- Joined
- Aug 15, 2003
I know, the only tight jump was her 2nd lutz. everything else was perfect.
Reactions and criticism of judging by Network commentators - NBC, CBC, BBC, etc
- Thread starter sowcow
- Start date
I know, the only tight jump was her 2nd lutz. everything else was perfect.
Not as explosive or high as Adelina's. Her program was safe and not stand out.
A...h.
Ha.
Ha.
Ha.
Ha.
Safe? ******* safe? I'D LIKE TO SEE ANY SKATER SKATE IN YUNA'S PLACE AND SEE IF THEY CAN DO HALF OF WHAT SHE'S DONE.
I can't believe it. Are they hearing what they're even saying? A flawless skate that was (decidedly underscored, given someone's inflation) deemed worthy of 144 is their definition of SAFE? Just because she makes it look easy, is it actually easy? YOU ARE A SKATER, for god's sake. You know how hard it is.
They need to be ashamed of themselves.
It's possible that I'm going to lose my mind over this.
A...h.
Ha.
Ha.
Ha.
Ha.
Safe? ******* safe? I'D LIKE TO SEE ANY SKATER SKATE IN YUNA'S PLACE AND SEE IF THEY CAN DO HALF OF WHAT SHE'S DONE.
I can't believe it. Are they hearing what they're even saying? A flawless skate that was (decidedly underscored, given someone's inflation) deemed worthy of 144 is their definition of SAFE? Just because she makes it look easy, is it actually easy? YOU ARE A SKATER, for god's sake. You know how hard it is.
They need to be ashamed of themselves.
It's possible that I'm going to lose my mind over this.
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2013
Please don't compare Adelina's sloppy jumps to Kim's text book jumps.
When Adelina's in the air, she has no control. Her jumps are high and ugly. Her landings have no speed.
I agree, Ambivalent. And I appreciate what you said about Mao Asada's free skate, too. She was brilliant. I felt she'd done enough to get on the podium even _with_ the disastrous short program, and wondered why her scores were not reflective of that.
One thing many people seem to be forgetting in here -- when Johnny Weir was underscored in Vancouver, he didn't create a controversy about it. I'm wondering if that's why he's being so understated now. He actually was able to make hay on the fact that the public was outraged on his behalf, and he didn't have to lift a finger to create that outrage -- it was similar, though lesser, than what we're seeing right now with the results of the Ladies Figure Skating Event at the Olympics. (I like to give it the full, formal name, especially now when the results are so problematic. The grandeur of the event needs to be restored _somehow_.)
I don't want to get too far afield here, but I do think that might be one reason why Johnny W. in particular doesn't want to go there with regards to the controversy. If he did, he'd be opening up old wounds that probably didn't heal too well. His own skate was the best of his career, he gained all sorts of new fans by it (including me), and there were petitions _then_ to the USFSA saying they should protest his scores because they were too low and all sorts of groups that sprang up on FB that said the same thing. (And of course, the USFSA did _nothing_.)
Weir is a pro's pro. So his own personal feelings are probably something like this (me saying this not knowing the guy from Adam, just knowing his skating and commentating): Carolina Kostner skated the best program of her life. Yuna Kim skated better in Vancouver, but still skated well.
And we have this young upstart Russian, who skated athletically and with flair, who was urged on by a home crowd and perhaps aided by some judging that appears, on its face, to be *highly* questionable.
The young Russian, Sotnikova, skated the best program of _her_ life, too. And she's only seventeen years old. She didn't ask for this sort of thing to happen, but she's happy she won and feels the win is legitimate.
He has to know all these things, right?
So while privately he may disagree with the result, he isn't going to say so publicly for all of those reasons. (I hope this makes some sense and didn't go too far afield.)
Except publicly said on NBC that Yuna didn't deserve to win. And then run to Korean TV and said Adelina didn't deserve to win. I'm not sure if he's versatile, but his mouth is.
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2014
.
Wow, very interesting! I strongly believe that NBC (and CBC, BBC, etc.) commentators were warned against (or strongly urged to avoid) discussing any DIRECT judging issues/controversy during the coverage. Certainly, the actions of the CBC commentators supports this assertion:
Of course, once the floodgates opened and the story was headlined by print media worldwide, the networks (and commentators) could no longer ignore the issue...
Interestingly, in many cases the initial reactions and 'off-the-cuff' opinions of commentators are clearly being 'watered down', walked back, and in some cases reversed! The quotes above by Bluebonnet, Mathman & vtgal provide examples of this by Johnny, Tara and Michelle. It is highly likely they are being pressured to do so by their employers (i.e. the Networks) and counseled to soften/change their earlier positions.
Why do the Networks want to minimize the controversy?
The networks clearly have figured out that a bit of "light" controversy at Worlds or Olympics is a great way to boost viewership (and therefore they welcome it). On the other hand, a "huge" controversy (despite an initial short-lived boost to ratings) tends to have the opposite effect - and kills-off viewership.
Select consequences of the "huge" 2002 Olympics judging controversy:
The $$ impact of the Hamilton/Bezic outrage to NBC's bottom line was enormous! I believe NBC at the time had already contracted with the IOC for the broadcast rights for the next 2 Olympic Games. Just imagine ... NBC pays the big bucks ($$) for the Olympic broadcast rights, only to have viewership tumble by 50%+ for the "marquee" figure skating events because of the 5 minute Hamilton/Bezic outrage. Those were probably the 5 most expensive broadcast minutes in NBC's history, if you consider all the {still ongoing} negative revenue implications!
So, it is easy to understand why NBC, CBC, the BBC, etc. (or any of the National Skating Associations, or the ISU/IOC) would want to AVOID introducing, contributing, or prolonging a judging scandal (or any big controversy) given the possible financial repercussions! This also explains why many commentators are clearly watering-down, walking-back, and in some cases reversing their initial opinions/comments which more harshly criticized the judging.
.
Wow, very interesting! I strongly believe that NBC (and CBC, BBC, etc.) commentators were warned against (or strongly urged to avoid) discussing any DIRECT judging issues/controversy during the coverage. Certainly, the actions of the CBC commentators supports this assertion:
Of course, once the floodgates opened and the story was headlined by print media worldwide, the networks (and commentators) could no longer ignore the issue...
Interestingly, in many cases the initial reactions and 'off-the-cuff' opinions of commentators are clearly being 'watered down', walked back, and in some cases reversed! The quotes above by Bluebonnet, Mathman & vtgal provide examples of this by Johnny, Tara and Michelle. It is highly likely they are being pressured to do so by their employers (i.e. the Networks) and counseled to soften/change their earlier positions.
Why do the Networks want to minimize the controversy?
The networks clearly have figured out that a bit of "light" controversy at Worlds or Olympics is a great way to boost viewership (and therefore they welcome it). On the other hand, a "huge" controversy (despite an initial short-lived boost to ratings) tends to have the opposite effect - and kills-off viewership.
Select consequences of the "huge" 2002 Olympics judging controversy:
- Media prefer to report the news; not 'be' the news story. Unfortunately for NBC, it's actions at the 2002 Olympics (as initiated by the Hamilton/Bezic outrage) meant NBC became entwined, and part of "the story" itself. Certain NBC executives undoubtedly took a lot of flack for allowing this to happen!
. - The infamous Hamilton/Bezic outrage in-and-of-itself led to the loss of many 'casual skating fans'; and the prolonged exposure and intense media coverage of the scandal aftermath left such distaste that many fans never returned.
. - Not just fans, but advertisers & sponsors also left in droves as as result of the 2002 judging scandal. This affected revenues not only at NBC and the other Networks, but also negatively affected the ability for National Skating Associations to raise funds and to foster partnerships.
. - Without the ongoing NBC media support (as initiated by the Hamilton/Bezic outrage) it is extremely unlikely the Canadians would have been awarded the gold medal; and the controversy would have been smothered very quickly!
. - Perhaps most importantly, without the Hamilton/Bezic outrage, NO changes would have been made to the judging system! In other words, the change from the 6.0 system to the current CoP system would NOT have occurred if not for the NBC broadcast that evening!
. - Arguably, the current CoP system is a fairer judging system; but it is NOT a system 'casual skating fans' can easily enjoy or understand (unlike the old 5.9's and 6.0's). The switch to a "less audience friendly" judging system has been a serious impediment to attempts by National Skating Associations and the Networks to re-energize lost skating fans, excite new fans, grow media viewership, and develop new markets and market opportunities for the sport.
The $$ impact of the Hamilton/Bezic outrage to NBC's bottom line was enormous! I believe NBC at the time had already contracted with the IOC for the broadcast rights for the next 2 Olympic Games. Just imagine ... NBC pays the big bucks ($$) for the Olympic broadcast rights, only to have viewership tumble by 50%+ for the "marquee" figure skating events because of the 5 minute Hamilton/Bezic outrage. Those were probably the 5 most expensive broadcast minutes in NBC's history, if you consider all the {still ongoing} negative revenue implications!
So, it is easy to understand why NBC, CBC, the BBC, etc. (or any of the National Skating Associations, or the ISU/IOC) would want to AVOID introducing, contributing, or prolonging a judging scandal (or any big controversy) given the possible financial repercussions! This also explains why many commentators are clearly watering-down, walking-back, and in some cases reversing their initial opinions/comments which more harshly criticized the judging.
.
