Reactions and criticism of judging by Network commentators - NBC, CBC, BBC, etc

[CarneAsada]

No, Sarah Hughes is less deserving than Tara Lipinski all day, any day.

 

[SkateToronto]

No, Sarah Hughes is less deserving than Tara Lipinski all day, any day.

neither of them is undeserving at all - let alone a conversation re who is more/less deserving. both of them won their gold medals fair and square.

 

[parma]

What NBC commentators did after women's results came out at the end of the ladies' event was a pure comedy. They all seemed to have had one goal and one goal only: no matter what, stop this controversy from evolving into a full-blown scandal. Johnny Weir, who strongly opposed Sotnikova's score during the women's event reappeared with Bob Costas later and rolled back. Scott Hamilton appeared on Today the next morning in a full damage control mode, stumbling all over by conflicting himself - he says at one time that there was nothing wrong with the judges' scores during the ladies' event and then in the next moment says that the current anonymous judging system and the way judges are selected and trained are completely wrong and ISU should fix it. This second part of the whole thing, the skating community trying to save the sport from another public humiliation by covering up rather than admitting and facing the problem head on, was even more disappointing than the initial scoring controversy itself.

 

[pangtongfan]

neither of them is undeserving at all - let alone a conversation re who is more/less deserving. both of them won their gold medals fair and square.

Agreed. Neither have an Olympic win that created anywhere near the scandal that Sotnikova's did. At most they were results you could debate, but not full fledged robberies and results that appeared completely fixed. Hers is the most hollow Olympic victory in history other than Berezhnaya & Sikharulidze's in 2002.

 

[BarbC]

Nagano really was almost a toss-up; I think there was a tiny margin between the final results of the two skaters, and I was one who would have given the gold to Michelle. I don't think that makes me crazy. But Tara won it, and it was a fair judgment. Any longtime fan learns to live with occasional disappointment. As a totally subjective reaction, I always preferred Michelle's skating to Tara's. But that doesn't mean that I hate Tara. And, as it turned out, the lack of an OGM did not hamper Michelle's career. We got to see an extraordinary artist create a multi-dimensional body of work, and that's been more than enough for me. So both skaters came out winners.

As a commentating pair, Tara and Johnny are a hoot. They work together so well as a team. Definitely an example of the whole being more than the sum of its parts. I can't be too strict in my evaluation of them because they're still new and inexperienced, but each of them has given some interesting commentary. She's quick and articulate and doesn't depend on snark. There's room for improvement, but Peggy Fleming didn't start out sounding like Walter Cronkite or anything, either. Of the roster of analysts on NBC, my favorite is Tracy Wilson because I feel I learn a lot from her. And I actually like Scott and Sandra most of the time.

I agree with all of this, Olympia.

At the time, I thought Tara L. was dynamic and Michelle K. was expressive. It was a toss-up as to which would be more rewarded. I didn't see Tara's as an inauthentic win; I thought she skated her best, Michelle skated well but perhaps not at her tip-top (this, of course, is with the long benefit of hindsight; I just remember at the time that both were stunning in their own way), and it was nice to have two medalists from the USA.

Now, as for why Michelle might be better remembered? That's obvious, at least to me; Michelle was in the sport as an active competitor for many more years than Tara, who started skating in shows almost immediately after Nagano. Not every figure skating fan can see a show (I only have managed to see one in my lifetime, and I love the sport), but most if not all of us can see the US Nationals, the World Figure Skating Championships, the Olympics, and in later years the Grand Prix events as well (at least on You Tube).

Tara still has the goods to skate well as a professional, and can light up a room from the You Tube performances I've seen, whereas Michelle has retired. Both did their level best in the sport, and both should be lauded for that IMHO. (You don't have to be great at the same things to be great.)

Personally, I like hearing other takes because I already know my own. ;-) And I certainly don't want someone to just regurgitate what I already think -- that's ridiculous.

Terry Gannon was excellent in his call of all the figure skating events -- as a few have said already -- precisely because he was objective and he tried to see both sides of things. (He said "home cooking?" a few times with regards to Sotnikova's scores, for example, and was the only one who said that.)

I enjoyed Tara and Johnny's call of all the events. I think they weren't as good at ice dance, though they both had studied up and Johnny, in particular, was good at explaining how difficult the choreo was and how much training you have to have to be skating that quickly and that close together with regards to the top six or seven pairs of skaters.

Just because I disagree with them with regards to Adelina Sotnikova doesn't change that.

 

[Hamil]

This summarizes what happened in Sochi.

http://voices.yahoo.com/scandal-fraud-death-figure-skating-12547557.html

 

[drivingmissdaisy]

Johnny Weir, who strongly opposed Sotnikova's score during the women's event reappeared with Bob Costas later and rolled back.

Strongly opposed is a grossly misleading description of Johnny's reaction to Adelina's score.

 

[drivingmissdaisy]

This summarizes what happened in Sochi.

http://voices.yahoo.com/scandal-fraud-death-figure-skating-12547557.html

This "journalist" is a Yuna uber. Just read his previous article.

 

[hurrah]

What NBC commentators did after women's results came out at the end of the ladies' event was a pure comedy. They all seemed to have had one goal and one goal only: no matter what, stop this controversy from evolving into a full-blown scandal. Johnny Weir, who strongly opposed Sotnikova's score during the women's event reappeared with Bob Costas later and rolled back. Scott Hamilton appeared on Today the next morning in a full damage control mode, stumbling all over by conflicting himself - he says at one time that there was nothing wrong with the judges' scores during the ladies' event and then in the next moment says that the current anonymous judging system and the way judges are selected and trained are completely wrong and ISU should fix it. This second part of the whole thing, the skating community trying to save the sport from another public humiliation by covering up rather than admitting and facing the problem head on, was even more disappointing than the initial scoring controversy itself.

:thumbsup:

 

[sowcow]

.

Somehow, I think that this thread and the OP would be full of praise for Tara Lipinski and her career if Lipniski had stated that Yu-Na should have won the OGM in Sochi instead of defending Adelina.

Ya think?

If by "...this thread and the OP" you are referring to the author of this thread (and by default, of the very 1st post) then your assumption is both misplaced and to a large extent moot (as I have presented only facts; and neither criticized nor praised any commentator). Indeed, my only reference (ever) to Tara was in a later post trying to answer the question "Why do the Networks want to minimize the controversy?"; specifically:

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.

Which fit into the overall post conclusion:

.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.

____________________

If however, by "...this thread and the OP" you are (mistakenly) referring to the post by fahrenheit290 (which was left a few minutes prior to your comment):

I totally agree that Tara is insecure. Especially in the years following her win when Kwan became the most honored skater in modern figure skating. Her win is arguable...and many people would've liked to see Kwan win (which probably bugs the **** out of Tara). Also, what has she done to her face? That shows insecurity more than her repeated comments defending the judges and Adelina.

... then I have no comment! Except to point out that when you say "...this thread" it is a reference to the entire "Reactions and criticism of judging by Network commentators - NBC, CBC, BBC, etc" thread; and that your subsequent mention of "...and the OP" is referring to me (...and not your intended target).

Cheers,
Steve

 

[Olympia]

You really can't please everyone. Many people are currently peeved by Scott's and Sandra's lack of criticism of Adelina's scores. in 2002, a huge number of people were incensed at the reaction of these same two commentators, Scott and Sandra, because they expressed anger at Berezhnaya's and Sikharulidze's pairs OGM. I mean, people criticized Scott and Sandra for years for their perceived partisanship in that issue.

At least this time around there can be no implication of national partisanship, because Scott and Sandra are neither Korean nor Russian. But really, they can't catch a break from the viewing public.

 

[usethis2]

Scott tries to cover up on TV yet behind the back he quips that the scandal benefits the industry. That surely can be called out as bad-faith commentaries.

 

[Ven]

You really can't please everyone. Many people are currently peeved by Scott's and Sandra's lack of criticism of Adelina's scores. in 2002, a huge number of people were incensed at the reaction of these same two commentators, Scott and Sandra, because they expressed anger at Berezhnaya's and Sikharulidze's pairs OGM. I mean, people criticized Scott and Sandra for years for their perceived partisanship in that issue.

At least this time around there can be no implication of national partisanship, because Scott and Sandra are neither Korean nor Russian. But really, they can't catch a break from the viewing public.

Sandra is Canadian and she got outraged when the Canadians were cheated. Now there was no Canadian and no American involved, so they just accept the results. Unethical.
We all know that if Gracie Gold had been cheated in the same manner Yuna was, Scott and Sandra's protests would have been very, very loud. NBC and USFS would have no doubt encouraged them too.

 

[verysmuchso]

Sandra is Canadian and she got outraged when the Canadians were cheated. Now there was no Canadian and no American involved, so they just accept the results. Unethical.
We all know that if Gracie Gold had been cheated in the same manner Yuna was, Scott and Sandra's protests would have been very, very loud. NBC and USFS would have no doubt encouraged them too.

I feel like they're just following the scent of money, ratings..... But then, Scott choked up about Patrick Chan's meltdown on camera -shrug-

 

[bebevia]

Cheers,
Steve

...So, your name is Steve...

 

[hurrah]

Scott has to be the worst skating commentator ever. He can't lie with any kind of conviction. But he's a good choice if you're aiming to reveal that television commentators are liars.

 

[bebevia]

Scott has to be the worst skating commentator ever. He can't lie with any kind of conviction. But he's a good choice if you're aiming to reveal that television commentators are liars.

That's a too far of a statement. Commentators too sometimes refrain from their opinions, or stay neutral, or stay conservative and defend authorities, but lying isn't their primary job nor do they prefer lying. I think the discussion here should stay at whether we agree with them or not. Scott is trying to make a sense of the results in his way, in my opinion, even though I disagree.

 

[johnsmith72]

I honestly can't stand Scotfs commentary. Not because I think it is biased but because of how he shrieks every time someone jumps. Also he talks way too much... I'm trying to get into the music and them it's like "here it comes... She's been struggling all practice with it... triple Flip!!! Saved the landing"

 

[usethis2]

I honestly can't stand Scotfs commentary. Not because I think it is biased but because of how he shrieks every time someone jumps. Also he talks way too much... I'm trying to get into the music and them it's like "here it comes... She's been struggling all practice with it... triple Flip!!! Saved the landing"

Tell me about it. Usually when I am just about to get into the performance and music he startles me with out-of-the-blue comments and completely kills the mood. I mean, I guess he has to say something but it just seems like he picks wrong moments more often than not.

 

[Hamil]

Michelle Kwan changes her opinion and admits judging problems.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWjEQJwKlK4#t=397

watch from 6 min 30 sec