Should Rick be Sut?
(Apologies for the awful pun)
For years those of us who live outside the US of A have had to deal with Rick Sutcliffe when watching games on MLB International. I know you guys get him just as much over there on ESPN but does anyone actually like him as the color analyst?
I caught a quick bit of Sutcliffe on the WBC the other day and he was praising Kevin Youkilis for going from 1st to 3rd on a single to RF. That is fair enough - that is a good baseball play. He then stated that Dustin Pedroia would've done the same and that is why the Boston Red Sox are better than the New York Yankees because that isn't the type of thing the Yankees do any more.
Sheesh I thought - that sounds like a spot of bias there but then during an ad break during the WBC we get clips of the 2008 season. It is 7-1 Rays against Boston with Papi at the plate and this is what Sut said, 'I don't pull for teams but I pull for guys - I hope Papi hits it out' - he did as we all know as the Sox came all the way back but should a broadcaster on a neutral network really be saying this kind of thing?
I know that I don't believe so. We all have seen announcers from other teams networks and think they are biased. That is slightly more fair as they are broadcasting to an audience that expects them to be but on national (and international) tv there should never be any bias shown.
Before anyone jumps on me and says it is only a couple of examples I should say that I have noted it before and there are announcers that seem biased for the Yankees. It isn't just that he is biased that bugs me - it is the fact that he bring very little to the table. He doesn't have an easy style that you can just listen to, nor does he bring much expert nous to the air and he can't even tell a good story.
Sadly one persons view on a small blog won't do much but it has made me feel a little bit better anyways.
For years those of us who live outside the US of A have had to deal with Rick Sutcliffe when watching games on MLB International. I know you guys get him just as much over there on ESPN but does anyone actually like him as the color analyst?
I caught a quick bit of Sutcliffe on the WBC the other day and he was praising Kevin Youkilis for going from 1st to 3rd on a single to RF. That is fair enough - that is a good baseball play. He then stated that Dustin Pedroia would've done the same and that is why the Boston Red Sox are better than the New York Yankees because that isn't the type of thing the Yankees do any more.
Sheesh I thought - that sounds like a spot of bias there but then during an ad break during the WBC we get clips of the 2008 season. It is 7-1 Rays against Boston with Papi at the plate and this is what Sut said, 'I don't pull for teams but I pull for guys - I hope Papi hits it out' - he did as we all know as the Sox came all the way back but should a broadcaster on a neutral network really be saying this kind of thing?
I know that I don't believe so. We all have seen announcers from other teams networks and think they are biased. That is slightly more fair as they are broadcasting to an audience that expects them to be but on national (and international) tv there should never be any bias shown.
Before anyone jumps on me and says it is only a couple of examples I should say that I have noted it before and there are announcers that seem biased for the Yankees. It isn't just that he is biased that bugs me - it is the fact that he bring very little to the table. He doesn't have an easy style that you can just listen to, nor does he bring much expert nous to the air and he can't even tell a good story.
Sadly one persons view on a small blog won't do much but it has made me feel a little bit better anyways.
posted by Neil Monnery at
14:36
3 Comments:
Firstly I have to agree with the sentiment that bias is becoming increasingly prevalent in broadcast journalism and it really shouldn't. Anyone who watches ITV sport these days will know just how frustrating and annoying the constant over-reaction to the exploits of a select few teams and individuals can be.
As for Sutcliffe, I don't actually mind him. I won't say he is my favourite broadcaster or that he is a particularly interesting guy, but he does sometimes come up with some very good observations. I think he is a classic example of someone who obviously knows a lot about their field but just is maybe not studied enough in other fields to be able convey that knowledge in an effective way. Is he worse than David Pleat?
No-one is worse than David Pleat - surely? If they are then I seriously don't want him (or her) to be calling any game that I am watching.
I want one of two things in a co-commentator in baseball (or cricket terms) and that is either a good story teller or someone who often gives really good insight into the game. I just feel Sut delivers neither.
My Fav Broadcaster or That is a particularly interesting guy,
Thanks for Sharing.......
Get More Details
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home