B/S were the better team, no doubt in my eyes. But they made several mistakes here and there and that effected their overall performance. After they skated, S/P had to skate perfectly in order to beat them. The problem is that S/P were actually perfect in their delivery of the program that night and still lost. That was anticlimatic at best. IMHO S/P deserved the gold based on their flawless performance under such pression. That doesn't mean they were the better team. But they performed better that night.
Please return the dead horse to its grave to rest in peace. The season has started, there is enough skating to discuss and no reason to resort to this.
As for the actual topic...
Do: Tell viewers a bit about the skaters and the program before it begins, point out key elements during the program, discuss levels, scoring, etc. during the replays as we're waiting for the marks. In short: be informative but don't talk over the performance. And share your opinions and expertise - I like announcers with a point of view - but try to be unbiased as possible, or at least acknowledge your bias if you can't.
Please don't: Talk over the program, engage in blatant homerism, whine about how 6.0 was better while complaining that math is hard, call 13 year olds sexy.
The good: Chris Howatch from Eurosport generally does well, though the Eurosport guys seem to have some opinions and comments in recent years. I also like the Youtube videos from the Spanish channel, I don't know how good the commentary is but there doesn't seem to be an excessive amount of it, and what little I can pick out sounds to the point.
The bad: Italian and French broadcasters who won't shut up; some of the very biased American announcers.
Should they have kept quiet and told us everything was fair and square - or was it part of their job to let us know they thought something was wrong?
Were Scott and Sandra over the top that evening - should they have kept their true opinions to themselves?
Or was it better they showed they have the integrity to call it like they see it?
Last edited by janetfan; 09-30-2012 at 06:00 AM.
I think Scott and Sandra got caught up in the emotions of the moment, and then proceeded to fan the flames for everyone else. I don't know whether it was good or bad. They certainly had seen many figure skating contests before in their lives which had not gone the way they expected.
For that matter, I still can't see why the Salt Lake City thing is harped on, even today, as being the the atom bomb that blew up figure skating. Nothing happened in 2002 that hadn't been going on since 1902. Everyone has always known that the judging is sometimes suspect, whether it is the Austrian world champion refusing to skate in Sweden against Ulrich Salchow because he can't get a fair shake, or Sonia Henie's father physically threatening the judges, or the North American Championship being cancelled because both the U.S. and Canada thought the judges for the other side were cheating, or the entire Russian complement of judges being banned from all events for a year in the 1980s because of systematic bias.
Yet when a French judge apparently collaborates with other judges on the panel, well, we are SHOCKED. Just shocked! Bring on anonymous judging quick!
But it surely lead up to a positive outcome - to change the judging system. So this should be praised as of 2010 Lysacek's quadless Olympic win.
Last edited by Bluebonnet; 09-30-2012 at 11:46 AM.
It seems like a giant leap of faith to believe so.
Back to announcers since someone brought up Evan - after Plushy finished Scott said, "this is gonna be close."
I listened to the Brit EuroSport clip the other day and their announcer said something like, "he did it, Plushenko won."
This was his call before Plushenko's score had been posted.
Last edited by janetfan; 09-30-2012 at 11:57 AM.
By the way, here is a reference to the French judge thing from the 2012 summer Olympics, about boxing.
Unless ISU is run by total idiots of course they would never use an emotionally unstable judge at their biggest event.
Sports like babseball, footbal and basketball make it clear the refs at the playoffs and championships are hand-picked based on their record of excellence.
Why would ISU not do the samething?
We all know why...don't we
Last edited by janetfan; 09-30-2012 at 12:24 PM.
me personally? I thought Plush had it too because I felt Evan held back in the presentation (something Plush never does) and I thought they'd give Plush the nod... I freaked when I found out I was wrong (woke the house up too... whoops)
If 6.0 had judged Adelina and Katelyn I would have seen immediately that they were tied ...say at 5.7's across the board for presentation.
The tech scores would have shown Kaetlyn with a lead....maybe 5.7 to 5.5.
I would have seen right away where Kaetlyn won and where Adelina lost. It took me quite a while to find this info this morning.
I also think the PCS are wrong and it looks like one judge filled in all the scores.
If I am to believe there is real and honest judging going on I don't expect to see such close agreement - but some semblance of human judgement involved.
Anyway - I did try to learn more about the CoP this morning but did not come away as satisfied as others.
Maybe it's because I don't automatically believe something just because I read it on the internet