That has been the case for so long. Yuna has been held to a different standard for such a long time. That is why it sucks to see it end like this (not to discredit her achievement in any way). So-called experts demand different things from her. Like other skaters bursting into smile, from ear to ear, because they manage to not fall. That's "exuding emotions," and "skating with flair" for them. Yuna has gone beyond that point, as far as I can see, since 2009. Yuna has been criticized for being too good at what she does - robotic, businessman-like, showing no emotion, whatever WHY ISN'T SHE LIKE THE REST OF US. I've seen such critics in 2013 worlds, and even in Vancouver.Not as explosive or high as Adelina's. Her program was safe and not stand out.
A...h.
Ha.
Ha.
Ha.
Ha.
Safe? ******* safe? I'D LIKE TO SEE ANY SKATER SKATE IN YUNA'S PLACE AND SEE IF THEY CAN DO HALF OF WHAT SHE'S DONE.
I can't believe it. Are they hearing what they're even saying? A flawless skate that was (decidedly underscored, given someone's inflation) deemed worthy of 144 is their definition of SAFE? Just because she makes it look easy, is it actually easy? YOU ARE A SKATER, for god's sake. You know how hard it is.
They need to be ashamed of themselves.
It's possible that I'm going to lose my mind over this.
I have no doubt in my mind that Yuna would have won in Sochi if she were.. Russian. (not sure if anyone can rebut this presumption)
I have to say, FlattFan, that I don't understand that at all. (But I love your comment about it!)
Anyone with eyes knows what happened. If Ms. Sotnikova had been skating anywhere else, with the usual sort of crowd that wasn't wildly into it so long as she stayed in the upright position, she probably would've ended up in fifth or sixth place.
Yuna Kim skated very well, most especially considering she knew the crowd was hostile. Most judges, if they aren't flat-out corrupt, would've taken that into account -- but this bunch didn't. (Why is that? It surely looks suspicious, doesn't it?)
Personally, *I* think Mao Asada deserved the bronze medal, but if the Russians were bound and determined to get one of their skaters a medal, I would've been OK with Sotnikova winning bronze.
But anything else is a gift, IMHO, and I don't respect anyone -- even my favorite figure skater Johnny Weir -- if he or she can't at least see that *some* of us are not happy about this result, most especially since he was victimized by bad judging himself in 2010.
Last edited:
Tara is a joke. Who does she think she is? She's a one-day wonder. She's the definition of a real loser.
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2011
Katarina Witt is really doing the rounds, saying that the judging was unfair and that Yu-Na (or Carolina) should have won. 
- Joined
- May 7, 2008
It seems pretty obvious NBC put a lid on the controversy. Scott and Sandra normally would've had an epic hissy fit for the ages over this.
As for the younger retired skaters, they seem more interested in being "fair and balanced" and not taking any hard stance. You can see that with the comments of Michelle Kwan and Todd Eldredge even. They might not like the result but they are not willing to throw themselves into the fire over it.
As for the younger retired skaters, they seem more interested in being "fair and balanced" and not taking any hard stance. You can see that with the comments of Michelle Kwan and Todd Eldredge even. They might not like the result but they are not willing to throw themselves into the fire over it.
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2010
Yu Na or Carolina as a Russian would have scored atleast 240 points in this competition easily. I challenge anyone to dispute that even the few existing Sotbots.
agree wholeheartedly
All the other commentators should be ashamed of themselves.
And if I see another shallow news article talking about ONE MORE TRIPLE FLIP.
I am going to FLIP. Ignoramuses.
Yes me too. It takes courage to stand up and speak out against a wrong.
I honestly don't know why he is even covering figure skating. He doesn't even know his figure skating. I remember watching him cover one of the competition where Yuna attempted a 3Lz but didn't end up jumping. It was counted as a jump (DUH! She was on the take off edge). However, stupid Scott said something along the lines of "I wonder if she will add another jump somewhere along her program. She is allowed 7 jumps in total so she can still add 1 more." Like seriously ***????
Then other stupid comments he has added over the years.
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2010
A NYT article sort of explained why NBC commentators were a bit withdrawn about the controversy. The company apparently made Team Johnny & Tara compete with Team Scott & Sandra to make a pick for the 2018 Pyeongchang Olympics. Who wants to raise a voice for "Dirty conspiracy!" when desperately trying to look reliable and likable especially in the eyes of her boss?
Here you go: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/22/sports/olympics/from-johnny-weirs-team-a-fresh-voice-for-nbc.html
Here you go: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/22/sports/olympics/from-johnny-weirs-team-a-fresh-voice-for-nbc.html
I was just trolling on this thread and this comment has made me giggle like a kindergartener hearing a fart joke for the last 10 mins. lol
To add, Silvia Fontana went apeshit on Italian RAI for Yuna... yes, not Carolina, but Yuna.
There is a post competition interview with Witt in German in which she goes ballistic as well.
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2010
He never disappoints us.
Similar threads
