Bob Picozzi

[Dabber]

Let me use this thread to air my biggest gripe about many WCBB announcers, certainly including Picozzi/Culmo: I think the play-by-play person should ALWAYS and IMMEDIATELY announce two facts: (a) who committed the foul; and (b) who entered and left the floor. This is OFTEN not done, even when the foul was committed by an important player who is approaching or is in foul trouble. And frequently the first time we will hear a player's name is when she is involved in a play, even though she has been on the floor for a minute or more. And then we have to figure out whom she replaced.

These are not things that a TV viewer can necessarily observe on his/her own, since the camera is typically not on the official calling the foul or on the substitution table. The viewer won't know these things unless the announcer tells him.

Totally agree with your post about the way important parts of the game are just plain neglected and that is why I always mute the TV and listen to TIC and Bob Joyce/Debbie Fiske. They are excellent in relating exactly what is happening WHEN it happens and their feedback is also meaningful - - none of the off-the-cuff chit chat you get with most of the TV crews.

 

[tomcat]

I don't disagree, but my related complaint is - reporting violations (travel, kick ball, 3 / 5 seconds) as a foul. Don't the announcers look at either the action or the TV? It happens on average I think once a game (maybe not at all one game but more than once in another). You see ref signal 3 seconds in the lane and hold up someones number and the commentators start talking about a foul.

And the related complaint - which happened in the game last night, FWIW - which team the foul (or non-foul) is on. Commentators say its someones 3rd foul, then correct themselves it is on the other team. Or say its so and so's ball - when the ref clearly signaled the opposite. And I'm not talking about the (relatively) few times that the ref changes or misses the call. I'm talking about when the TV person misses the call!!

I have noticed this, too, and have been annoyed by it. My theory -- and that's all it is -- is that on plays where the action turns around (many of these situations -- 3-second call, for example, or traveling, or too much time), the announcers have trained themselves to automatically move down the court to be ready to call the next series of plays. I have a feeling they want to be ready for the next plays, so their eyes dart away from the cause of the turnover and they reflexively call it a foul because their brain didn't have a chance to focus on what actually happened. Just a guess.

 

[lanieer]

Totally agree with your post about the way important parts of the game are just plain neglected and that is why I always mute the TV and listen to TIC and Bob Joyce/Debbie Fiske. They are excellent in relating exactly what is happening WHEN it happens and their feedback is also meaningful - - none of the off-the-cuff chit chat you get with most of the TV crews.

Radio is a whole different animal. While I'm not a culmo/ picozzi fan, you can not compare the reporting of audio only to tv.

 

[Dabber]

Radio is a whole different animal. While I'm not a culmo/ picozzi fan, you can not compare the reporting of audio only to tv.

Radio is a whole different animal. While I'm not a culmo/ picozzi fan, you can not compare the reporting of audio only to tv.

Yes, no argument that radio is a "whole different animal" but quite honestly, Culmo et al tend to forget there is an actual game going on and more often than not, there is no explanation about action on the floor, especially with respect to fouls, etc.,, etc., etc.