ESPN Coverage Defies Sanity [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

ESPN Coverage Defies Sanity

BlakeorHenman
06-29-2007, 07:00 PM
Can anyone tell me why they would be showing Roddick/Verdasco in the second set, when FEDERER/SAFIN are at 4-4 in the third?????

This is ludicrous.

El Legenda
06-29-2007, 07:00 PM
im watching espn and its feds match

Marek.
06-29-2007, 07:04 PM
Yeah, they should have shown the whole Fed Safin match.

gusman890
06-29-2007, 07:18 PM
We've seen Federer destory people countless times 6-1 in the first, mainly because safin was making errors.

tangerine_dream
06-29-2007, 07:27 PM
ESPN has a tough job. A lot of big names are playing at the same time and their best course is to split time between them all rather than show one match in its entirety.

R.Federer
06-29-2007, 07:39 PM
They should have shown the roddick match live (I mean, in the USA anyway) and shown the Federer match taped.
You can't win them all. If they show bits of each, then people are upset. If they show one taped, then the taped-fans are upset. Alternatively, you should all move to Europe and get it on Sky or SF1 or BBC Sports (not that they don't have their own share of issues!)

nobama
06-29-2007, 08:23 PM
No what defies sanity is when seeds like Djokovic and Jankovic are playing LIVE and ESPN is showing us Blake & Sharapova on TAPE. :retard:

RagingLamb
06-29-2007, 08:26 PM
espn is run by idiots who don't care about tennis.

aramis
06-29-2007, 08:33 PM
I just watched the whole match on espn360 with much better commentary to boot.

Dusk Soldier
06-29-2007, 08:33 PM
Can anyone tell me why they would be showing Roddick/Verdasco in the second set, when FEDERER/SAFIN are at 4-4 in the third?????

They were doing you a favour, the Federer/Safin match wasn't that great.

Dusk Soldier
06-29-2007, 08:34 PM
espn is run by idiots who don't care about tennis.now that they have espn360, you can't really complain what matches they show.

Andre'sNo1Fan
06-29-2007, 08:35 PM
They were doing you a favour, the Federer/Safin match wasn't that great.
Exactly, can't even see the big deal.

RagingLamb
06-29-2007, 08:38 PM
now that they have espn360, you can't really complain what matches they show.

unfortunately I can't use espn360, for some reason my internet provider won't let it work.

so I guess I should really be mad at my internet provider.

goldenlox
06-30-2007, 03:28 PM
They think Sequera getting buried in her match with Williams is a great tennis match that they need to repeat 20 times

rofe
06-30-2007, 03:29 PM
Old news.

The Freak
06-30-2007, 03:31 PM
NBC is worse, they don't show live tennis. They will be showing the Venus match later in its entirety. :o

Marek.
06-30-2007, 03:32 PM
Don't we already have like five threads on this? Everyone knows that ESPN hates tennis.

goldenlox
06-30-2007, 04:09 PM
Don't we already have like five threads on this? Everyone knows that ESPN hates tennis.And they hate tennis fans.
Dick Ebersol is an idiot also.

World Beater
06-30-2007, 04:23 PM
And they hate tennis fans.
Dick Ebersol is an idiot also.

this clown thought he could commentate the cricket matches in england...good to see they rejected him. at least they have some sense... his knowledge of tennis rivals that of cricket.

El Legenda
06-30-2007, 04:24 PM
some of you people dont understand what they can and cant broadcast live, they probably have a set of live hours can are allowed the broadcast, blame Wimbledon, they are the ones getting money for these TV contracts.

El Legenda
06-30-2007, 04:25 PM
this clown thought he could commentate the cricket matches in england...good to see they rejected him. at least they have some sense... his knowledge of tennis rivals that of cricket.

i guess you missed the point of that story



it was a JOKE

darnyelb
06-30-2007, 04:33 PM
that was a pretty crappy choice in matches to air. Would've killed to see Jankovic/Safarova highlights.

BlakeorHenman
06-30-2007, 04:34 PM
They were doing you a favour, the Federer/Safin match wasn't that great.

Yeah, it turns out it wasn't, but they were huge names and Roddick was cruising even easier against Verdasco, someone with only a casual interest in tennis would have never even heard of.

Also, it turns out they switched to the match right after I posted the thread. Still, I would expect Fed/Safin final set to be shown in it's entirety.

BlakeorHenman
06-30-2007, 04:35 PM
now that they have espn360, you can't really complain what matches they show.


Isn't it like 25 bucks for that? I'm a poor guy... can't afford it.

World Beater
06-30-2007, 04:38 PM
Isn't it like 25 bucks for that? I'm a poor guy... can't afford it.

i believe its free - espn 360. If you look in the right places, you can great streaming video.

BlakeorHenman
06-30-2007, 04:40 PM
maybe i just need to download codecs or something then...

CyBorg
06-30-2007, 04:45 PM
This is why I payed the 25 bucks for the Wimbledon stream. To save me the aggravation of watching ESPN morons.

Worth it. So worth it.

Rumour
06-30-2007, 04:48 PM
And they hate tennis fans.
Dick Ebersol is an idiot also.

this clown thought he could commentate the cricket matches in england...good to see they rejected him. at least they have some sense... his knowledge of tennis rivals that of cricket.
Dick Ebersol the head of NBC Sports, not Dick Enberg the commentator.

goldenlox
06-30-2007, 06:10 PM
I mean Dick Ebersol. I've heard him talk about tennis on tv, and he thinks it's dead. Yet he buys the rights of majors to show delayed tape.
Let a different network show the matches live, if he won't.
Dick Ebersol is a moron.
Dick Enberg is an 80-something football play by play voice. Knows little about tennis.

goldenlox
06-30-2007, 06:19 PM
No what defies sanity is when seeds like Djokovic and Jankovic are playing LIVE and ESPN is showing us Blake & Sharapova on TAPE. :retard:That's typical ESPN programming.

trixtah
06-30-2007, 07:51 PM
The actually think people in the US want to watch US players--catering to casual (RED WHITE AND BLUE) viewers rather than avid tennis fans.

tangerine_dream
06-30-2007, 08:17 PM
I know logic and reason is difficult for MTF to understand so I'll just repost something I found over at TW:

Posted by jlambertou

Why is this such a big deal?

Spanish stations would show Spanish players even if they weren't at the top. Same with English stations. ESPN shows plenty of other matches, and we got to see a good bit of the Safin-Federer match even with the Roddick match going on. The reasons have all been mentioned - the Federer-Safin match wasn't really in doubt, and ESPN needs to show American matches. It would be ridiculous for the only American left in the tournament to be playing and for the match to not be shown on television - think of it that way.

If a casual fan in the US had the week off from work and actually sat down and watched all the coverage, they would get to know several players from other countries... especially the ones that got to later rounds, and that played in exciting matches. But if there are Americans left in the tournament (especially one who is a top seed) they want to see them play. It's really not rocket science.

goldenlox
06-30-2007, 08:45 PM
I understand showing Roddick-Verdasco now(for the 10th time).
but when there is live tennis at a major going on, they are crippling the sport by showing these replays instead of live tennis.

It's a SPORT. They would never blow off an NFL game to show a tape of a game that ended already, just because it has big market teams.

The popularity of tennis goes down and down. They don't treat it as a sport.
Cause and effect?

Kitty de Sade
06-30-2007, 08:47 PM
"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to goldenlox again." Meh..:ras:

I couldn't agree more with your post. :yeah:

MCL
06-30-2007, 08:47 PM
I understand showing Roddick-Verdasco now(for the 10th time).
but when there is live tennis at a major going on, they are crippling the sport by showing these replays.

:yeah:

Scotso
06-30-2007, 08:50 PM
Roddick tops the list of their "must show" players.

It's basically a list of players they're fanboys of.

tangerine_dream
06-30-2007, 08:55 PM
I understand showing Roddick-Verdasco now(for the 10th time).
but when there is live tennis at a major going on, they are crippling the sport by showing these replays instead of live tennis.
I agree. Live tennis should always be shown over a taped match. Taped matches may as well be shown in the middle of the night when everyone's asleep.

It's basically a list of players they're fanboys of.
More like a list of players who bring in the ratings which in turn brings in the money which in turn justifies ESPN showing us any tennis at all.

ESPN doesn't care about "real" sports fans, in any sport. They're a business, therefore the only thing they care about is ratings.

When you consider that there are many other sports far more popular than tennis in the US, we are lucky to have 8 hours of coverage.

goldenlox
06-30-2007, 09:02 PM
You'd be luckier if TTC had this major, like the French Open.

nobama
07-01-2007, 04:34 AM
When you consider that there are many other sports far more popular than tennis in the US, we are lucky to have 8 hours of coverage.I don't count as coverage showing something tape delayed that they showed live earlier or on a different day. Not in this day and age when people have DVRs or find live streams online. Sure ESPN says they're going to have 100+ hours of coverage, but the amount that's live tennis is far less than that.

Marek.
07-01-2007, 04:35 AM
ESPN has provided a lot of coverage with the Complete Wimbledon summary show in addition to the live coverage but that woman on that show is incredibly annoying. She sounds like she has no idea what she's talking about and is probably looking at a prompt the whole time.:o

sawan66278
07-01-2007, 05:26 AM
I understand showing Roddick-Verdasco now(for the 10th time).
but when there is live tennis at a major going on, they are crippling the sport by showing these replays instead of live tennis.


Spot on.:yeah:

The_Nadal_effect
07-01-2007, 07:13 AM
ESPN is a lot better than Star Sports (India) then.

Here, they feed us a Mirza/ Peer doubles when we have Safin and Fed play. I know these channels feed to area-specific audiences but they should prioritize by rankings too. Besides it wasn't even Mirza's singles match. :shrug:

soraya
07-01-2007, 09:11 AM
[QUOTE]
It's a big deal because people in the US keep complaining about "the death of American tennis" and about how interest in tennis is waning in this country, how ratings are low, etc.

Sure, featuring an American player will draw in more viewers, but how is playing pre-taped matches in which the commentators tell us what the outcome was before they replay it supposed to draw in viewers when there are spectacular live matches being played, or when there are other taped matches which are more exciting/competitive that they can show instead?

Promoting the US players on a US TV station is of course good short term business sense, but that means that you're not promoting the sport for the long term, in a way that will make people tune in to see matches even if there aren't any Americans left in a tournament. If you establish a viewing culture in which Americans are only interested in watching tennis matches if they involve an American player with US Open-winning potential, you deserve everything you get when Americans lose interest in tennis just because American players aren't winning Slams.
:yeah:


With that said, I actually think ESPN's coverage hasn't been that bad. :eek:
Am I watching a different ESPN?