ADVERTISEMENT

OT: There is a reason ESPN doesn't cover hockey

OmniscientFan

Well-Known Member
Feb 24, 2005
1,470
252
1
Because their IDOITS!


The "flop" according to ESPN's Jason "I never saw a hockey game in my life" Williams.


Continue doing what you do ESPN. At the very least it's entertaining.
 
They don't have hockey TV contracts so they don't cover it well. If they signed a contract with the NHL that made them money suddenly they'd start treating hockey like the most important sport in the world.

IOW, they have lousy sports coverage because their coverage depends on which sport is paying them.
 
That's what happens when you turn a basketball player into a "sports journalist" and expect him to intelligently analyze a sport he knows nothing about.
 
Because their IDOITS!


The "flop" according to ESPN's Jason "I never saw a hockey game in my life" Williams.


Continue doing what you do ESPN. At the very least it's entertaining.

Without watching the espn part, the player was skating backwards with the puck which made his trip c9nsiderably worse than the action.

That said it was a missed call. Whatever.

LdN
 
Oh, this give me a chance to bring out an oldie but a goodie (with apologies to the OP; no offense meant).

xbiqykK.jpg
 
Without watching the espn part, the player was skating backwards with the puck which made his trip c9nsiderably worse than the action.

That said it was a missed call. Whatever.

LdN

Since you haven't watched the ESPN part, let me ask you a question. How long after the (alleged) trip did the guy fall down to the ice? You don't even have to answer me. Watch the hockey play video, see how long it was, then watch the ESPN video.
 
I think it's pathetic when a SPORTS "journalist" admits to knowing nothing about a sport. SPORTS are what you get paid to cover. Not just the NBA and basketball. For example, I am not a horse racing fan, but 3 times a year I could educate myself to have a semi-intelligent take on the Kentucky-Preakness-Belmont races. I am not a race car fan, but before the Indy 500 and Daytona 500, I could educate myself on those races. ....

These guys get paid to cover sports. IMO, that means ALL sports. Having hosts to openly "brag" about their lack of interest in a major sport like NHL Hockey, just shows the total bias the espn has in favor of the sports they have contracts with.
 
Since you haven't watched the ESPN part, let me ask you a question. How long after the (alleged) trip did the guy fall down to the ice? You don't even have to answer me. Watch the hockey play video, see how long it was, then watch the ESPN video.

What is your point? It was a trip. Missed call as I said.

Hockey is a fast sport and calls are missed all the time.

Play continues.

LdN
 
I wouldn't say it was a flop. But the StL guy had another Boston player on his back/side when they were going to play the puck. So I believed it was a good no call and that the Boston guy should have gotten up and got back in the game instead of crying like he was murdered which seemed like it was just done to fire up the home fans.
 
Last edited:
What is your point? It was a trip. Missed call as I said.

Hockey is a fast sport and calls are missed all the time.

Play continues.

LdN

My point is the ESPN "analyst" said the guy "flopped" 2 to 3 seconds after contact.
 
But the StL guy had another Boston player on his back/side when they were going to the puck. So I believed it was a good no call

I’m a Pens fans rooting for St. Louis. That was a horrible no call. Clear trip. Caught him with his knee from behind. The Boston guy was behind him, not on him, and had no impact on the play.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Obliviax
I wouldn't say it was a flop. But the StL guy had another Boston player on his back/side when they were going to the puck. So I believed it was a good no call and that the Boston guy should have gotten up and got back in the game instead of crying like he was murdered which seemed like it was just to fire up the home fans.

To call that a good no call is insane.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gogolion
Agree...really bad non-call. Player, the defensemen, was stunned and that led to the goal. After the play, you can read his lips as he is on one knee watching the ref skate past him "And that is OK with you?" But, Bruins get a lot of calls. That is why there are seven games. A lot of hockey is luck. Many pucks hit the pipes or simply fall at somebody's feet at the right time. Like soccer, it is about working hard to get good opportunities, playing disciplined defense and hoping you get a little lucky. Over the long run, you hope that the variables even out and the best team wins
 
Without watching the espn part, the player was skating backwards with the puck which made his trip c9nsiderably worse than the action.

That said it was a missed call. Whatever.

LdN

It's pretty idiotic of you to comment on a thread without watching the video that is the subject of the thread. The point of the thread is that the commentator somehow believed it was a flop, 2 or 3 seconds after contact. Clearly he was wrong.
 
Anyone watching one of those ESPN studio shows has to be either:

A complete idiot.
Someone who enjoys laughing at complete idiots.
Or
Someone who’s TV remote control broke at an inopportune time.

Agree. The ESPN studio shows are the worst. But there is an over-whelming bias through-out the sports media against hockey & towards the NBA. WHEN (I tend to switch around the dial), I listen to sports talk radio, I tend to listen to Mad Dog Sports radio on Sirius. At the 6pm time slot they have a guy named Nick Wright. He's the guy that's on TV in the mornings with Chris Carter. During the NHL Quarterfinals, he jokingly made a comment that he was going to his "NHL segment". During his "NHL segment" he talked to his shows' producer about that playoff match-ups. After 60-seconds, he said "OK. 60-seconds. That's enough hockey talk. We completed our hockey talk for the night. I hope everyone enjoyed our NHL segment". Then he went back to talking the NBA Playoffs.

IMO, this is horrible. For a NATIONAL sports talk radio host to : a) admit to such little interest in a sport, b) admit to such little knowledge of a sport, and c) mock a sport ..... is IMO "job negligence".
 
  • Like
Reactions: odshowtime
First off, why are you even watching that Greenberg show?

No, first off is why are you even watching that scumbag network? There is only one reason to watch them, and that is when Penn State is playing something and it’s the only place and option. Otherwise they can go fvck themselves.
If you need a refresher in my reasoning, see Penn State and ESPN circa 2011.
 
I think it's pathetic when a SPORTS "journalist" admits to knowing nothing about a sport. SPORTS are what you get paid to cover. Not just the NBA and basketball. For example, I am not a horse racing fan, but 3 times a year I could educate myself to have a semi-intelligent take on the Kentucky-Preakness-Belmont races. I am not a race car fan, but before the Indy 500 and Daytona 500, I could educate myself on those races. ....

These guys get paid to cover sports. IMO, that means ALL sports. Having hosts to openly "brag" about their lack of interest in a major sport like NHL Hockey, just shows the total bias the espn has in favor of the sports they have contracts with.
And of course, we all know there’s no flopping in the NBA!!!!!!!;) The reason Klay Thompson got hurt was he tried to kick out and get a foul call! He was never touched but hurt himself trying to pull off a Steph Curry!
 
Haven't read this thread, but guessing the fact that hockey has achieved HALF the ratings of the NBA for their respective finals plays a role. Just a guess.
 
Haven't read this thread, but guessing the fact that hockey has achieved HALF the ratings of the NBA for their respective finals plays a role. Just a guess.

With the amount of coverage the NHL receives throughout the year from ESPN ... or should that be 'LACK of coverage', I think it should be troubling for the NBA that the NHL still achieves half the ratings. Consider that from October thru May the NBA regular season is jammed down our throats and covered by ESPN as if each and every game is equivalent to the Super Bowl. Once football is over ESPN dedicates about 59 minutes and 30 seconds of each 60 minutes SportsCenter to NBA coverage ....... Yet, come the Finals, the NHL Stanley Cup Finals is pulling half the ratings of the NBA Finals...... Yes, that should be concerning for ESPN and their multi-billion $$$ NBA investment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: odshowtime
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT