Broadcasters not mentioning a no-hitter in progress

[Boozeman]

Interesting story the other night from Jered Weaver's no-hitter that is picking up some steam in Los Angeles. Throughout the broadcast, the TV broadcast team refused to mention it. At the beginning/end of the inning I guess they showed a graphic on screen mentioning that the Twins didn't have a hit, but considering that the Angels were up 9-0 after four innings, if you had turned on the game in the middle of the 6th inning you would have had no idea what was going on and probably said "Oh well, Angels are up 9-0, I'll watch something else."

Of course, it's 2012, so all you would have really had to do was check Twitter or Facebook and you would have instantly known Weaver was tossing a no-no, which makes the broadcast team's decision all the more puzzling (they did the same thing last year for Ervin Santana's no-hitter).

Jim Carlisle of the Ventura County Star wrote a great piece yesterday taking Victor Rojas and Mark Gubicza to task: http://www.vcstar.com/news/2012/may/03/rojas-staying-mum-on-no-hitter-was-a-no-no/

Here's Rojas' explanation:

""Some people say jinxes have no place in sports, but that's just how I am," Rojas said. "I didn't move from my position after the third inning, I didn't move any paper. I put my pens back in the same spot. That's just who I am."

 

[RedHotChiliPrepper]

My thoughts have always been the broadcasters job is to tell you what's going on, regardless of the situation. If the analyst doesn't want to say it and doesn't want to move himself or his papers, fine. But the play by play guy has to at least mention the guy hasn't given up a hit yet. The Angels radio guys didn't have a problem in mentioning it, which was nice because I heard it in the first 2 minutes I listened when I turned on the game in the car leaving work.

 

[spikechiquet]

Interesting story the other night from Jered Weaver's no-hitter that is picking up some steam in Los Angeles. Throughout the broadcast, the TV broadcast team refused to mention it. At the beginning/end of the inning I guess they showed a graphic on screen mentioning that the Twins didn't have a hit, but considering that the Angels were up 9-0 after four innings, if you had turned on the game in the middle of the 6th inning you would have had no idea what was going on and probably said "Oh well, Angels are up 9-0, I'll watch something else."

Of course, it's 2012, so all you would have really had to do was check Twitter or Facebook and you would have instantly known Weaver was tossing a no-no, which makes the broadcast team's decision all the more puzzling (they did the same thing last year for Ervin Santana's no-hitter).

Jim Carlisle of the Ventura County Star wrote a great piece yesterday taking Victor Rojas and Mark Gubicza to task: http://www.vcstar.com/news/2012/may/03/rojas-staying-mum-on-no-hitter-was-a-no-no/

Here's Rojas' explanation:

""Some people say jinxes have no place in sports, but that's just how I am," Rojas said. "I didn't move from my position after the third inning, I didn't move any paper. I put my pens back in the same spot. That's just who I am."

These stupid "reasons" are why play-by-play for the local FSN broadcast negates these guys being called "journalists" or any other sort of equivalent. The fact that they get lumped into the same group as sports writers and other types of actual media bothers.
They need to be lumped in with fanboi bloggers and the "we won" tweeters instead.

 

[MileHigh]

Here's where the bar is placed:

What would Vin Scully do/say?

He'd say there's a no-hitter/perfect game in progress.

'Nuf said.

 

[Dick Whitman]

A few years ago, Freddy Garcia took a no-hitter into the ninth and Hawk Harrelson, as he should have, kept mentioning it. Jay Marriotti ripped his ass the next day in a Sun-Times column for it. To me, and this is saying something, it was the pettiest, most intellectually dishonest column of his career. Shameful.

 

[playthrough]

If I was these guys' boss, I'd have been all over them. Don't care how many graphics are put up or what your old jinxes are. If you don't tell people this is more than just a shutout, somebody somewhere is changing the channel.

 

[Stitch]

Any broadcaster won't say it's a no hitter during a game because of a supposed "jinx" is an idiot and shouldn't be in the booth.

 

[Boozeman]

If I was these guys' boss, I'd have been all over them. Don't care how many graphics are put up or what your old jinxes are. If you don't tell people this is more than just a shutout, somebody somewhere is changing the channel.

Right? Where was the producer in all this? It's one thing if the announcer doesn't want to say it (and these guys are both ex-pitchers, so I'm sure they have their personal superstitions), but someone needs to be in their ear screaming to mention the no-hitter. If they refuse, get someone on air who will do it. The people behind the microphone are just as responsible and should be ashamed of themselves.

 

[BurnsWhenIPee]

I say this as an avid White Sox fan and Hawk Harrelson fan ... but any time a radio/TV broadcaster does something that makes him fall lower on the professionalism scale than the Hawkaroo, they need to find a new line of work. Now.

