Over at Sports on Earth, Joe DeLessio writes about how he learned to love John Sterling:
But over the past few years, my appreciation for Sterling has grown more sincere. I’ve written this before, but I’ll admit that I giggle at his silly catchphrases, even as I roll my eyes. I now look at Sterling the way I look at the New York Post ‘s front page: The more the headline makes your roll your eyes, the better it is. The Post is ridiculous, sure, but I’d hate for them to start using straightforward headlines on the front page, free of puns and sexual innuendo. Similarly, I’d miss Sterling if the Yankees replaced him with a professional, boring play-by-play man. I want him to introduce terrible, amazing home calls every season, forever. Too many Sterlings—like too many New York Posts—wouldn’t be a good thing. But there’s a place for silly, even in a profession with a long history of no-nonsense (or at least, little-nonsense) icons.
Once upon a time, I laughed at Sterling when he broke out his crazy home run calls. But now I think I’m both laughing at him and with him. He seems to be in on the joke—crafting increasingly complex, absurd home run calls, for the entertainment of people like me. And I eat them up. After all, if the main purpose of a baseball broadcast is to inform the listener (which Sterling does, at least when he’s not jumping the gun on an ump’s call or failing to properly follow the ball once it’s put into play), then there’s no reason the secondary purpose can’t be to entertain. It’s like a “Big Show”-era edition of SportsCenter, but with more Broadway references.
[Photo Credit: Béatrice de Géa for The New York Times]
After all, if the main purpose of a baseball broadcast is to inform the listener (which Sterling does, at least when he’s not jumping the gun on an ump’s call or failing to properly follow the ball once it’s put into play), then there’s no reason the secondary purpose can’t be to entertain.
And here is where I disagree with DeLessio, or rather, I disagree with his final assessment. Sterling simply *doesn't* inform the listener about what is happening on the field, at least not to my satisfaction. Far too often does he jumpt the gun or fail to follow the ball, far too often is there simply dead air (even my wife used to notice this) in between the bombast and absurd banter. Too many times did I find myself shouting at the radio "what the fuck is going on?!?"
Until the Yankees employ a proper play-by-play man for radio, I'm done with their broadcasts.
I co-sign this 100%. Rizzuto was an awful broadcaster, no seriously he's been gone 6 years and we can stop sugarcoating it, and we all LOVE him.
Embrace the Sterling experience, people!
[2] Rizzuto was only really awful near the end. When I was younger, he still called the game pretty straight, especially when he was alone in the booth in later innings. When he had a partner in the booth, like Messer, he would go more off the rails. Later, as he got older, his schtick grew more pronounced, and I tired of his act as well.
Maybe I would embrace the Sterling experience if he, like older Rizzuto, only called a couple innings of the game and always paired with a more competent partner (i.e., not Waldman).
I love the Scooter. I never listen to Sterling, but from what I have heard he sounds annoying. I agree that a guy like Rizzuto obviously cannot do play-by-play and needs to be paired with somebody who can. I'm sure that effect is amplified on radio.
[3] Agreed. Sterling would be great if he waxed poetic about home runs while his partner described the action. But Waldman isn't that good and her voice just sounds shrill to me.
Rizzuto was fun to listen to at the end but he had legit partners who described the action well.
I actually bought the MLB app so I can listen to the away announcers and follow the game better.
I loved Mel & Red, I loved Joe G & Scooter, Bill White too. Stirling's act is getting very old, although I can live with his home run calls. But he knows nothing about sabermetrics (is dismisive of them), and is so-so-obvious. (Friend and I had a drinking game - a shot every time Stirling used the word "obvious." I gave up after 3 innings). Hope when he leaves (sooner rather than later) Yanks get a pro like John Miller.
But Waldman isn't that good and her voice just sounds shrill to me.
Some folks are said to have a face made for radio; Waldman's got a voice made for flag semaphore ...
Has anyone put together a list of home run calls Stirling woukld have made had he been broadcasting earlier? Mickey? Yogi? Ellie? Moose? Roger? Or Joe DE, or Lou, or the Babe?
[5] I actually bought the MLB app so I can listen to the away announcers and follow the game better.
Same here, until this year. Now I'm trying what I called in another thread my "run-silent-run-deep" approach to the game: I don't really listent to or watch any games, except the few times they happen to be on up here on regular cable (e.g., against the Blue Jays), and even then I don't go out of my way to watch. Instead, I've really gone back to simply *following* the season via box scores.