155 replies to this topic

[8slim]

Reason?

I'll say upfront, I haven't read the guy in years. But when I first moved to NY and I did, he was the most hypocritical, sanctimonius jerk I've ever seen grace a sports page. He would rail about the moral failings of some network's coverage, while his column ran opposite escort ads.

I probably shouldn't have said what I did, b/c the biggest reason I can't stand him is stories from people who used to work with him. And of course "worst on the planet" was hyperbole. Let's just say its tough to take any critique seriously from a guy who apparently exhibited a fair amount of degenerate behavior. But its all hearsay so I'll just leave it at that. Never mind.

Edited by 8slim, 19 May 2009 - 10:09 PM.

[Fratboy]

John: IT IS HIGH... IT IS FAR... IT IS DEEP... IT'S... GONE!!!!1111 OH, IT'S A HOLIDAY FOR MATT! OVER THE RIGHT FIELD WALL, JUST BEYOND THE 314 FOOT MARKER. ANOTHER HOME RUN FOR MATT HOLLIDAY!

Suzyn: He really hit that one, John.

John: Right you are, Suzyn. And here's Robinson Cano stepping in. Thuhhhhhh pitch... and there's a ball, outside....

Just setting you up for next year, guys.

Edited by Fratboy, 19 May 2009 - 10:52 PM.

[Rick Burlesons Yam Bag]

What nonsense. Sports is entertainment and he entertains. Due to my lack of cable television I probably listen to about as much or more baseball on the radio as anyone on this board. A good radio team:

- Describes the action in an interesting manner
- Provides a score update at least twice an inning
- Gives you the pitch count and runners situation at least every other pitch, and
- Is reasonable in giving you assessments of where a player is at in a given game.

Sterling and Waldman do all of the above and they do it well. Are they homers? Yes, but who cares?

This silliness of judging radio broadcasters by perceived inaccuracies is one of the worst thing that Bill Simmons brought about in his career. To all the people who said they listened and then "re-watched" the game later and saw an inaccuracy, I say simply this:

"Bullshit."

Seriously? You listened to a game on the radio - not a playoff game or an important game, but just a random game - then went home and fired up the replay and remembered the call by Sterling vividly? Bull. Shit.



Get over yourselves oh knights of the laptop. The game is fun and Sterling is fun to listen to. And Dave O'Brien can't lick Jerry Trupiano's martini stained velvet tux.

[Sparky Lyle]

And Dave O'Brien can't lick Jerry Trupiano's martini stained velvet tux.

I agree with everything else you said .... but this. I listen to most of the Sox games on radio because I'm sitting in a police cruiser all the time and I really love listening on radio. Yammer, I just couldn't stand Trupiano, though I thought he was a very nice man. He just sucked. For me anyway. I like O'Brien a lot. Much more than Trup. Come to think of it, I like him more than Castig. I think Castiglione is becoming senile.

[JBill]

One of the great Mike and Dog moments came the day after the Yankees lost Game 5 to Anaheim in 2005. They replayed all of Sterling's calls from the ninth inning and goofed on all of it. The money shot was Sterling's call of A-Rod's double play ball, which included 35 seconds of silence following the play. The assumption was that Sterling was so upset about the DP, he got up and walked away for a half-minute to regain his composure. For the rest of the inning, Sterling kept complaining about the double play. I thought Russo was going to pass out from laughing so hard.

This sent me searching for any youtube M&MD clips of Sterling calls, but I couldn't find any. Definitely one of the best parts of their show was the almost daily replay of his calls. All they would do is replay them and laugh, and the best ones got Russo to laugh so hard you could hear him wheezing.

And I bet a lot of the inaccuracy stuff comes from their show, they loved to pick up on his mistakes, which were usually huge and hilarious. And they liked Sterling!

Edited by JBill, 20 May 2009 - 12:07 AM.

[atisha]

I agree with everything else you said .... but this. I listen to most of the Sox games on radio because I'm sitting in a police cruiser all the time and I really love listening on radio. Yammer, I just couldn't stand Trupiano, though I thought he was a very nice man. He just sucked. For me anyway. I like O'Brien a lot. Much more than Trup. Come to think of it, I like him more than Castig. I think Castiglione is becoming senile.

I have to agree with you. Castig sounds tired and cliche'd a lot these days, the Dave innings are fresh air in comparison. And as about Yankees booth, I was listening one night out of sheer curiosity and they brought me to change station (and game) in about five minutes. Awful combination. I wasn't aware of the miscues, that makes it even worse.

[jon abbey]

Seriously? You listened to a game on the radio - not a playoff game or an important game, but just a random game - then went home and fired up the replay and remembered the call by Sterling vividly? Bull. Shit.

Not a whole game, but an inning or two while taking a shower pretty frequently. And it's easy to remember since it generally seems like you're watching a different game than the one that Sterling just described to you.

[runnels3]

And Dave O'Brien can't lick Jerry Trupiano's martini stained velvet tux.

Ah ha! I see you are trying to goad us a la Callahan. I won't bite.

[MoGator71]

I don't mind Sterling as much as I used to. Yeah he's a homer, but he's a local guy...they're all homers. The O's guy (Angel?) is worse, the Rays guys are worse. Listen to an NBA b'cast sometime, as an out-of-towner I get the other team's feed for Celts road games and some of them are insufferably bad. Sterling is a schtick guy, like Trupe...chances are if you didn't like Trupe you don't like Sterling. It's fun to mock him, but he's not that bad...and when Boston is really putting it to NY he starts ballwashing the Sox and it's amusing.

Waldman on the other hand...ugh.

[joyofsox]

John: IT IS HIGH... IT IS FAR... IT IS DEEP... IT'S... GONE!!!!1111 OH, IT'S A HOLIDAY FOR MATT! OVER THE RIGHT FIELD WALL, JUST BEYOND THE 314 FOOT MARKER. ANOTHER HOME RUN FOR MATT HOLLIDAY!

Suzyn: He really hit that one, John.

John: Right you are, Suzyn. And here's Robinson Cano stepping in. Thuhhhhhh pitch... and there's a ball, outside....

Just setting you up for next year, guys.

I would advise changing "and there's a ball, outside...." to "and there's a fast strike"

"a fast strike"

GOOD FUCKING MOTHER OF CUNTDOM DOES THAT PHRASE PISS ME OFF!!

It does not tell me what type of pitch it was and it does not tell me where in or out of the zone the pitch was thrown. THANKS, Mr Radio Man!!!!!!!!!

The problem with Sterling -- and this goes back at least 10-12 years -- is that he fails to describes basic things about the game. Like which side of the field a foul ball was hit, whether a pitch was high or low, inside or outside, whether a fielder moves to his left or right to get a grounder.

He must assume that you are also watching on TV, following along via radio. I have heard him -- while TV is showing a replay -- say words like, "see there's the tag, right there on the arm".

[xjack]

A day after Sterling gets a beat-down in the Post, Harold Reynolds does this segment on MLB Network tonight praising his home run calls. Coincidence? I doubt it.

[johnmd20]

Get over yourselves oh knights of the laptop. The game is fun and Sterling is fun to listen to. And Dave O'Brien can't lick Jerry Trupiano's martini stained velvet tux.

No he's not, he's painful to listen to and there is no fun at all involved with his self promoting antics and absolutely awful home run calls.

[johnmd20]

The problem with Sterling -- and this goes back at least 10-12 years -- is that he fails to describes basic things about the game. Like which side of the field a foul ball was hit, whether a pitch was high or low, inside or outside, whether a fielder moves to his left or right to get a grounder.

But but but RBYB says that he gives the score at least twice an inning. And in doing that, he's accurate and descriptive and fun. Sterling is awesome.

Edit - spelling

Edited by johnmd20, 21 May 2009 - 07:21 AM.

[Rick Burlesons Yam Bag]

But but but RBYB says that he gives the score at least twice an inning. And in doing that, he's accurate and descriptive and fun. Sterling is awesome.

Edit - spelling

Yeah, it must suck having someone who actually listens to the games and kind of gets what good radio announcing sounds like as opposed to doucheknockers who bitch about perceived or fabricated mistakes that occur a few times in a 3 hour broadcast. Please, stick to the Simmons thread where you can tell us all how much you loved him but he totally sucks in this particular article or topic.

Yawn.

[Rick Burlesons Yam Bag]

No he's not, he's painful to listen to and there is no fun at all involved with his self promoting antics and absolutely awful home run calls.

Let's be honest, you have mentioned a few times that you watch a lot of baseball on tv. You listen to Sterling what......5-6 times per year?

Again, just more drivel from Phil Mushnik's less talented monkey butler.

[snowmanny]

John: IT IS HIGH... IT IS FAR... IT IS DEEP... IT'S... GONE!!!!1111 OH, IT'S A HOLIDAY FOR MATT! OVER THE RIGHT FIELD WALL, JUST BEYOND THE 314 FOOT MARKER. ANOTHER HOME RUN FOR MATT HOLLIDAY!

Suzyn: He really hit that one, John.

John: Right you are, Suzyn. And here's Robinson Cano stepping in. Thuhhhhhh pitch... and there's a ball, outside....

Just setting you up for next year, guys.

That's OK. It's the "Another Pay Day!! For J Bay!!!" I'm worried about.

[MoGator71]

I think joyofsox' point is a good one. I don't know a ton about Sterling's work pre-MFY, I know he used to do TV for the Atlanta Hawks because he's the PBP guy on one of the games on the Bird DVD (what a surprise that was, BTW), but he does somewhat announce like he's doing TV. In that way I think he kind of falls short as a radio PBP guy, and that touches on the original criticism about his accuracy.

I guess if you want to listen to the game in the background (which I bet a lot of people do in the summer, I know I put the game on the radio outside a bit) he's fine, he's conversational and he is entertaining. But if you for whatever reason don't get the games on TV, and radio is where you go for all the games, then you probably want more attention to detail. And if that's what you want Sterling would probably drive you nuts.

[johnmd20]

Let's be honest, you have mentioned a few times that you watch a lot of baseball on tv. You listen to Sterling what......5-6 times per year?

Again, just more drivel from Phil Mushnik's less talented monkey butler.

I would say I listen to Stirling about about 10-15 times per year. I live in NY and am always carrying an AM/FM radio when I'm walking in the city. So if the MFY are on, I'll listen to the game.

And every time I listen to him, I'm never interested or impressed or engaged. It doesn't help he shares the booth with Waldman and Sterling is nothing but a homer, more interested in promoting himself and the Yankees than he is in describing what is happening on the field.

I disagreed with you about Stirling. You resorted to calling me a monkey butler and mocking me about Bill Simmons. That's deep. Aren't ad hominem attacks frowned upon around here?

[Rick Burlesons Yam Bag]

I would say I listen to Stirling about about 10-15 times per year. I live in NY and am always carrying an AM/FM radio when I'm walking in the city. So if the MFY are on, I'll listen to the game.

And every time I listen to him, I'm never interested or impressed or engaged. It doesn't help he shares the booth with Waldman and Sterling is nothing but a homer, more interested in promoting himself and the Yankees than he is in describing what is happening on the field.

I disagreed with you about Stirling. You resorted to calling me a monkey butler and mocking me about Bill Simmons. That's deep. Aren't ad hominem attacks frowned upon around here?

So who are good broadcasters to whom you listen to regularly? Who does it well?

And ad hominem attacks are only discouraged when the person being attacked is not an idiot.

[johnmd20]

So who are good broadcasters to whom you listen to regularly? Who does it well?

And ad hominem attacks are only discouraged when the person being attacked is not an idiot.

Nice, add idiot to the list. I also forgot to add douchknocker. Your ability to spin a web of insulting words is great and to be admired.

As per who I like to listen to, I'm not exactly sure why I have to represent myself to you. And I am wondering who you made judge, jury, and executioner of this thread, but I'll play along because I fear your wrath, your ability to bully, and your ability to be the smartest guy in the room. And please, for the love of God, just don't call me an idiot again; it's just so true, so mean, and it cuts too deep.

I think Keith Hernandez and Ron Darling do a very good job in the booth on SNY. Bob Wischusen is also a guy I like to listen to on the radio. Castiglione, of course, is also good.