 

[black dude with pompano]

I actually started watching about the sixth inning (thanks to MLB Extra Innings). They would use "code words" rather than the words "no-hitter" during the broadcast. I didn't have a problem with it. I don't believe in jinxes anymore than I believe in Jesus, but as a baseball guy I respected their effort.

My only concern was the confusion about whether it was no-hitter or perfect game. (Even Twitter was confused.) It was not a perfect game because a batter reached on a passed ball after a strike out. Later there was a walk, so it was a moot point.

Interesting discussion...

 

[Elliotte Friedman]

You'd be surprised at how many former players turned broadcasters don't believe you should "jinx" the pitcher -- and won't. Teams and players can respond negatively, too, especially if it gets broken.

One of my mentors, Jerry Howarth, had a great way of dealing with this. When Dustin McGowan took a no-hitter into the 9th against Colorado, he gave the score and simply said, "After 8 innings, the Blue Jays are outhitting the Rockies 7-0." Everyone understood what that meant.

 

[steveu]

As a baseball fan I firmly believe in the jinx and not doing it. (Yes, go ahead, make fun of me!!)

However, you can say so much without actually saying the words. "Philip Humber has faced 18 batters through six... and not one of them has reached first safely."

"We have potential history in the making in Anaheim for Jered Weaver..."

And yes, what Elliotte said...

 

[MTM]

A broadcasters job is to tell the audience what is happening, and these two hacks failed miserably.

I'm with Boozeman, if I was flipping channels and saw 9-0 up in the little scorebox, I would have kept flipping and missed it.

And who the hell is Victor Rojas to make that decision? It's surprising that a team in the No. 2 media market has not had a quality PBP guy since **** Enberg and Bob Starr in the early 1980s.

 

[As The Crow Flies]

I'm OK with avoiding the term "no-hitter" -- baseball has all kinds of these weird (sometimes dumb) unspoken rules and for a lot of people that's what makes the sport endearing. But as a few have said, there are dozens of ways to get around it and still keep the audience informed of what's going on. If Rojas didn't do that, then he failed at his job.

 

[SoCalDude]

One of the guys on talk radio, Petros, I think, made an interesting point comparing it to a guy who has made a lot of free throws in a row. Petros was blasting the Angels announcers for not mentioning it.
He added that announcers never hesitate to say Joe Blow has made 55 free throws in a row. Oh, he missed, I must have jinxed him. Ha ha ha ha.

 

[HanSenSE]

Diane Pucin had a similar story in Friday's Times. Here's two of the better quotes:

First, from Jon Miller of the Giants, late of ESPN:

"I feel like I have a responsibility to my audience, to the station, to the network, to say what's going on. Plus, I want to maximize my audience. If someone hears from me about a no-hitter, he might call others or text or email and that helps my audience get larger. Some guys use all kinds of euphemisms, talking about 'no runs, nothing at all,' they make a game of it. I just think, if it's a big story, mention it. But it's a quaint old baseball thing. I don't blame anybody for doing a game any way they want."

And Charley Steiner from the Dodgers:

"Why are you keeping that a secret from your audience? In the 21st century we have this thing called the Internet. People in Swaziland know a no-hitter is going on. If you have those baseball superstitions from 40 years ago, OK, but do you not have some obligation to inform the audience?"

http://www.latimes.com/sports/la-sp-0504-no-hit-announcers-20120504,0,5311872.story

 

[Smasher_Sloan]

Here's where the bar is placed:

What would Vin Scully do/say?

He'd quote Tennyson, or else read from the voluminous cheat sheets that are prepared for him.

 

[FishHack76]

I say this as an avid White Sox fan and Hawk Harrelson fan ... but any time a radio/TV broadcaster does something that makes him fall lower on the professionalism scale than the Hawkaroo, they need to find a new line of work. Now.

I think a couple run-ins with the law took care of that.

 

[Tom Petty]

a player's first consideration should be his teammate throwing the no-hitter ... avoid a jinx like the plague.
a "broadcast journalist's" first consideration should be his/her customer, the audience.
fanbois running wild.

 

[Drip]

You'd be surprised at how many former players turned broadcasters don't believe you should "jinx" the pitcher -- and won't. Teams and players can respond negatively, too, especially if it gets broken.

One of my mentors, Jerry Howarth, had a great way of dealing with this. When Dustin McGowan took a no-hitter into the 9th against Colorado, he gave the score and simply said, "After 8 innings, the Blue Jays are outhitting the Rockies 7-0." Everyone understood what that meant.

I like the way he handled it.