World Cup final in Brazil than watched the Super Bowl worldwide.
I could care less how many people in Brazil watched anything.
By that thinking the favorite past time in the entire world is living grass huts and farming rice fields because BILLIONS of Chinese do that.
Your previous post said "most Americans don't watch....." The definition of "most" means, simply, more Americans are watching than not watching. Therefore, while the WC is clearly not watched by most Americans, neither is the Super Bowl watched by "most Americans". NO SPORTING EVENT IS!!!!
But again, I'm still trying to figure out what the number of viewers has to do with the topic of this thread, which is what network has the better announcers for a certain sport. But hey, that's just me....
Because silly, every thread is about Illegal Immigration! Didn't you know that? ;-)
Disregard all my previous comments (as most smart people do!)
The cliché is that all Mancunians support Manchester City, while Manchester United’s fans all live in the south.
It’s not entirely true.
Gary Thorne was an outstanding NHL Hockey announcer when ESPN had the games.
You're right. Some of them live in the U.S.
Something is very wrong with the pic on the right.......
For all the soccer haters, NFL Tampa Bay Bucs owner Malcolm Glazer gained majority control of Manchester U last year.
I have an earlier post about all the bad sports reporters on ESPN, and that guy is one of them. Thatguy is a total joke.
...and City gained a lot of new supporters.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.