However, it doesn't matter who I like to listen to, no matter who I am listening to, even if it's a high school basketball game played by two schools with less than 100 students each, the announcing would be better than Stirling.

[Rick Burlesons Yam Bag]

Nice, add idiot to the list. I also forgot to add douchknocker. Your ability to spin a web of insulting words is great and to be admired.

As per who I like to listen to, I'm not exactly sure why I have to represent myself to you. And I am wondering who you made judge, jury, and executioner of this thread, but I'll play along because I fear your wrath, your ability to bully, and your ability to be the smartest guy in the room. And please, for the love of God, just don't call me an idiot again; it's just so true, so mean, and it cuts too deep.

I think Keith Hernandez and Ron Darling do a very good job in the booth on SNY. Bob Wischusen is also a guy I like to listen to on the radio. Castiglione, of course, is also good.

However, it doesn't matter who I like to listen to, no matter who I am listening to, even if it's a high school basketball game played by two schools with less than 100 students each, the announcing would be better than Stirling.

Keith Hernandez and Ron Darling announce for tv.

I won't disagree with you on Castiglione but you do realize that Bob Wischusen is a football commentator......right? And sorry, I can't turn off the Bullshit Detector. I have a hard time believing that you would mis-spell "Sterling" repeatedly but can spell Wischusen without googling to try and find a New York area radio voice to try and bolster your point that you don't just crap on everyone who steps in front of a mic.

I am not sure why you get a jolly from douching on writers and broadcasters, but there you go. It's you, let's not try to hide it.

In the entire United States there is one radio voice you like announcing baseball, and that is Joe Castiglione. I think that says everything we need to know about how valid your opinion on this matter is. Thank you for playing. You idiot.

[Average Reds]

Nice, add idiot to the list. I also forgot to add douchknocker. Your ability to spin a web of insulting words is great and to be admired.

As per who I like to listen to, I'm not exactly sure why I have to represent myself to you. And I am wondering who you made judge, jury, and executioner of this thread, but I'll play along because I fear your wrath, your ability to bully, and your ability to be the smartest guy in the room. And please, for the love of God, just don't call me an idiot again; it's just so true, so mean, and it cuts too deep.

I think Keith Hernandez and Ron Darling do a very good job in the booth on SNY. Bob Wischusen is also a guy I like to listen to on the radio. Castiglione, of course, is also good.

However, it doesn't matter who I like to listen to, no matter who I am listening to, even if it's a high school basketball game played by two schools with less than 100 students each, the announcing would be better than Stirling.

You are taking Yammer's bait. As fun as this can be to observe, you are at the point where it's like watching a wounded animal writhe in pain before officially becoming roadkill. So let me help out.

IMO, you are wrong about Sterling. He can be a buffoon at times, and his 'old-time radio guy' schtick can wear on anyone, but I always get the sense that he loves the game and he delivers that emotion through the radio on a daily basis. I can't help that I find it somewhat endearing - I just do. And while he's an unabashed homer, he's the best kind of homer in the sense that there is no meanspiritedness to it. He appreciates great players no matter who they play for and he is constantly praising members of the opposition who impress him. This differentiates him from a jackass like Michael Kay, who deserves to be beaten constantly for having the nerve to breathe my air. (And yes, I know that Kay is a TV guy, but I'm comparing homers here.)

At the end of the day, your opinions are fine. The thing is, when someone like Yammer challenges you to put up or shut up, you need to back up those opinions with substance or you're going to be roadkill. Yammer's preferred method of attack - substance, followed by insult, followed by substance, followed by insult - can be unsettling. But you need to take it in stride, ignore the insults and return fire on the substance. Or just ignore him.

My two cents...

Edited by Average Reds, 22 May 2009 - 01:43 PM.

[Hendu for Kutch]

At the end of the day, your opinions are fine. The thing is, when someone like Yammer challenges you to put up or shut up, you need to back up those opinions with substance or you're going to be roadkill. Yammer's preferred method of attack - substance, followed by insult, followed by substance, followed by insult - can be unsettling. But you need to take it in stride, ignore the insults and return fire on the substance. Or just ignore him.

My two cents...

I've got no dog in this fight, as I don't even listen to Yankees games. However, this just doesn't seem to be the case here. In reading this thread, there are a ton of examples given by people of specific things Sterling has said or done. It appears Yammer has just come in and said "nu-uh, you're all stupid". I'm curious exactly what substance he's added, in your opinion. Insults, sure, but I'm not seeing the substance. It's coming across as more of an "I'm right and you're a big stupid whiner" argument.

[Average Reds]

I've got no dog in this fight, as I don't even listen to Yankees games. However, this just doesn't seem to be the case here. In reading this thread, there are a ton of examples given by people of specific things Sterling has said or done. It appears Yammer has just come in and said "nu-uh, you're all stupid". I'm curious exactly what substance he's added, in your opinion. Insults, sure, but I'm not seeing the substance. It's coming across as more of an "I'm right and you're a big stupid whiner" argument.

I think you didn't understand what I was trying to say, so I'll summarize.

My point to Johnmd20 was about how to handle the insults - ignore them and answer the specific points Yammer raised or just ignore him altogether. But he really shouldn't take the bait and respond to the insults, since there is no future in it.

As it relates to the actual topic of Sterling, I made my perspective pretty clear. If you have a question about that, I'm happy to engage in a conversation. If you want to draw me into a personality contest where I pass judgment about the merits of which poster is acting in the most boorish fashion, I'll pass.

[johnmd20]

Keith Hernandez and Ron Darling announce for tv.

I won't disagree with you on Castiglione but you do realize that Bob Wischusen is a football commentator......right? And sorry, I can't turn off the Bullshit Detector. I have a hard time believing that you would mis-spell "Sterling" repeatedly but can spell Wischusen without googling to try and find a New York area radio voice to try and bolster your point that you don't just crap on everyone who steps in front of a mic.

I am not sure why you get a jolly from douching on writers and broadcasters, but there you go. It's you, let's not try to hide it.

In the entire United States there is one radio voice you like announcing baseball, and that is Joe Castiglione. I think that says everything we need to know about how valid your opinion on this matter is. Thank you for playing. You idiot.

