Forums

by **UNTBOWLER** » Fri Jun 25, 2004 7:13 am

Would it hurt ESPN to show matches that do not feature an American. They have a man crush on Andy Roddick who is boring to watch since all he does is hit a big serve, big forehand that will either be an error or a winner. This morning they show a pre-recorded match of Roddick even though there was a Henman match and many others.
Then they have to show every Williams sister blowout.
Oh well at least we have some tennis on TV.

by **FulhamFan** » Fri Jun 25, 2004 9:11 am

The power went out in my house this morning so I wan't watching. They really pulled that crap again?! What pisses me off is that do it in the morning where the only thing they should be showing is live tennis.

They really don't need to show every single match. They could easily show an interesting match on another court and go to roddick when he's in the fifth set or when he's closing out.

They also spend way too much time at the desk with chris fowler doing useless banter. Time that they should be spending promoting solid players on the outer courts. I read the interview with the ESPN VP and he says they're trying to build the story so that's why they show entire matches no matter how boring or predictable. Moron doesn't realize that the story works out itself. No one needed to build wimbledon 2001 to see how great that semi-final was.

And right now they're really pissing me off. They went off hewitt vs ivanisevic to watch an american no name close out the last set. I'm pissed because yesterday when ivanisevic and ferrero were closing out simultaneously they kept it on venus vs sprem.

by **kennycalhoo** » Sun Jun 27, 2004 9:38 pm

and I hate to sound like an apologist, because I would love to watch some of the other guys myself......
But they have to make money. More of the "non-hardcore" tennis fans are going to watch Capriati, Davenport, Roddick, Dent, Ginepri, etc. because those are the names (ok, maybe not Dent and Ginepri yet). They HAVE to. It's much like the Tiger phenomenon in golf. every time for a while when he would be in a tournament, ratings were through the roof. When he wasn't....not so much.
So the way I look at it, it's better than nothing. Keep sending your emails, and ask for them to continue to show some of the young up and comers, the great matches, and maybe they can sprinkle that in next year!
(and for the record, I do not work for ESPN.)

by **Mystery Man** » Mon Jun 28, 2004 2:11 am

Here in the UK, with BBC digital interactive, at any one time five matches are being televised, and you can choose whichever match you want to watch. Sometimes, they even show matches without commentary, which is arguably better than matches with commentary. However, most of the time we have to put up with commentary from Boris Becker, Tracy Austin, John McEnroe and other such luminaries, as well as the BBC commentary staff.

by **FulhamFan** » Mon Jun 28, 2004 8:12 am

But they have to make money. More of the "non-hardcore" tennis fans are going to watch Capriati, Davenport, Roddick, Dent, Ginepri, etc. because those are the names (ok, maybe not Dent and Ginepri yet)."

non-hardcore fans know who the top ten players are and want to see them when they match up. Hardcore-tennis fans want to watch nadal, gasquet, ljubicic and tursunov. During the french they only showed 6 games of federer vs kuerten at midnight. Their argument was "maybe" the "hardcore" fan would watch it but they would much rather perfer watch a williams/capriati killfest. I don't buy that. My problem isn't so much that they show those. It's when they show tape of those when there's an excellent match on LIVE.

by **dryeagle** » Mon Jun 28, 2004 8:33 am

The essence of sports is that its shown LIVE, bottom line. Tennis is the only major sport where the action is never shown live, always on tape delay. ESPN's coverage is disappointing, but NBC is the biggest offender -there coverage is downright awful. But this is a network that chose to cover the entire 2000 Olympics on tape - showing the action at night (15-24 hours after it happened) yet gave you the results earlier that morning on the "Today Show." The only tourney that is covered properly in America is the US Open on CBS and USA.

by **Fee** » Mon Jun 28, 2004 10:49 am

"Average" sports fans don't get up to watch tennis at 4 in the morning on the West Coast, and they sure as shit don't watch tennis during the week when they have many other things on their minds. ESPN needs to get a better freaking clue who their audience really is for this coverage. Exactly who do they think is home all day to watch (or tape) these programs? It is not your average beer drinking, pretzel chomping, NFL betting, March Madness pool participant. It is not the 'casual observer' or whatever they call them. This coverage is being watched by real tennis fans, people who have a number of tennis websites bookmarked on their web browsers, people who know the difference between the entry system and the champions race, people who know within 2 places where their favorite players are on each, people who know that Sharapova is not the 'glamour girl' that idiot Tim Ryan keeps calling her but a powerful player on the verge of making serious noise, people who cringe every time Suzy Kolber speaks because everything she says is WRONG and incorrectly pronounced, people who....

