WHY would anyone want to see the winning goal in sudden-death overtime of a Stanley Cup Final – perhaps even the Cup-winning goal – when he or she can look at a shots-on-goal graphic?
If TV were invented today, live sports events couldn’t be covered any worse than they are today, after 50 years of practice.
Consider that not even neophyte hockey fans would need an explanation of the nature of overtime Stanley Cup play. They’d know not to turn away or be distracted during OT, lest they miss the game-ending goal.
And, in the case of Thursday night’s Stars-Devils Game 5 on ABC, they’d risk missing the only goal, maybe even the one that wins the Cup for the Devils.
But that was the case, as ABC’s mindless, indiscriminate use of graphics not only covered live play in OT, the network risked the lasting ridicule of hiding the game-ending and/or Cup-clinching goal behind a graphic.
With 9:30 left in the first OT and play on, play suddenly disappeared, lost to a fat, mid-screen stat graphic that noted – ta da! – both teams’ scoring chances. Even play-by-play man Gary Thorne, obviously consulting his monitor, was distracted by the foolish intrusion, noting the contents of the graphic with a, “There you see it.”
Yeah, there we saw it – a graphic, covering live play in OT of a Stanley Cup final.
With 2:25 left in the first OT, and the faceoff deep and to Dallas goalie Ed Belfour’s right, a graphic appeared that covered the puck just as it was dropped. This time, ABC risked missing the winning goal on a bang-bang play to show a “Shots on Goal” graphic.
A circumspect production – one in the hands of those who grasp the sport and the moment at least as well as the TV hardware at their disposal – would’ve dictated that no graphics be posted anywhere within live play in a 0-0 Stanley Cup final, beginning with, say, 10 minutes left in regulation.
There’s nothing, save a declaration of war or a tidal wave warning, that should supersede the view of live action in OT of a Stanley Cup final. These graphics can’t wait until a whistle?
And why is it that I, who has never produced or directed a sports telecast, have to prevail upon professionals to employ a basic, common-sense treatment of what they’ve been charged to televise?
Given past embarrassments, you’d think that ABC/ESPN would have a prescribed, Day 1 mandate on how live events should be covered in crunch time.
In 1992, the closest finish in Indianapolis 500 history – Al Unser Jr. winning by .043 of a second – was lost to a live national audience when ABC’s director chose to shoot a close-up of the guy waving the checkered flag.
But nothing has changed. Fact is, all networks stand a better chance of repeating such mistakes than learning from them.
*
COME back to us, Timmy. Tim McCarver’s firm contention, Friday night, that the second-base umpire might have the best angle on tag-out plays along the first-base line was off the wall.
And McCarver held to his position after Channel 5 boothmate Bobby Murcer wisely suggested that the second-base ump was blocked out by first baseman Tino Martinez when Martinez clearly missed tagging Kurt Abbott after a grounder to Derek Jeter, a botched call that led to Abbott’s ejection.
Even after a replay showed Murcer’s analysis to have made complete sense while nearly destroying McCarver’s point, McCarver maintained his take on the matter.
Had McCarver contended that, in this case, the home-plate ump might’ve had a better angle – a clear look down the line – than the first-base ump, we’d have agreed. But the second-base ump? Ninety feet away with an impeded view? Bizarre.
WE received a lot of puzzled and negative feedback following a column in this space last week in which we chastised Barry Bonds for failing to run to first on a bases-loaded pop-up near home plate.
The ball fell in front of the plate, was fielded by Cub catcher Joe Girardi, who stepped on home, then threw to first to get Bonds in a double play.
Many readers felt that this could not possibly have happened because the infield-fly rule was in effect, thus Bonds was automatically out. Or, they felt that Bonds was a victim of a bad no-call.
However, the infield fly is a discretionary rule, one that must be declared by an umpire immediately after the ball is hit. Unless a batter, especially a veteran one, hears something along the lines of, “Infield fly!” he should run to first.
In this case, the infield-fly rule was not invoked because it applies only on balls that can be caught with what the MLB rule book calls, “ordinary effort.” Bonds’ pop-up, high above the plate in windy Wrigley Field, did not constitute an “ordinary” chance. Far from it. In fact, it was not immediately apparent if the ball would be fair.
Had the infield-fly rule been in order, or even erroneously declared, Bonds, lingering near the plate, would not have been thrown out at first on the tail end of a double play. But Bonds, like many modern players, isn’t big on running to first on any kind of fly ball, which was the point of the column.
*
NESTOR Aparicio, energetic host of One on One Radio’s weekday afternoon show, is the second cousin of Hall of Fame shortstop Luis Aparicio. …
According to a N.J. Casino Commission report last week, a record $4.1 billion was lost last year by gamblers in Atlantic City’s 12 casinos. But drinks are always on the house. …
We’d be more impressed with New York Times sports columnists if they spent more time exposing Cablevision’s exploitation of its Metro channel to deprive non- Cablevision subscribers of sports programming than by serving as Metro show hosts and contributors. …
Mindless channel surfers, Tuesday afternoon, might have noticed that Met pitchers Dennis Cook and Al Leiter were featured chefs on The Food Channel’s “Ready, Set, Cook.”
Lookalikes: We’ve received so many for this one, one we’ve used in the past, that it’s worth reprising: Dallas Stars coach Ken Hitchcock and Bob Keeshan, a/k/a Captain Kangaroo.