Are Hernandez and Darling not broadcasters? Yes, I looked up Wischusen's name to see how to spell it. Nice work inspector, Sherlock ain't got nothing on you.
I live in NY and listen to the FAN and 1050 all day, it would be shocking if I didn't know who Bob W. was. I don't get a jolly from douching all writers and broadcasters, I just get my jollies douching on the lousy ones. It's the internets, after all. Douching happens.

And Average Reds, thanks for the advice. Duly noted. RBYB is just a bully and I thought it worth mentioning that bullying didn't impress me. But, yeah, I shouldn't engage. It's best to ignore than to feed the trolls.

[jon abbey]

Another minor example (I barely listen to Sterling, or I'm sure I'd have way more) from last night's game: I listened to the first few batters on the radio, then went and watched from the start on DVR. Joba threw a 3-2 curveball to Roberts leading off the game for a called strike three, which is a semi-big deal for Yankee fans who have been watching closely to see how Joba's secondary pitches have been developing. Sterling's description of this pitch, after the fact, was that it was "right in there", which to me means that it was pretty much right down the middle and that "Roberts froze". But when I watched the pitch on TV, it broke across the outside part of the plate and Roberts seemed to see it pretty well but just be a bit fooled, more of a decision not to swing than freezing IMO.

Yes, this is nitpicking to an extent, but it adds up really quickly. The game that Sterling describes is not the game actually being played, which makes him fundamentally incompetent at his job. When you couple this with his smugness, he becomes intolerable.

[Rick Burlesons Yam Bag]

Another minor example (I barely listen to Sterling, or I'm sure I'd have way more) from last night's game: I listened to the first few batters on the radio, then went and watched from the start on DVR. Joba threw a 3-2 curveball to Roberts leading off the game for a called strike three, which is a semi-big deal for Yankee fans who have been watching closely to see how Joba's secondary pitches have been developing. Sterling's description of this pitch, after the fact, was that it was "right in there", which to me means that it was pretty much right down the middle and that "Roberts froze". But when I watched the pitch on TV, it broke across the outside part of the plate and Roberts seemed to see it pretty well but just be a bit fooled, more of a decision not to swing than freezing IMO.

Yes, this is nitpicking to an extent, but it adds up really quickly. The game that Sterling describes is not the game actually being played, which makes him fundamentally incompetent at his job. When you couple this with his smugness, he becomes intolerable.

It's a pretty big nitpick. On strike three a curveball breaks and a guy doesn't swing so he gets called out.......that's called "getting frozen" by pretty much any definition, unless your hypothesis is that he was not aware that taking a called strike for strike three would be a bad thing.

I enjoy having Yankee fans on this board and I think you represent them pretty well, but I think you are pretty far off on this whole "He is not calling the game that is being played" thing.

[Rick Burlesons Yam Bag]

I've got no dog in this fight, as I don't even listen to Yankees games. However, this just doesn't seem to be the case here. In reading this thread, there are a ton of examples given by people of specific things Sterling has said or done. It appears Yammer has just come in and said "nu-uh, you're all stupid". I'm curious exactly what substance he's added, in your opinion. Insults, sure, but I'm not seeing the substance. It's coming across as more of an "I'm right and you're a big stupid whiner" argument.

Not really.

I made it clear how a good announcer is defined and then noted that Sterling does, in fact meet these guidelines.

You will note that none of the critics have cited what a good game call is, nor have they cited any radio announcers who do it well. They have instead come up with a number of instances (and I have noted that they are probably fabricated) where they perceived a missed call by the announcer and deemed him not a strong announcer as a result. That hypothesis alone is ridiculous; they talk for 4 hours 162+ times per year, the odd mistake will be made.

And yes, I insult idiots. I do it frequently and with no remorse. If you would like me to feel remorse please PM me, I would be more than happy to consider your rationale for why I should feel remorse for making idiots feel uncomfortable. Right now I see nothing but upside.

[Rick Burlesons Yam Bag]

Are Hernandez and Darling not broadcasters? Yes, I looked up Wischusen's name to see how to spell it. Nice work inspector, Sherlock ain't got nothing on you.
I live in NY and listen to the FAN and 1050 all day, it would be shocking if I didn't know who Bob W. was. I don't get a jolly from douching all writers and broadcasters, I just get my jollies douching on the lousy ones. It's the internets, after all. Douching happens.

Hernanedez and Darling are absolutely not radio announcers, which is what is being discussed. Calling a tv game and a radio game are completely separate animals.

And I just don't believe you listen to any radio baseball broadcasts. The fact that you cited a football broadcaster who does Jets games and two guys who are on tv is evidence of that. This discredits your viewpoint, which is very relevant to the conversation. The fact that you persist with the viewpoint while really having no clue is what puts you into the realm of iodiocy.

And Average Reds, thanks for the advice. Duly noted. RBYB is just a bully and I thought it worth mentioning that bullying didn't impress me. But, yeah, I shouldn't engage. It's best to ignore than to feed the trolls.

Let me bring you up to speed on the whole "troll" thing. You spend an inordinate amount of time here criticizing journalists for absolutely asinine reasons, that is troll-like behavior. It was one of the things that chased Bill Simmons - a guy I used to enjoy going back and forth with long before you got here - off the board. Your posts have no substance, no wisdom or insight.

Am I bullying? I am criticizing idiots and calling bullshit on stupidity. If that is bullying then just call me "Biff."

[jon abbey]

It's a pretty big nitpick. On strike three a curveball breaks and a guy doesn't swing so he gets called out.......that's called "getting frozen" by pretty much any definition, unless your hypothesis is that he was not aware that taking a called strike for strike three would be a bad thing.

Not quite, I think he was fooled that it was going to be a strike, but not by the pitch choice itself. Sterling made it sound like Roberts was sitting fastball and couldn't react when it was a curve, which was right down the middle. What actually happened was that he watched it right into the mitt, breaking over the outside part of the plate. Yes, the end result is the same, but to me there's a distinct difference there. It is a nitpick, as I said, but it adds up quickly IMO.

I enjoy having Yankee fans on this board and I think you represent them pretty well, but I think you are pretty far off on this whole "He is not calling the game that is being played" thing.

Yeah, like I said, if I listened to him more (and then went and watched the DVR of the same game), I'd have more and better examples. I listened to four batters on the radio yesterday, so that's the best I've got for today.