I should stop now before this issue sends me into cardiac arrest. As I sit here on the West Coast, with my 3 hour window of no friggin coverage because now NBC is in the mix, making things EVEN WORSE!!!! (And this is the same network that will have the Olympics on 7 channels, and it will probably all still be taped).

by **R. Jayakrishnan** » Mon Jun 28, 2004 2:07 pm

Cha-Ching!! .. Can we give Fiona a prize for that dead-on-accurate comment?

Jay

by **kennycalhoo** » Mon Jun 28, 2004 7:45 pm

and at the same time, I think this whole board is underestimating the idea that more people who wouldn't consider themselves tennis fans tune in for the slams. It sucks, I hate watching tape delayed Lindsay Davenport. But I truly think you're wrong if you think non-fans aren't watching more during that time.
That's why I've been so excited to see the Tennis Channel, although we still don't have it where I live. But remember, ESPN is going for the masses, both the intense fan, and the ones who might just be checking things out to see if Serena is on.

by **dryeagle** » Tue Jun 29, 2004 10:04 am

Fiona's fired up and I don't blame her. I remember being in LA a few years ago during Wimbledon and wathcing matches during the day on NBC that were played 8 hours earlier in the day. It must be tough on the west coast to watch these european tournaments, though during the australian open its probably better.

For the west coast viewers, do they put the Wimbledon finals on live at 6 am or are they delayed and played at 9 am?

by **Fee** » Tue Jun 29, 2004 10:47 am

Wimbledon finals have been live for about ten years now, I would guess. Maybe even longer... It is easier to watch the Aus Open here, but only by a few hours.

NBC is really screwing up the coverage. I have a 3 hour window of nothing, then NBC comes on and they can cause ESPN to blackout thier coverage. On Monday, NBC went off on the East Coast with Roddick and Henman in progress, came on live on the West Coast with Roddick and Henman in progressed and followed both matches until the end. ESPN was blacked out here, so I missed them showing a replay of Roddick's complete match, and the east coast missed an absolute ripper between Henman and Flip. Could we be any more screwed with this mess?

And thanks Jay, I would love a prize....

by **FulhamFan** » Tue Jun 29, 2004 2:40 pm

I have a feeling were going to get screwed big time tomorrow. Henman vs Ancic and Federer vs Hewitt are both must see matches. Williams vs Capriati is also bound to garner interest. However roddick is also playing schalken.

I know they're going to show roddick in it's entirety no matter how boring it is and probably show capriati as well on tape instead of henman or federer. Tomorrow should be a great day if all play is live. Unfortunetly I get a huge chunk missing because of the ultra-stupid 10:00 am in all time zones.

by **FulhamFan** » Wed Jun 30, 2004 12:04 pm

As someone from the central time zone I got screwed. Showing henman vs ancic and then watching the today show for an hour before any coverage started. And now on espn they're showing roddick on tape (in it's entirety) instead of HEWITT VS FEDERER live. The biggest match of the day isn't shown live. These people are fat heads.

With all they're hours of coverage you'd think they'd wait till the end of that before showing roddick on tape. Same crap as yesterday when they showed roddick instead of henman.

by **UNTBOWLER** » Wed Jun 30, 2004 1:35 pm

NBC and ESPN have a huge man crush on Roddick, plus I'm sure they are pissed that Serena thrashed Fatpriati in under an hour.
I would love to see Federer and Hewitt. At least we will get to see Federer in the finals, of course that is only if Roddick beats Ancic on Friday.

by **federerfan** » Wed Jun 30, 2004 2:32 pm

I agree. I have been disgusted with the flagrantly pro-US commentary and coverage during Wimbledon. I endorse showing a representative cross-section of matches, even if they do not feature players that I enjoy watching. In the majority of cases, I think that matches shown should be according to the seedings of the players, not their nationality. Hence, I do not enjoy seeing #7 Jennifer Capriati instead of #1 Roger Federer on a regular basis.

