Sir, neither of those are questions, both are instructions

So would "Talk about your offense tonight." What's your point?

It's no harder to be vague and/or too general -- not to mention lame -- in a ``properly phrased'' question than in ``talk about" form.

It's all about what you ask, not how you ask it.

 

Y'know this is passable message board fodder, but I hope no one actually displays these attitudes at work.

I'm a bumbler when I speak. Luckily, I'm a writer by trade. Saying a competent phrase is a tougher task for me than most, but I get it done and do the other 96 percent of my job -- writing, editing, observing, recording -- well enough that it's not a problem.

All in all, I don't want question-phrasing to be what starts a fistfight when we're all in the same unemployment office two years from now.

 

No. But why say "Can you give your assessment of the play of XXXX" as opposed to "Why did you focus the offense around XXX" or "What did you see from Team B's film that led you to think XXXX was capable of a game like this?"

 

Can you "talk about" my math skills?

Tricky decimals! ???

 

I'd rather some guy drop a "talk about" than give a rambling-ass monologue where you're thinking, "Is there a question in there?"

 

Yeah but when the manager or coach asks "Is there a question in there?"...totally worth the wait.

 

Thing about the vague question, though, is I might think X, Y, and Z are important to the offense's performance, but when I start with the general question, he starts talking about A, B, and C. Had I just asked about X, Y, and Z I might have missed out. That's why I like starting vague and narrowing it down from there. Where's the harm?

 

I've always preferred that an actual question be asked.

Lots of reporters and writers don't have the ability to think about what they want the athlete to talk about, so they take the easy way out and start the conversation like a couple of fans in a bar.

 

Depending upon how much time there is (how tight deadline is), I prefer BrianGriffin's more general first question about the offense than imjustagirl's specific one -- as a first question. If it's that obvious XXXX had a big game, it's pretty certain the Q&A will get to him soon enough. I want to know what the coach finds important first. What does he choose to single out, without anyone leading the witness, so to speak? He may have a first comment about the offense nobody would think to ask about.

If XXXX had that great a performance, the second question can be more specific. Just my opinion. I like knowing what coaches want to talk about, feel the need to talk about during that postgame surge of victory adrenaline or embarrassment in defeat -- it gives me insight as a columnist -- and I can always point them in the right direction if I need something specific.

Oh, and put me in the camp that doesn't lose any sleep over "talk about." Speaking specifically to trifectarich's point above, I'd say some of the best writing about sports sounds like a conversation between two people in a bar and flows smoothly because of its conversational style. I'm fine generally with whatever gets the conversation started, but if you say you have two questions and then you don't ask two questions, you're begging for someone to bitch-slap you.

 

Exactly. Start general and then zero in on the specifics.

 

Because you are setting the stage for such questions. If you ask a pointed question that contradicts his view, you make him defensive and things can quickly turn combative unnecessarily. Getting his general overview allows you some context to approach the more pointed questions with.

That's always been how I've liked to deal with it. Of course, it might be different if you walk into an interview room at 10 and you need to file by 10:30.

 

OK, I guess I'm missing the point where "Can you give your assessment on XXXX's play today." Assuming that's one player, how is that any more general than my questions?

You're asking him to talk about one person's play. Without using a stupid big-ass word. No one's ASSESSING shit in a press conference. I mean, want to talk about bastardization of a word...assessing means determining. I don't want him to DETERMINE the play of so and so. I want him to answer a question about it.