And in general, I'm just going by my experience, I'd be thrilled if I actually liked Sterling, I have no real horse in this race. To be honest, I don't even care that much about accuracy, I worshipped the Scooter as a kid and he was less accurate than Sterling's ever been (although at least they had counterbalances in the booth then, like Bill White and Frank Messer and Tom Seaver later on), but it's the combination of inaccuracy and self-satisfied smugness that bugs the fuck out of me so I usually don't consider listening on the radio as an option anymore.

Maybe slightly off topic, but when Harry Kalas died last month, I happened to be listening to a bit of Michael Kay's afternoon radio show. John Kruk called in, and was going on and on about how Kalas was a part of the Phillies family, how they went out of their way to include him in their postseason celebrations, etc. What was interesting was Kay's reaction, he was quite noticeably stunned that it was possible for players to form any kind of relationship with their broadcasters. He couldn't get past this for quite some time, well after Kruk had left, he kept saying things like "John Sterling and I have been here for decades and none of the players ever invite us to do anything." I just kept thinking, "Yeah, you guys are arrogant, ignorant yahoos, do you think that might have something to do with it?"

[OilCanShotTupac]

The fact that you persist with the viewpoint while really having no clue is what puts you into the realm of iodiocy.

I really like this.

[Spacemans Bong]

Early Rizzuto is pretty good, I think only when the adulation for not being an uptight douche like Red Barber did Scooter try and be Scooter all the time and he became a parody of himself.

[johnmd20]

Hernanedez and Darling are absolutely not radio announcers, which is what is being discussed. Calling a tv game and a radio game are completely separate animals.

And I just don't believe you listen to any radio baseball broadcasts. The fact that you cited a football broadcaster who does Jets games and two guys who are on tv is evidence of that. This discredits your viewpoint, which is very relevant to the conversation. The fact that you persist with the viewpoint while really having no clue is what puts you into the realm of iodiocy.

Let me bring you up to speed on the whole "troll" thing. You spend an inordinate amount of time here criticizing journalists for absolutely asinine reasons, that is troll-like behavior. It was one of the things that chased Bill Simmons - a guy I used to enjoy going back and forth with long before you got here - off the board. Your posts have no substance, no wisdom or insight.

Am I bullying? I am criticizing idiots and calling bullshit on stupidity. If that is bullying then just call me "Biff."

It's clear that when you get on a rant, there is no substance, wisdom, or insight that you'll even consider listening to. Because you are dancing in a number of different directions.

Towards that end, forget about everything else, let's get to the crux of this thread, the quality of Sterling's work.

Sterling misses calls, major calls, on every broadcast. This is well documented. Not a call saying, "That was outside," when the pitch was down the middle. That happens all the time to all announcers and that is to be expected. He misses calls like, "It is high, it is far, it is. . . .caught by a charging in Bay in shallow leftfield." And he calls balls high and far when they are low line drives to the outfield and not necessarily home runs.

So right there, that's poor work, he often misrepresents almost every fly ball hit to the outfield by a Yankee. And when a MFY home run is actually hit, Sterling goes into a self promoting mode where he cleverly "catchphrases" the person hitting the home run. It's juvenile and gets in the way of the game.

He's a poor announcer and he doesn't call games accurately, he's an egregious homer,(probably his least offensive offense) and blatantly self promoting, at the expense of the game being played that he is supposed to call.

And that is why I criticize Sterling.

And just like when you think someone is an idiot, it's ok to call them an idiot, when I think a journalist needs criticism, I'm going to criticize. I don't think you're an idiot, because you aren't one. You are, however, a douche.

[runnels3]

I don't know a ton about Sterling's work pre-MFY, I know he used to do TV for the Atlanta Hawks because he's the PBP guy on one of the games on the Bird DVD (what a surprise that was, BTW), but he does somewhat announce like he's doing TV.

He did do the Hawks on radio back in the Dominique/Doc prime days. And if you want to know where he got "Thuhhh pitch..." it was from sitting alongside the late Skip Carey doing Braves games on radio & TV in the same era . Of course Carey's (and his father Harry's as well) use of the article was a little more subtle...Sterling has cultivated it to suit his perch atop MFY-land. And back then he was nothing approaching controversy...you know, the kind that inspires entertaining dog-eat-dog threads like this one.

[joyofsox]

Saying a ball hit off a fielder's glove or a fan got in the player's way when neither happened (the Damon stuff from the Post) seems like a perfect example of calling a different game.

So right there, that's poor work, he often misrepresents almost every fly ball hit to the outfield by a Yankee. And when a MFY home run is actually hit, Sterling goes into a self promoting mode where he cleverly "catchphrases" the person hitting the home run. It's juvenile and gets in the way of the game.

I recall one game in the late 90s where for whatever reason Sterling got a late jump on the call. The ball was clearly a home run, maybe it was a liner and got out in a hurry, but the ball had just about landed in the bleacher crowd as he was intoning "It is high ..." He would not be denied.

[Rick Burlesons Yam Bag]

Not quite, I think he was fooled that it was going to be a strike, but not by the pitch choice itself. Sterling made it sound like Roberts was sitting fastball and couldn't react when it was a curve, which was right down the middle. What actually happened was that he watched it right into the mitt, breaking over the outside part of the plate. Yes, the end result is the same, but to me there's a distinct difference there. It is a nitpick, as I said, but it adds up quickly IMO.

Being "Frozen" means you think the pitch is going to be a ball and it turns out to be a strike so you leave your bat on your houlder. This happens most comonly with curve balls. Yes, there are cases where a batter is sitting one pitch and another comes but ultimately it doesn't matter. If the bat is on the shoulder for strike three, unless you are retarded or suffering from a stroke, you have been "Frozen."

And I guess this gets to my bigger point. These Sterling "errors" seem to suffer from fans not really getting the game, not really seeing the play as well as they perceive. So much of these perceived flaws are really non-existent, as silly as they were to begin with.

[Rick Burlesons Yam Bag]

It's clear that when you get on a rant, there is no substance, wisdom, or insight that you'll even consider listening to. Because you are dancing in a number of different directions.

