Inside Television 509
Publication date: 7-9-10
By: Hubert O’Hearn
As I mentioned a few weeks ago, my June and July television viewing has been consumed by the World Cup. At the time of writing, Holland had won its semi-final with Spain-Germany still to come. As my original prediction was Spain-Holland with the Spanish to win, I’m calling this a successful World Cup on a personal basis.
On a larger scale, I truly think it has been the best, most intriguing World Cup ever. It has had strange waves to it - the horrific crash-outs of traditional powers Italy, France and, er, England which at least thinks of itself as a power - the disappointment amidst outstanding play by the Africans - the early South American dominance - and finally the South American implosion. It leads to an all-European final which has never happened off European soil.
So the tournament as a whole has had intrigue. And for once, television didn’t ‘over cover’ the story. I think what finally drew me to footie away from hockey and baseball is that baseball has become horribly over-produced. Give me the batting average, home runs, ribbies and on-base-percentage if you desperately feel the need. But don’t tell me Roscoe Jockitch is 3 for 8 with two men on, two out and facing a righthander. For one thing, your survey sample is so small as to be insignificant, and for another you’re making baseball fans feel like they’re in the company of drooling pencilneck geeks. And is that really the company you want to keep?
In contrast, footie lets the images tell the story with even the play-by-play plan Steve Banyard keeping to the background. And the images have been outstanding, particularly in the use of ultra-high definition slow motion replay during lulls or on tackles. Anyone who thinks the game isn’t physical needs to watch. Imagine going for a three mile run (plausible for a midfielder) while people periodically chop at your ankles with their cleats. Things have been cleaned up since the days when Vinnie Jones or Roy Keane would cripple players for the loose reason of revenge, but the risk factor still remains.
There has also been - and there’s no other way of putting this - the ‘good side’ of racism at play. Entire squads have lived up to national stereotyping. England played like a bunch of old C. Aubrey Smith generals still fighting the current war with the tactics of the last. France utterly dissolved in an occasionally foul-mouthed display of a gigantic miff. Mexico showed all the potential of a great team yet somehow managed to fuddle it all up. The Dutch bicker like a locker room full of super-models, yet they play the way super-models look. And so on.
Finally - because one can’t go on forever about this, and with barely having touched the grotesque incompetence of much of the officiating (Frank Lampard’s non-goal and Carlos Tevez’s knack of invisibility to the linesman) and the nonsensical debate after the Uruguay-Ghana game that goals should count even though they don’t cross lines, which disregards the fact that the rules were properly enforced, Ghana had two chances to win anyway, and didn’t.
But - really finally this time - would anyone have ever bet the parlay that perhaps the three best strikers in the world - Lionel Messi, Fernando Torres and Wayne Rooney would score precisely no goals (up to the time of writing in Torres’ case)? And Miroslav Klose might be the greatest striker of all-time. Go figure. Be seeing you.
Publication date: 7-9-10
By: Hubert O’Hearn
As I mentioned a few weeks ago, my June and July television viewing has been consumed by the World Cup. At the time of writing, Holland had won its semi-final with Spain-Germany still to come. As my original prediction was Spain-Holland with the Spanish to win, I’m calling this a successful World Cup on a personal basis.
On a larger scale, I truly think it has been the best, most intriguing World Cup ever. It has had strange waves to it - the horrific crash-outs of traditional powers Italy, France and, er, England which at least thinks of itself as a power - the disappointment amidst outstanding play by the Africans - the early South American dominance - and finally the South American implosion. It leads to an all-European final which has never happened off European soil.
So the tournament as a whole has had intrigue. And for once, television didn’t ‘over cover’ the story. I think what finally drew me to footie away from hockey and baseball is that baseball has become horribly over-produced. Give me the batting average, home runs, ribbies and on-base-percentage if you desperately feel the need. But don’t tell me Roscoe Jockitch is 3 for 8 with two men on, two out and facing a righthander. For one thing, your survey sample is so small as to be insignificant, and for another you’re making baseball fans feel like they’re in the company of drooling pencilneck geeks. And is that really the company you want to keep?
In contrast, footie lets the images tell the story with even the play-by-play plan Steve Banyard keeping to the background. And the images have been outstanding, particularly in the use of ultra-high definition slow motion replay during lulls or on tackles. Anyone who thinks the game isn’t physical needs to watch. Imagine going for a three mile run (plausible for a midfielder) while people periodically chop at your ankles with their cleats. Things have been cleaned up since the days when Vinnie Jones or Roy Keane would cripple players for the loose reason of revenge, but the risk factor still remains.
There has also been - and there’s no other way of putting this - the ‘good side’ of racism at play. Entire squads have lived up to national stereotyping. England played like a bunch of old C. Aubrey Smith generals still fighting the current war with the tactics of the last. France utterly dissolved in an occasionally foul-mouthed display of a gigantic miff. Mexico showed all the potential of a great team yet somehow managed to fuddle it all up. The Dutch bicker like a locker room full of super-models, yet they play the way super-models look. And so on.
Finally - because one can’t go on forever about this, and with barely having touched the grotesque incompetence of much of the officiating (Frank Lampard’s non-goal and Carlos Tevez’s knack of invisibility to the linesman) and the nonsensical debate after the Uruguay-Ghana game that goals should count even though they don’t cross lines, which disregards the fact that the rules were properly enforced, Ghana had two chances to win anyway, and didn’t.
But - really finally this time - would anyone have ever bet the parlay that perhaps the three best strikers in the world - Lionel Messi, Fernando Torres and Wayne Rooney would score precisely no goals (up to the time of writing in Torres’ case)? And Miroslav Klose might be the greatest striker of all-time. Go figure. Be seeing you.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar