I've never been that excited about sports -- watching it OR doing it myself. I can think of 100 things I'd rather do than watch sports.
Still, I'll break the pattern once in a great while. Today was one example: we watched the Belmont Stakes. At least we like horses, so sometimes we'll watch horse-related sports.
But I was reminded of some reasons why I don't like television sports. The number one reason: the INANE and CONSTANT chatter!
When was the last time you heard anything intelligent spoken during a sports broadcast?
Commentator to losing team member: What happened today?
Team member: Well, the other team had a really strong offense, they were really on their game, they had some good moves; our team's defense was weak and had a few holes in our plays, but we'll come back even stronger and get 'em NEXT time.
Isn't all of that obvious? Didn't the winners simply play better than the losers, assuming the teams were evenly matched in the first place? What ELSE could the team spokesperson say to explain their loss? In which case, why bother interviewing the guy/gal in the first place?
Back to the Belmont: lots of interviews, lots of utterly forgettable comments made. Constant chatter. Do viewers really like this stuff? If so, why? Does drinking more beer make it all go down better? If viewers actually attended the race (or other event), they wouldn't hear the chatter then. Why bore us with it in the comfort of our homes?
And the Belmont Stakes at least a two-hour broadcast! Two-three minutes of racing, preceeded and followed by interviews and mindless blah-blah.
I realize a program like this probably can't function by airing only the race itself. OK, so maybe the trumpet fanfare, the race itself and the awarding of the trophy. Half an hour. If necessary, raise the advertising rates to make sure costs can be recovered in 1/2 hour. On TV, I've seen rooms decorated and paintings completed in that amount of time.
By the way, Summer Bird won. And I'm done watching TV sports for a long time.