Ergo you decied that you would go with no substance. Good job. I am dancing in a clear direction - Sterling is a good radio announcer. I have laid out the criteria and have shown them to be met by his broadcasting calls. So I guess.....whatever.

Towards that end, forget about everything else, let's get to the crux of this thread, the quality of Sterling's work.

OK, sounds great. I listen to him about 100 times per year. I am excited for the conversation.

Sterling misses calls, major calls, on every broadcast.

No he doesn't

This is well documented.

No, it's really not. You perceive it to be, but you are wrong.

Not a call saying, "That was outside," when the pitch was down the middle. That happens all the time to all announcers and that is to be expected. He misses calls like, "It is high, it is far, it is. . . .caught by a charging in Bay in shallow leftfield." And he calls balls high and far when they are low line drives to the outfield and not necessarily home runs.

Ahhhhhh...the old "he misses home run calls" canard. Yes, Jerry Trupiano used to do this 3 times a game if I remember correctly from posts on this board. Here's the probem. You listen to 15 games a year. I listen to easily 5 or 6 times that. Here is the straight dope - he really doesn't do this all that often. I know, it really pissed off Bill Simmons though. And I know you think highly of his baseball opinions.

So right there, that's poor work, he often misrepresents almost every fly ball hit to the outfield by a Yankee.

Poor work which I pretty much showed doesn't exist. But in your 11% of the season where you listen to him it must happen like all shitwhistles.

And when a MFY home run is actually hit, Sterling goes into a self promoting mode where he cleverly "catchphrases" the person hitting the home run. It's juvenile and gets in the way of the game.

This is a reasonable complaint. It doesn't bother me as much but I can see it bothering some. I have never seen it as self promotin, but rather entertainment. I am not sure how exactly it is juvenile though. It is more common in radio announcing than I think you realize.

He's a poor announcer and he doesn't call games accurately, he's an egregious homer,(probably his least offensive offense) and blatantly self promoting, at the expense of the game being played that he is supposed to call.

And that is why I criticize Sterling.

But outside of the homerism - which I don't mind, I think radio announcers should be homers to a small extent as long as they respect the game and the other team, which he certainly does - he does none of those things. I am not sure how the home run tags are self promotion. It's not like he is up there pitching the John Sterling book or the John Sterling brand of cologne, he is making up a hokey catch phrase. Who gives a shit?

And just like when you think someone is an idiot, it's ok to call them an idiot, when I think a journalist needs criticism, I'm going to criticize. I don't think you're an idiot, because you aren't one. You are, however, a douche.

You are an idiot. A complete and utter fool.

[Foulkey Reese]

I'm sorry Yammer but you're wrong. You're just 100% flat out wrong. I've listened to plenty of Sterling broadcasts and there is absolutely no doubt that he frequently flubs calls. I listen to quite a bit of MLB radio during the day and I can honestly say that I have never heard another announcer trip over his words when describing a play as much as Sterling.

"Jeter.....ball.....DIVING PLAY!!!...no.....ok wait............safe!!!!..........well what do you know he called him out....how about that?"

And then I'll see the replay later and it's a routine ground ball to SS where Jeter was out by a mile.

BTW calling another poster an idiot 100 times in a thread about a radio announcer just makes you look silly. This site is better than that.

[Rick Burlesons Yam Bag]

I'm sorry Yammer but you're wrong. You're just 100% flat out wrong. I've listened to plenty of Sterling broadcasts and there is absolutely no doubt that he frequently flubs calls. I listen to quite a bit of MLB radio during the day and I can honestly say that I have never heard another announcer trip over his words when describing a play as much as Sterling.

"Jeter.....ball.....DIVING PLAY!!!...no.....ok wait............safe!!!!..........well what do you know he called him out....how about that?"

Sorry budzo. This may happen once in a blue moon but it is about that frequent. The guy doesn't pump the drama overboard on routine plays nor does h make safe/out mistakes like that. He will absolutely say that a player looked safe but was called out, he will refer to something as a bang bang play and then dissect it, but your phrasing doesn't happen.

And then I'll see the replay later and it's a routine ground ball to SS where Jeter was out by a mile.

Really. You really listen to a game, remember the specific routine play and then watch it later? Let's be honest here, you are making this up. It's cool. Don't sweat it, we don't know your real name.

BTW calling another poster an idiot 100 times in a thread about a radio announcer just makes you look silly. This site is better than that.

No, this site really isn't. This site has always weeded out the shitty posters by calling bullshit on them. I know that the last 2-3 years crappy posters have come in and clung to this concept of this site being the best baseball site and hoping that dopes will maintain order, but the quality of this site was built and mantained through idiots being made to feel uncomfortable.

Kind of like life really.

[Drocca]

I injest over 70% of my baseball via radio. John Sterling does everything well and some things, well many things, that I wish other announcers would just fucking do --- like, say, desribe the play.

He's good. Is his team a top five broadcasting team? Not in my opinion, but that speaks more to the quality of radio broadcasts right now than it does his own skill. He is very good at his job.

Do I like listening to him? No, because he's the Yankees announcer and I shouldn't like listening to him or I'm hardwired not to.

Hopefully this makes sense. Like most issues; everyone in this discussion with an informed opinion, which is two maybe three people tops, is correct and just shitty at explaining themselves. Except Yammer. He gets it but doesn't show the requisite contempt for Sterling that he should for reasons beyond his announcing, namely, the team he announces for. They suck. I hate them. Fuckers.

[Drocca]

I really hope there weren't too many commas in that post because while I'm may be drunk I'm fucking working on it.

,

[Seven Costanza]

And I guess this gets to my bigger point. These Sterling "errors" seem to suffer from fans not really getting the game, not really seeing the play as well as they perceive. So much of these perceived flaws are really non-existent, as silly as they were to begin with.

I really don't have a dog in this race per se, but the preceding quote caught my eye. Yammer, if the fans don't 'see' the play as well as they perceive it on the radio, whose fault is that? In my book, it would be the announcer for not being more clear, concise and accurate. The only way a fan would get an unclear 'picture' of the play over the radio is through shoddy announcing that leaves much open to interpretation.

Just my two cents; I could be reading this all wrong too.

