Monday, March 12, 2007
Why Hockey is Better than Baseball
by Jes
It's March, which means Spring Training has begun for my second-favourite sport: Baseball!!
Still, this IS a hockey blog, and I am Canadian, so I am obliged to point out what makes Hockey #1 and baseball a distant #2.
Here's one (edited) list, from Hockey vs Baseball, by Dan "Curly-Haired Boyfriend" Shaughnessy (published in the 1992 Flyers' Wives Fight for Lives Program)
1. Contact is allowed. Think about it. What Roger Clemens did in Game 4 of the AL Championship Series would go unnoticed in any hockey game. Give the ref a little shove. Tell him you'll find out where he lives. Tell him to have another doughnut. Nobody will say you're stressed out. It's no big deal. (Jes: Umm, give the ref a little shove and you can expect a nice long suspension)
2. Hockey players don't make as much money. They're more in touch with you and me. (Ok, so this one is becoming outdated....)
3. Hockey has Wayne Gretzky and Janet Jones. Basball has Jose and ??? Canseco (Original line was Esther Canseco, but I think we're a few wives down the line now, with little improvement.)
4. Hockey is fast, faster, fastest. Baseball is glacier slow.
5. Carla, the waitress on Cheers, was married to a hockey player.
6. Hockey players don't do as many autograph shows and they come much cheaper.
7. Baseball players live on the disabled list. Hockey players take 30 stitches to the hand, spit on the wounds, and go back on the ice for more.
8. Hockey had The Rocket before baseball.
9. Hockey skills are instantly visible. When Bobby Orr played, a novice viewer immediately knew that Orr was the best player on the ice. Take your son to see Will Clark and the big guy might strike out four times and make you look bad.
10. Slapshot was better than Bull Durham.
11. Hockey has Gordie Howe. Baseball had Steve Howe.
12. Hockey coaches can dress like adults. (Jes: Imagine Marc Crawford wearing a Kings uniform. Exactly)
---
Here are a few others...
13. Hockey Hair (Sopel, Smyth...) - Much better than bad afros and cornrows.
14. Ice Girls vs. Ball Girls - No contest
15. Steroids Scandal. What steroids scandal? NHL actually tests for steroids, and we know it wouldn't be quite as beneficial for a hockey player (ask Brent Sopel).
16. Hockey has Brent Sopel - Baseball has no Brent Sopel
17. Hockey preseason games have fights - Baseball preseason games have regular players leaving after 3 innings of 'work'.
18. Lou Pinella might be a fiery guy, but he'd get his ass kicked by any NHL coach not named Paul Maurice.
It's March, which means Spring Training has begun for my second-favourite sport: Baseball!!
Still, this IS a hockey blog, and I am Canadian, so I am obliged to point out what makes Hockey #1 and baseball a distant #2.
Here's one (edited) list, from Hockey vs Baseball, by Dan "Curly-Haired Boyfriend" Shaughnessy (published in the 1992 Flyers' Wives Fight for Lives Program)
1. Contact is allowed. Think about it. What Roger Clemens did in Game 4 of the AL Championship Series would go unnoticed in any hockey game. Give the ref a little shove. Tell him you'll find out where he lives. Tell him to have another doughnut. Nobody will say you're stressed out. It's no big deal. (Jes: Umm, give the ref a little shove and you can expect a nice long suspension)
2. Hockey players don't make as much money. They're more in touch with you and me. (Ok, so this one is becoming outdated....)
3. Hockey has Wayne Gretzky and Janet Jones. Basball has Jose and ??? Canseco (Original line was Esther Canseco, but I think we're a few wives down the line now, with little improvement.)
4. Hockey is fast, faster, fastest. Baseball is glacier slow.
5. Carla, the waitress on Cheers, was married to a hockey player.
6. Hockey players don't do as many autograph shows and they come much cheaper.
7. Baseball players live on the disabled list. Hockey players take 30 stitches to the hand, spit on the wounds, and go back on the ice for more.
8. Hockey had The Rocket before baseball.
9. Hockey skills are instantly visible. When Bobby Orr played, a novice viewer immediately knew that Orr was the best player on the ice. Take your son to see Will Clark and the big guy might strike out four times and make you look bad.
10. Slapshot was better than Bull Durham.
11. Hockey has Gordie Howe. Baseball had Steve Howe.
12. Hockey coaches can dress like adults. (Jes: Imagine Marc Crawford wearing a Kings uniform. Exactly)
---
Here are a few others...
