How Biased Is Your Announcer?

[Chip R]

Originally Posted by cumberlandreds

I don't mind a home announcer being a little biased. As long as he gives the other team credit when they do well and not try to put down their performance because the "home" team was bad that day. Also don't like it when they start blaming the umpires for the teams ills. Bob Carpenter of the Nats is really bad for that. The White Sox guys are the worst. Especially Harrleson. Just unlistenable at times. I would have thought the Cards announcers would be much higher. They are extremely biased and are in the same league as Harrelson and Stone.

I agree and I think the Reds announcers will give the other team credit when they do well - sometimes to a fault.

[dfs]

I don't mind homerism at all. Well, at least not in dosages that the reds guys usually give me. What bothers me is when the announcers generally don't seem to be enjoying what they are doing. If it's so damned hard, step aside and let somebody else take a crack. I'm sure you can find a 9-5 some place that won't be as hard as watching the reds on a nightly basis.

[REDREAD]

Originally Posted by elfmanvt07

It's worth noting that almost all of Thom's homerism evaporates when he's called on to work a Reds game on national FOX.

Or when the Reds fail to lay a bunt down.

[REDREAD]

Originally Posted by Yachtzee

Sure it's fine when the team is doing well, but I couldn't stand listening to Marty and Thom when the Reds were doing poorly. They can really beat a dead horse about something they see that they don't like. I can see they're bad. I don't need the announcers harping on it the entire game. Nobody plays the indignant man like the Brennemans.

Yes.. case in point.. Last year, Marty made it his mission to mention that Stubbs was leading the league in strikeouts .. He would mention it about 100 times/game it seemed.
Even when the team is doing well.. Marty seems to take pleasure whenever Homer, Bruce, or Stubbs fails to "come through". He also enjoyed running Chapman down the previous two years.. Marty obviously thought Chapman was a "Waste of money" and took great pleasure at beating into the ground Chapman's control problems when they happened".

Even this year, I've had to turn the game off at times.. One game, the Reds had bases loaded in an early inning and didn't score.. Marty reminded us of that failure about 8 more times before I turned off the radio. He can not retire soon enough.

[redsmetz]

Originally Posted by REDREAD

Even this year, I've had to turn the game off at times.. One game, the Reds had bases loaded in an early inning and didn't score.. Marty reminded us of that failure about 8 more times before I turned off the radio. He can not retire soon enough.

I agree although I fear Thom is the heir apparent and he's worse than his dad when he's cranky. Jim Kelch would be a welcome lead announcer with Thom going back to just being a national announcer.

[Sea Ray]

I'm wondering if they'd done Marty if he'd have had a negative score?

[Tom Servo]

Originally Posted by REDREAD

Or when the Reds fail to lay a bunt down.

Or when Jay Bruce strikes out.

[DGullett35]

Im suprised the Indians were second. I give Rick Manning credit however when the Indians play badly he lets the viewers know it.

[HeatherC1212]

I don't mind a little homerism when I'm watching a Reds broadcast (they should be rooting for the home team since that's the target audience) but our guys are pretty much Switzerland when you compare them to the broadcasters in Chicago. The White Sox guys especially are HORRIBLE with their bias to the point of obnoxiousness although the Cubs guys can be bad at times too.

The Orioles guys are pretty awesome for the most part and I bet they're enjoying their job covering the games this year with all the Orioles success. They haven't had that there in a long time!

[FlightRick]

Is the we/us thing just a pet peeve among those who studied broadcasting and/or believe in a proper, by-the-book technique? Or is there more to it than that? Because by and large, I fall into the "royal we" speak 90% of the time, so do my friends, and really, unless there's some sort of strong agreement among professional athletes that abhors fans/broadcasters including themselves with the actual players, I don't see the harm. They're really the only ones in a position to take offense.

I'll throw my lot in with those who don't mind some homerism. I'd get annoyed if it were blind homerism, but if there's such a thing as being "competently biased," then that's what I want. Root for the home team, but have enough baseball knowledge that your opinions are well-informed and your fact-reporting is accurate; and most of all, rooting for the home team doesn't mean ignoring their shortcomings or the strengths of the opposition.

I like the idea of being told the story of a baseball game by someone who is a fan. But only if they're the good kind of fan. Intelligent and knowledgeable, able to avoid trite cliches and internal inconsistencies (I hate it when an announcer decrees something one inning, then the opposite is suddenly true the next; Bobby Valentine did this about a half dozen times on Sunday, and I truly wonder if he can hear himself talk), and of course, a bit of cleverness doesn't hurt. You know: a fan like me. I'd absolutely love to sit next to myself on a couch and watch a baseball game with me. The conversation would be scintilating.

I digress.

Anyway, thanks to MLB Network showing so many games per week where they pick up the local feeds (and they only do one "national" game per week), the past 3 years have been awesome for sampling all the different flavors of broadcasters. And I've taken advantage, and come away with the impression that our guys are significantly more palatable than most. They get "competent bias" right.

Except Thom. And it's not the "bias" part that he gets wrong. When Marty gets cranky, I'm usually cranky, too, and I'm confident our crankiness is justified. But when Thom gets cranky, I just want to give baby his bottle so he'll stop making that horrific noise. How is it possible that this has been his job for so many years, and he still seems to know less about baseball than us? I mean, it'd be one thing if he was acting dumb to set up his Expert Color Analyst, but I'm pretty sure that isn't it.

I digress again. End communication...


Rick

[RANDY IN INDY]

Jim Kelch.................no.

[Rojo]

Originally Posted by cincinnati chili

Totally agree. To me, a local announcer should be pulling for the locals. Just don't fail to point out the greatness of the other side and the shortcomings of "our" side.

For ultra-homers, the other team becomes the Washington Generals.

[westofyou]

Originally Posted by RANDY IN INDY

Jim Kelch.................no.

I'd rather listen to Kelch read the phone book than suffer through Thom Brennaman's attempt to make every instance on the field the most important event since the discovery of manned space flight.

[George Anderson]

Originally Posted by westofyou

I'd rather listen to Kelch read the phone book than suffer through Thom Brennaman's attempt to make every instance on the field the most important event since the discovery of manned space flight.

That is the best thing you have ever posted.

[Tom Servo]

Jim Kelch and Chris Welsh is easily the Reds best announcing duo, and I'd go far as to say one of the best in baseball.