[AlNipper49]

Sterling has grown on me. I do think he gets a bum rap around here -- he's biased but no more so than Remy. (Waldman and Kay are embarrassments to their profession, on the other hand).

I think that he could be more specific at times - and it does get annoying - but I get annoyed with every announcer/whatever at times. I think he does an adequate job describing the game and does an above average job adding color to the game. It's all what you're looking for and some folks will like announcers, some folks won't and some folks won't care either way.

[CrackpotTheory]

This thread is much more interesting than listening to Sterling, so all I have is this, which I thought funny:

Can you tell Robinson Cano and Jose Molina apart? Apparently John "I Am Legend" Sterling cannot. In the midst of the eighth inning rally today, he started with his "Robbie Cano, don't you know" and "a ribbie from Robbie" bullshit when the Yanks scored the go ahead run. The only trouble was that Jose Molina was the hero with his two out double.

Too bad we have an announcer more concerned with his self-made legacy than with calling a good game. What a dick.

Oh, and he has a blog named after him: http://johnsterling.blogspot.com/

[Foulkey Reese]

Sorry budzo. This may happen once in a blue moon but it is about that frequent. The guy doesn't pump the drama overboard on routine plays nor does h make safe/out mistakes like that. He will absolutely say that a player looked safe but was called out, he will refer to something as a bang bang play and then dissect it, but your phrasing doesn't happen.

It absolutely does happen and judging by this thread and the articles and blogs linked I'm not the only one who notices.

Sterling is a decent announcer with a near perfect radio voice, but there is no doubt that he flubs some calls more often that he should and sometimes gives a poor description of what's going on. I can't imagine that anybody who listens to him frequently would disagree with that.

Really. You really listen to a game, remember the specific routine play and then watch it later? Let's be honest here, you are making this up. It's cool. Don't sweat it, we don't know your real name.

Why is this so hard to believe? I have NESN/YES/ESPN going on my TV anytime I'm sitting in front of it, so there are a lot of times I see a highlight reel or a replay and notice that a play didn't happen how Sterling called it.

Sometimes it's as simple as Sterling saying "Jeter rips a line drive single in right!" and coming home to see Jeter hit a weak ground ball that finds a hole. Sometimes it's "ITS A TEXT MESSAGE FROM MAAA....oh....I guess Adan Jones caught it...wow how about that?" only to see a ball that hit the ground and bounced into the stands for a double.

Does this happen every single day? No, but it definitely happens enough for myself and many others to notice it.

Edited by Foulkey Reese, 23 May 2009 - 09:56 AM.

[Cuzittt]

No, this site really isn't. This site has always weeded out the shitty posters by calling bullshit on them. I know that the last 2-3 years crappy posters have come in and clung to this concept of this site being the best baseball site and hoping that dopes will maintain order, but the quality of this site was built and mantained through idiots being made to feel uncomfortable.

OK, then. I suppose we can then use the same tactics on you. Doubt it will work however... even though the only person who is looking like an idiot in this thread is you.

Here is the rub. You have a subjective opinion about radio announcers and what works for you. You like your radio announcers to have a good voice and good delivery. I won't go as far as saying you don't care about accuracy, but I do think it is fair to say that you like a good narrative flow even if it gets in the way of complete accuracy. All of which is fine. You like Sterling because he has a great radio voice. He does. You like Trupiano because he is smooth. It's your opinion, it isn't wrong. You certainly are not an idiot for having this opinion.

BUT, it is an opinion. Others, because they have different subjective criteria will disagree with your opinions. This does not make these people idiots, it makes them different from you.

However, instead of acknowledging this... or even simply saying I disagree... you get into your lovely debating style which is to call everyone who disagrees with your opinion an idiot. Well, guess what, they aren't. Simply because you can't believe that Sterling can make egregious errors like, well, making shit up to sell a better narrative doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Perhaps if a single poster was telling you this, you could get away with your idiot defense. But... it isn't one. In fact, it is a good number of people. Yankees fans and Red Sox fans. Members of SoSH and outside sources. I tend to believe the wisdom of the crowd here... Sterling misses some shit.

Now, even if you acknowledge this point... it probably wouldn't change your opinion about Sterling. However, if you acknowledge this point might be true... would it not give you more perspective into why certain posters here dislike him? If you are into accuracy more than narrative... it is hard to fathom liking a guy who makes shit up.

[Aside - I don't listen to a lot of Sterling. I have no opinion on his game calling abilities from an accuracy standpoint. You may very well be correct that his errors are overreported and overscrutinized. But, you have not refuted the reports. You have simply waved them away by saying no one could possibly remember his exact bad call after seeing a replay later... or going back to a DVR. But, I know I have heard calls on the radio only to see the play later and be very confused because the play I saw did not fit what was said on the radio. Which doesn't even get into the people who watch the game with the sound down on the tv and the radio turned on.]

You are correct that often the best way to get really bad posters to shape up is to show them the errors in their way. But, these errors are usually objective errors. You can actually use stats or other data to show them to be wrong. IF there are objective errors in the statements being made, you have not convinced me of them. As for the subjective opinion on whether Sterling is a good announcer... a person simply can't be wrong if they disagree with you.

And while I expect you will continue to "smack down" all the "idiots" on this site, I can't see why anyone would take your smack seriously after this abortion of a thread.

[johnmd20]

You are an idiot. A complete and utter fool.

I appreciate you showing me the error of my ways. Frankly, I am surprised you have taken the time and energy to speak with someone so utterly idiotic. It's an honor to have been slapped around by you, sir.

If Sterling was making the call from the booth about this conversation, it would go something like this. . . .
===========================
JS: So up to the plate steps Rick Burlesons Yam Bag. Yam is a stellar season, a very talented player who leads by example and production, as he's hitting a very solid .207 with 2 homers and 3 runs batted in in 105 at bats. And that doesn't even begin to tell the story of his intangibles.

SW: Right you are John.

JS: And here's the pitch, oh a curveball, just outside.

[to the viewer watching from home, it was a blazing fastball, over the backstop and onto 161st street]

JS: And the 0-1 pitch. . . .is in there for a called strike, the count is 1-1.

SW: It's amazing how comfortable RBYB looks at the plate, he's surely one of the better signing's of the Hal Steinbrenner era.

JS: Without a doubt Suzyn, if he were to leave the lineup, I'm not sure how they would ever replace his production. . . .and here's the pitch and it's a bomb flyball to right. . . .IT IS HIGH. . . .IT IS FAR, IT IS GOOOOONE, A HOME RUN. SLICK RICK DOES THE TRICK WITH HIS STICK AND IT WAS SICK!!!!

[to the viewer watching from home, it was a line drive down the line that barely cleared the wall]

Anyway, good show. . . .

[Rick Burlesons Yam Bag]

OK, then. I suppose we can then use the same tactics on you. Doubt it will work however... even though the only person who is looking like an idiot in this thread is you.

Here is the rub. You have a subjective opinion about radio announcers and what works for you. You like your radio announcers to have a good voice and good delivery. I won't go as far as saying you don't care about accuracy, but I do think it is fair to say that you like a good narrative flow even if it gets in the way of complete accuracy. All of which is fine. You like Sterling because he has a great radio voice. He does. You like Trupiano because he is smooth. It's your opinion, it isn't wrong. You certainly are not an idiot for having this opinion.

BUT, it is an opinion. Others, because they have different subjective criteria will disagree with your opinions. This does not make these people idiots, it makes them different from you.

However, instead of acknowledging this... or even simply saying I disagree... you get into your lovely debating style which is to call everyone who disagrees with your opinion an idiot. Well, guess what, they aren't. Simply because you can't believe that Sterling can make egregious errors like, well, making shit up to sell a better narrative doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Perhaps if a single poster was telling you this, you could get away with your idiot defense. But... it isn't one. In fact, it is a good number of people. Yankees fans and Red Sox fans. Members of SoSH and outside sources. I tend to believe the wisdom of the crowd here... Sterling misses some shit.

Now, even if you acknowledge this point... it probably wouldn't change your opinion about Sterling. However, if you acknowledge this point might be true... would it not give you more perspective into why certain posters here dislike him? If you are into accuracy more than narrative... it is hard to fathom liking a guy who makes shit up.

[Aside - I don't listen to a lot of Sterling. I have no opinion on his game calling abilities from an accuracy standpoint. You may very well be correct that his errors are overreported and overscrutinized. But, you have not refuted the reports. You have simply waved them away by saying no one could possibly remember his exact bad call after seeing a replay later... or going back to a DVR. But, I know I have heard calls on the radio only to see the play later and be very confused because the play I saw did not fit what was said on the radio. Which doesn't even get into the people who watch the game with the sound down on the tv and the radio turned on.]

You are correct that often the best way to get really bad posters to shape up is to show them the errors in their way. But, these errors are usually objective errors. You can actually use stats or other data to show them to be wrong. IF there are objective errors in the statements being made, you have not convinced me of them. As for the subjective opinion on whether Sterling is a good announcer... a person simply can't be wrong if they disagree with you.

And while I expect you will continue to "smack down" all the "idiots" on this site, I can't see why anyone would take your smack seriously after this abortion of a thread.

This is a really boring post, but I will respond. And as I have already gone on the record as saying that you really are awful for this site as both poster and dope I won't bother repeating it.

There is a pretty significant body of internet work criticizing radio announcers. Google quickly and you will find screeds written about every announcer the game and how he or she is awful. And the repeated criticism is this perceived "accuracy" item, which started up when Bill Simmons started publicly attacking Jerry Trupiano for perceived home run call errors. So this stuff is not only non-original thought, not only is it a cruddy way of analyzing announcers, but in addition it merits attacking if people are using it as their measure of worth.

The issue of accuracy has become the "Mike from the Life commercials dying from Pop Rocks" of the last 5 years. We have a thread of people saying that they listen to Yankee games and then go back to watch them later and they find mistakes. Does that not set off any bullshit detector for you? If not, Lemmy from Motorhead would certainly take your case to the Valhalla of Rock and revoke your contract with Satan. Have you noticed that no one said "I listen to the radio while I watch the game?" I do that all the time (it's my primary method for watching games on mlbtv.com). I have never noticed Sterling being all that inaccurate. A homer? Absolutely. But not inaccurate.

I provided an objective method for assessing the quality of announcers. Listen to some games. If you want to just come into a thread and pile on to a decent announcer or writer without being called on it then maybe there is a great site for that. Calling out bullshit is not a bad thing kids.

[Rick Burlesons Yam Bag]

I appreciate you showing me the error of my ways. Frankly, I am surprised you have taken the time and energy to speak with someone so utterly idiotic. It's an honor to have been slapped around by you, sir.

If Sterling was making the call from the booth about this conversation, it would go something like this. . . .
===========================
JS: So up to the plate steps Rick Burlesons Yam Bag. Yam is a stellar season, a very talented player who leads by example and production, as he's hitting a very solid .207 with 2 homers and 3 runs batted in in 105 at bats. And that doesn't even begin to tell the story of his intangibles.

SW: Right you are John.

JS: And here's the pitch, oh a curveball, just outside.

[to the viewer watching from home, it was a blazing fastball, over the backstop and onto 161st street]

JS: And the 0-1 pitch. . . .is in there for a called strike, the count is 1-1.

SW: It's amazing how comfortable RBYB looks at the plate, he's surely one of the better signing's of the Hal Steinbrenner era.

JS: Without a doubt Suzyn, if he were to leave the lineup, I'm not sure how they would ever replace his production. . . .and here's the pitch and it's a bomb flyball to right. . . .IT IS HIGH. . . .IT IS FAR, IT IS GOOOOONE, A HOME RUN. SLICK RICK DOES THE TRICK WITH HIS STICK AND IT WAS SICK!!!!

[to the viewer watching from home, it was a line drive down the line that barely cleared the wall]

Anyway, good show. . . .

I'm pretty psyched to have 3 jacks on the season, but you would have thought the would have mentioned the 116 HBP that I have. I'm all about team, like the fat kid from Bad News Bears.

[ILikeIke]

Summers just played the following Sterling call on the FAN:

against Detroit from last year:

JS: Lazy fly ball to center field, Abreu is there... and he makes the catch... (crowd cheering) I'm sorry, that ball is gone. He hit a home run... I completely lost track of the ball.