Roger Federer is an unparalled talent to be sure, but his play should be shown because of his seeding regardless of the comepetitiveness of his matches. I did not appreciate seeing his matches tape delayed, intermittently and in some cases not at all. I have seen more than I can handle of Williams, Capriati and Roddick though. I have yet to see Grosjean at all, and he has played several matches and is not a low seed.

I realize that this is a rant and I am not anti-American at all, generally speaking (I go to school in the US), but when coverage of international events is so one-sided, it is infuriating.

by **kennycalhoo** » Wed Jun 30, 2004 7:15 pm

in the U.S. It is going to be dominated by US players. Again, I'm going to go back to the very basic argument, that they will do what they can to put their American players at the best possible times, to attract the American "non-fans" who might not always watch. It's a shame, it really is, but for ESPN, it is the smart play to try and get better ratings, and consequently, more money. Sorry. I wish I could blame them. I also wish I could see Hewitt-Federer live.

by **FulhamFan** » Wed Jun 30, 2004 10:01 pm

. It's a shame, it really is, but for ESPN, it is the smart play to try and get better ratings, and consequently, more money. Sorry. I wish I could blame them. I also wish I could see Hewitt-Federer live.

Dude you can blame them. They had a gigantic window of time. They absolutly could of show federer live and followed it with andy. It's not that big of a difference to show andy at 12:00 or and at 2:00. Even better they could of showed it live while nbc was doing they're coverage.

by **FulhamFan** » Fri Jul 02, 2004 11:28 am

Unfreaking beleivable. Right now both men's matches are being played. Both espn and nbc have tennis on. What do they do? They show the women's matches from yesterday instead.

NBC tennis guy#1: The rain delay just ended when coverage in central time zone goes live. Maybe we should give them the live feed?

NBC Fathead:nah, they can watch yesterday's women's semis. Only the east coast derserve live tennis.

ESPN tennis guy#1: NBC is showing ancic/roddick. Maybe we should show federer/grosjean for the people getting screwed by noon in all time zones on nbc.

ESPN Fathead exec: Nah, they'll just have to eat a 2nd helping davenport/sharapova.

If they were working in any other sport they'd be fired. In case you didn't know I live in central time zone.

by **UNTBOWLER** » Fri Jul 02, 2004 11:45 am

WTF this is ridiculous now they are pushing Federer/Grosjean to 8 P>M>
FUCK ESPN and NBC only they could screw this up.
Now NBC is showing Serena and Amelie.
:shocked:

This the worst damn coverage ever.

Ok now they are only on NBC but guess what they are showing it Tape Delayed 45 minutes behind!!!
UNBELIEVABLE!!!!

by **dryeagle** » Fri Jul 02, 2004 12:45 pm

For you guys in the central time zone, that sucks, NBC should no better. They are the worst network for sports period, and they will screw up the olympics like they always do.

Just waiting out another rain delay. I think the real problem here is Wimbledon. In ESPN's defense, they were ready to go at 8:00 am this morning live. They have paid $$ to show one men's semifinal and how long can they keep this window open. They do have other commitments, such as golf.

Wimbledon has had this problem for years and they haven't reacted to it. I don't know if its a bad time of year for rain or not over there, but this is awful. They should move the tournament back a few weeks if they get less rain later in the summer. Another thing, how come it takes over 5 years to put a freaking roof on the place? They might as well play this tournament in Germany where they do have a roof in the meantime.

by **FulhamFan** » Fri Jul 02, 2004 1:09 pm

In ESPN's defense, they were ready to go at 8:00 am this morning live. They have paid $$ to show one men's semifinal and how long can they keep this window open. They do have other commitments, such as golf.

they also have two channels. Showing sportscenter instead of tennis is dumb because people get sports news anyway through that ticker.

CBS is the only network that does sports right whether it's the olympics, basketball or tennis.

Forums

ESPN Coverage

ESPN Coverage

Here's the flip side....

Selection of matches at Wimbledon

Fiona makes a good point.....

Wimbledon converage is obscenely US-biased.

Welcome to tennis coverage.....

Who is online