13. Hockey Hair (Sopel, Smyth...) - Much better than bad afros and cornrows.
14. Ice Girls vs. Ball Girls - No contest
15. Steroids Scandal. What steroids scandal? NHL actually tests for steroids, and we know it wouldn't be quite as beneficial for a hockey player (ask Brent Sopel).
16. Hockey has Brent Sopel - Baseball has no Brent Sopel
17. Hockey preseason games have fights - Baseball preseason games have regular players leaving after 3 innings of 'work'.
18. Lou Pinella might be a fiery guy, but he'd get his ass kicked by any NHL coach not named Paul Maurice.
Labels: baseball, hockey, hockey vs. baseball
Soccer Stealing Ideas from Hockey?
by Jes
Soccer (aka Football) is the world's most popular sport outside of North America, where it's just Saturday morning TV filler.
(D'uh, Big Moose, we already know that)
Soccer certainly doesn't need a whole lot of help from Ice Hockey, which ranks about like 200th in world sports popularity. Right?
Well, apparently not...
Wow, the NHL actually having an impact on the world's biggest sport?
Perhaps soccer ought to take a few more hints from hockey to make their sport more interesting
1. Allow some actual body contact - Why punish a player for simply breathing on the guy? Allow some body shoving is the guy has the ball. If he's such a good player, he ought to withstand a clean body-check.
2. Fighting - OK, so soccer players fight like sissies, but why not let the fights happen on the field instead of the stands? Wouldn't you like to see David Beckham's face smashed by a good left bitch-slap from Thierry Henry?
3. Pipe in god-awful emo rock music over the PA. Why let the fans chant and moan this 'whoooooa-whoooa-whoooa' crap that makes no sense? It's obvious that the fans are so bored with the game that they have to resort to singing and chanting. By blaring Nickelback over the stadium speakers, you'll calm the crowd down and allow them to sit there and shut up instead of lighting flares and throwing toilet paper onto the field.
4. How about some real uniforms? What pride can Manchester United really have when the players are running billboards? Did you know their team mascot/name/logo is the Red Devils? Well, I don't blame you if you don't, given how their 'logo' is a small one-inch patch on the upper right of their jerseys.
5. Allow some real numbering - Ever notice how all soccer teams give players numbers in the 1-20ish range? Why can't players wear #88, #69, or #99? How many good strikers have worn #9? Exactly...
6. Stop calling players by one name - It's bad enough that the players suck, but you can't look them up in a phone book to throw a bomb through their frickin' window! Which RONALDO are you talking about? The ugly gap-toothed caveman from Brazil or the pretty boy Metrosexual from Portugal?
7. Have the playoffs AFTER the season, and not during the season. There is simply a lot less thrill to the regular season when there is nothing to play for until the NEXT season.
Or, you can just watch hockey and forget about soccer. North Americans are great at that.
Soccer (aka Football) is the world's most popular sport outside of North America, where it's just Saturday morning TV filler.
(D'uh, Big Moose, we already know that)
Soccer certainly doesn't need a whole lot of help from Ice Hockey, which ranks about like 200th in world sports popularity. Right?
Well, apparently not...
Two moments in World Cup history are guaranteed to start arguments between soccer fans - Geoff Hurst's winning goal for England in 1966 and Diego Maradona's "Hand of God" strike for Argentina 20 years later.
Adding fuel to bar room disputes, modern TV technology now shows up egregious errors by referees who wrongly disallow or award goals when the ball did not cross the line.
That is why Fifa, world soccer's governing body, is considering bringing the sport into the 21st century by looking at introducing goal line technology.
It is not a novel idea - tennis, basketball, rugby and American football have used computer technology or video replays for years to help officials make the right call.
In ice hockey, the use of video to show if the puck has crossed the goal line has become a familiar feature of National Hockey League (NHL) games for a decade.
Fifa president Sepp Blatter has said goalline technology will be in place at the 2007 World Club Cup in Tokyo. A Fifa committee is assessing various forms of technology and whatever they choose will be operational by the December tournament.
Wow, the NHL actually having an impact on the world's biggest sport?
Perhaps soccer ought to take a few more hints from hockey to make their sport more interesting
1. Allow some actual body contact - Why punish a player for simply breathing on the guy? Allow some body shoving is the guy has the ball. If he's such a good player, he ought to withstand a clean body-check.
2. Fighting - OK, so soccer players fight like sissies, but why not let the fights happen on the field instead of the stands? Wouldn't you like to see David Beckham's face smashed by a good left bitch-slap from Thierry Henry?
3. Pipe in god-awful emo rock music over the PA. Why let the fans chant and moan this 'whoooooa-whoooa-whoooa' crap that makes no sense? It's obvious that the fans are so bored with the game that they have to resort to singing and chanting. By blaring Nickelback over the stadium speakers, you'll calm the crowd down and allow them to sit there and shut up instead of lighting flares and throwing toilet paper onto the field.
4. How about some real uniforms? What pride can Manchester United really have when the players are running billboards? Did you know their team mascot/name/logo is the Red Devils? Well, I don't blame you if you don't, given how their 'logo' is a small one-inch patch on the upper right of their jerseys.
5. Allow some real numbering - Ever notice how all soccer teams give players numbers in the 1-20ish range? Why can't players wear #88, #69, or #99? How many good strikers have worn #9? Exactly...
6. Stop calling players by one name - It's bad enough that the players suck, but you can't look them up in a phone book to throw a bomb through their frickin' window! Which RONALDO are you talking about? The ugly gap-toothed caveman from Brazil or the pretty boy Metrosexual from Portugal?
7. Have the playoffs AFTER the season, and not during the season. There is simply a lot less thrill to the regular season when there is nothing to play for until the NEXT season.
Or, you can just watch hockey and forget about soccer. North Americans are great at that.
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
Opening Up on Closed Captioning
By Gőlbez and special guest 'Aurian'
Closed Captioning (CC) is not something most hockey fans need or think about. I'm sure most of us have seen it, or played with the CC button on the remote a few times, but the captioning is always a few seconds behind the real action, and it's not something we need to have to enjoy the game.
I'm in that majority, but my many hours at the gym, on the cross-trainers, have been spent in front of TV screens, where the CC option is often turned on while I'm watching a sports game or highlight show.
I'm always amazed at just how 'butchered' some of the names can get. Pavol Demitra becomes 'Pablo', Pavel Kubina becomes 'Havlid Subpoena', Messier becomes 'Mess Yay', Bure becomes 'beret' or 'Bear A', and so on. It often seems like the typists who do the CCing have never watched a hockey game before in their lives.
Now, I know the players well and CC is not something essential for me. The errors seem more amusing than anything else. But, what about someone who needs CC?
Hockey Rants reader Aurian is someone who needs to use Closed Captioning to enjoy the full viewing experience, and contributes her thoughts on the issue
Why Captions are Important for me:
Even though people always tell me that the announcers are as annoying as hell and there isn't much point to captions anyways, I do find I miss the captions when they are not running. Watching a game, I don't always know who's wearing what number jersey for the opposing team, and the lettering on the jersey is often too small to make out. I like to have the captions running so I can go "oh, so that's how so-and-so plays!" I don't always catch why the play is stopped, what the ref is calling, who assisted on that goal, etc. The "public" channels (CBC, Rogers Sportsnet, TSN) all have captions, whereas PPV does not. I actually sometimes feel like I am not getting much value for my money because I am getting less from PPV :p
(Jes: PPV is never worth the money! *COUGH*)
How Captions work:
I had a captionist in one of my university classes that involved a lot of discussion in a big lecture hall. She captioned the discussion for me, so I watched her at work. She would program her computer to auto-type words if she typed in a few letters, especially for the longer ones. Before a class, she would find out the subject and program a list of new words into her computer. This is important for live stuff, because people can speak faster than someone can type properly (taped programs have FAR fewer caption errors and do not have the lag you see in live shows and games). Even so, she would still make mistakes. Usually caption errors come from typing phonetically or breaking down a name into similar words. However, sometimes I get the feeling that the captionist has never watched a hockey game or heard some of the names before :p
Caption follies:
The sports news shows usually are not too bad, because the speakers generally plan out what they will say. The games are the best source of bloopers. CBC is the best source for funny captions - they are the ones doing the "Brenda Morrison" on a regular basis.
I just watched a period of the Bruins-Rangers game and got the following:
Crueller took at shot at the goal (Cullen). The announcers discussed the trade of "Con Ray". Someone by the name of Peter Pwei ska is playing too (Peter Prucha). Also, at one point, the Vlaisers were up by three goals (NY Rangers).
I remember some great ones from various Canucks games. The captionists have just as much trouble with Bieksa as those Toronto announcers did. I've watched "Bert Fuzzy" and "Henry Sedin" play. I've also seen Cloo Tear and Longo in goal (insert bad pun there :p). There have been some minor gaffs like Sammy Salo, Kessler, and Burros.
If the networks are going to take the time to provide CC for the games, why don't they hire somebody who actually follows the sport? I can understand if some AHL call-up gets their name slaughtered, but how can you screw up a star like Bertuzzi? Give the captionists a roster list or find a hockey fan out of the bunch. There must be one.
Closed Captioning might not be important to everyone, but to those that need it, they do deserve to be able to watch a game without a whole whack o' errors.
Closed Captioning (CC) is not something most hockey fans need or think about. I'm sure most of us have seen it, or played with the CC button on the remote a few times, but the captioning is always a few seconds behind the real action, and it's not something we need to have to enjoy the game.
I'm in that majority, but my many hours at the gym, on the cross-trainers, have been spent in front of TV screens, where the CC option is often turned on while I'm watching a sports game or highlight show.
I'm always amazed at just how 'butchered' some of the names can get. Pavol Demitra becomes 'Pablo', Pavel Kubina becomes 'Havlid Subpoena', Messier becomes 'Mess Yay', Bure becomes 'beret' or 'Bear A', and so on. It often seems like the typists who do the CCing have never watched a hockey game before in their lives.
Now, I know the players well and CC is not something essential for me. The errors seem more amusing than anything else. But, what about someone who needs CC?
Hockey Rants reader Aurian is someone who needs to use Closed Captioning to enjoy the full viewing experience, and contributes her thoughts on the issue
Why Captions are Important for me:
Even though people always tell me that the announcers are as annoying as hell and there isn't much point to captions anyways, I do find I miss the captions when they are not running. Watching a game, I don't always know who's wearing what number jersey for the opposing team, and the lettering on the jersey is often too small to make out. I like to have the captions running so I can go "oh, so that's how so-and-so plays!" I don't always catch why the play is stopped, what the ref is calling, who assisted on that goal, etc. The "public" channels (CBC, Rogers Sportsnet, TSN) all have captions, whereas PPV does not. I actually sometimes feel like I am not getting much value for my money because I am getting less from PPV :p
(Jes: PPV is never worth the money! *COUGH*)
How Captions work:
I had a captionist in one of my university classes that involved a lot of discussion in a big lecture hall. She captioned the discussion for me, so I watched her at work. She would program her computer to auto-type words if she typed in a few letters, especially for the longer ones. Before a class, she would find out the subject and program a list of new words into her computer. This is important for live stuff, because people can speak faster than someone can type properly (taped programs have FAR fewer caption errors and do not have the lag you see in live shows and games). Even so, she would still make mistakes. Usually caption errors come from typing phonetically or breaking down a name into similar words. However, sometimes I get the feeling that the captionist has never watched a hockey game or heard some of the names before :p
Caption follies:
The sports news shows usually are not too bad, because the speakers generally plan out what they will say. The games are the best source of bloopers. CBC is the best source for funny captions - they are the ones doing the "Brenda Morrison" on a regular basis.
I just watched a period of the Bruins-Rangers game and got the following:
Crueller took at shot at the goal (Cullen). The announcers discussed the trade of "Con Ray". Someone by the name of Peter Pwei ska is playing too (Peter Prucha). Also, at one point, the Vlaisers were up by three goals (NY Rangers).
I remember some great ones from various Canucks games. The captionists have just as much trouble with Bieksa as those Toronto announcers did. I've watched "Bert Fuzzy" and "Henry Sedin" play. I've also seen Cloo Tear and Longo in goal (insert bad pun there :p). There have been some minor gaffs like Sammy Salo, Kessler, and Burros.
If the networks are going to take the time to provide CC for the games, why don't they hire somebody who actually follows the sport? I can understand if some AHL call-up gets their name slaughtered, but how can you screw up a star like Bertuzzi? Give the captionists a roster list or find a hockey fan out of the bunch. There must be one.
Closed Captioning might not be important to everyone, but to those that need it, they do deserve to be able to watch a game without a whole whack o' errors.
Labels: Aurian, Bertuzzi, closed captioning, Demitra, hockey, Pavol Demitra
