• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Fox Blows It at End of WS Game 4

R

RicoGregg

With 2 out in the bottom of the 9th, and the Red Sox leading the Cardinals 4-2, with a runner on first, the Sox closer unexpectedly throws to first and catches the Cardinal runner off base to end the game, and seal the win for Boston.

Exciting? Maybe. But, viewers never saw it live when it happened. Fox was too busy showing an attractive blonde woman in the stands at that moment. They cut to the field the split-second after the runner was called out, but we never saw it live.

I can't imagine NBC's Hall of Fame director, the late Harry Coyle, botching a moment like this.
 
Strange how they go to so much trouble and $$$ to get the rights to show the World Series, and then don't even show all the action when they finally have the chance. Someone there must have been *easily* distracted, or just didn't care as much for the game as the rest of those in attendance. I can see how something like this would make most baseball fans mad, or at least, very frustrated.
 
Fox coverage is frustrating at the very least. I tune in to see a baseball game,,, not a series of closeups. I don't think the Fox sports guys understand that in baseball, there are 9 players on the field plus a batter. All we usually see is the pitcher and batter and catcher. Throughout the games I have no idea how the defense is set. The Cards put a shift on for Ortiz,, and you only see it when he hits,,, the rest of the time its close up of pitcher,, close up of batter, close up of coach, close up of blonde in the stands. I want to see the game,, not little select pieces of it. In the NLCS, there was about 10 seconds of a closeup of Brian Wilsons beard,,,, 37" of nasty beard on my screen when I am supposed to be seeing baseball. Come on Fox, show the WHOLE game.
 
The key word here is "unexpectedly." That's how the runner was caught. That's why the camera was someplace else. It happens.
 
So then it's ok to cut away from live action with the game on the line to show an attractive woman in the stands, is that what you're saying?

Unbelievable.
 
RicoGregg said:
Exciting? Maybe. But, viewers never saw it live when it happened. Fox was too busy showing an attractive blonde woman in the stands at that moment. They cut to the field the split-second after the runner was called out, but we never saw it live.
Click to expand...

So instead of the Heidi game, we now have the Heidi Klum game?
 
sack said:
Fox coverage is frustrating at the very least. In the NLCS, there was about 10 seconds of a closeup of Brian Wilsons beard,,,, 37" of nasty beard on my screen when I am supposed to be seeing baseball. Come on Fox, show the WHOLE game.
Click to expand...

The NLCS was on TBS (Turner Broadcasting System), not on FOX.
 
Maybe they will have to use the split screen that had become popular in auto racing. While the commercial (or in this case the camera not pointed at the field of play) is running on one side of the screen, the race (or the camera pointed at the field) is shown on the other so if something happens, you can watch it.
 
The problem with baseball? There exists no good camera angle to show all the action. You have that in football, basketball, hockey, soccer, horse racing and even lacrosse because all the players are bunched up in a relatively small area.

Personally, I like to have my live baseball on the radio and watch highlights later.
 
RicoGregg said:
So then it's ok to cut away from live action with the game on the line to show an attractive woman in the stands, is that what you're saying?
Click to expand...

Had the camera been focused on the action, it would have been the center field camera showing the pitcher, hitter, and catcher. That angle still would have missed the out at first base. It's the same reflex command that calls for the first base camera, regardless of what the previous shot was. That's how it works.

But what's the problem with looking at attractive women. Had I been at this game, I'm sure my eyes would have wandered a few times, and most likely missed some critical plays. That's why TV has replay.
 
Last edited:
Apparently some cameraman was looking for the next hot supermodel. The recent Miss Alabama (and someone can correct me if I have her title wrong) who was (and maybe still is) the girlfriend of a college football player, and who is now on Hardee's commercials, was "discovered" that way. And Pamela Anderson was similarly "discovered" when she was shown on a jumbotron at a ballgame.
 
Wrong. Katherine Webb was the reigning Miss Alabama when she was highlighted by Brent Musburger in a football game last season. She is no longer the reigning Miss Alabama, a lady named Mary-Margaret McCord is.
 
Last edited:
Wow camera guy! Big mistake. Focus on the baseball game, that's what you are paid for!

-crainbebo
 
On the international feed, they focused on the runners but Gary Thorne, who was doing play by play was momentarily confused by what he saw. Still, much better than missing the play altogether.
 
crainbebo said:
Wow camera guy! Big mistake. Focus on the baseball game, that's what you are paid for!

-crainbebo
Click to expand...

The camera guys focus on what the director tells them to focus on. That's what they get paid for. Running camera is a job, most likely a union job, and they do what they're told.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom