Coverage of Mosconi Cup

John Novak

John Novak

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Without going into detail of who said what, over all how do you rate the comments for the commentators involved



1. Yes it was fair for both sides
2. Over critical for Team Europe
3. Over critical for Team USA
 
Last edited:
I thought they did a good job. At times it was slightly biased for the euros, but I don't think they were disrespectful or overly critical.
 
I thought they were definitely leaning towards Europe but I thought overall it was good coverage.
 
I think overall it was fair. Some have been criticizing Jay for being overly harsh towards the American team, I think he was just disappointed and showing a bit of frustration in the way things were working out for the Americans. Jim Wych came across as a professional broadcaster who knew when a comment was needed to smooth over Jay's or Andy's words. Jim also conveyed the game and patterns very well. Andy through his excitement showed bias at times. Jerry came across pretty fair overall as well. I wish there were more events with this level of broadcasting.
 
It was fair for both sides... there was criticism, but I think some people just don't like criticism in their sports broadcasts, regardless of whether it's deserved or not.

Certainly what they do isn't easy, but when someone dogs it, it's ok to say so. Players and fans should understand it's nothing personal.
 
I was only able to see most of the first 2 days :(. It may be most criticism that's been leveled orients around day 4, so...

I thought commentary was very good. Jim seems to have picked up his game IMO. All of them stayed in the game, discussing most every shot before and after, and otherwise making good, timely observations. Some commentators can talk about cheeseburgers for 5 shots straight. That drives me nuts.
 
I thought Andy should've been in the booth a lot more. He had the best handle on the whole "adverb" thing.
 
Everyone likes their commentary a little different. Some guys want the commentator to wear his heart on his sleeve while others prefer something more dispassionate.

With some guys, say a Freddy the Beard, it's more likely than not that you're going to hear some hilarious stories, with only passing mention of the match at hand. Other guys, like George Fels, are able to delve into the minutia of the shots and embellish the call with rich references to past matches, players, and the history of the game. Other guys are over the top with their delivery, others are dry as sawdust. Maybe it's because of years of listening to the late, great Grady and the still kicking Billy I. in the booth that my personal preference is for commentary that accurately describes the technical possibilities the table presents to the shooter.

In this regard, I thought Andy was far and away the best commentator. Some of the other guys, not so much.

Lou Figueroa
 
Last edited:
I thought Jim did well overall. Jerry quite often called the wrong shots or couldn't seem to see the picture of the table too well from the comm box. Not sure if he could have looked at a tv monitor instead to see what was going on better. Would like to see some ex-MC players in there (i.e Souquet or Rodney Morris or Tony Drago) for a bit more insight and experience of the pressure and situations that the players are facing
 
Just thought I'd insert some stats to liven up the room.

Here are the number of matches each commentator worked, along with the match score (Eur. - USA) for the matches he worked.

[Note: 20 matches x 2 commentators per match = 40 commentator slots.]

Wych - 14 matches, Cup score 7 - 7
Helfert - 13 matches, Cup score 8 - 5
Forsyth - 11 matches, Cup score 6 - 5
Goldstein - 2 matches, Cup score 1 - 1
 
I know my opinion is going to be the odd ball opinion but I really enjoyed Forsyth's commentary. He has a non biased, disarming manner that is also intriguing. The non biased part seems to be from the heart as he really prefers the excitement, complexity and beauty of the game without having to take sides. At least that's the way he comes across to me.

Great job by all commentators this year. Great entertainment. A year is too long to wait. Thank you.
 
John Novak said:
Without going into detail of who said what, over all how do you rate the comments for the commentators involved



1. Yes it was fair for both sides
2. Over critical for Team Europe
3. Over critical for Team USA
Click to expand...

I thought it was fine. Geeze it's just commentary. It's analysis and opinion. Are we so far gone as a species that we have to have discussions about the commentary of an event that is over?

:-)
 
Nothing personal but I think they could have had more qualified people, sharing their opinions. By this I mean, players that have been under the gun and know what it's like to be living in the moment of such a pressure packed situation. As we witnessed, it can be overwhelming.

They should also know a little more about the likes and dislikes of each player, as far as position play. Not what they would do in certain situations.
 
MitchDAZB said:
I thought Andy should've been in the booth a lot more. He had the best handle on the whole "adverb" thing.
Click to expand...

I agree with you.

I don't know why JH was anywhere near this. Maybe they were scraping the bottom of the barrel budget-wise and had to find someone on the super cheap. Nothing else makes sense unless he has embarrassing pictures of someone high up at MR. Just my $.02.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top