|
Post by lionsarm on May 11, 2009 23:20:49 GMT -5
if anyone didn't know. he mentioned that he almost didn't return. his junior season was soo tough on him mentally. esp having to step in for a departing all-american who had just the year before guided the team to a national championship. on top of that, the irvine team last year was on total rebuilding mode with four departing senior all americans.
regardless of the pressure, ammo just did not perform consistently. he almost did not return this past season opting to potentially start his career in europe.
i bet he and all uci fans are so glad he decided to return.
|
|
|
Post by cheeseburger on May 11, 2009 23:44:12 GMT -5
the ammerman that finished last season is not remotely close to the ammo that walked out of smith field house with a mvp trophy. the guy grew a ton, as a person & a volleyball player. good for him...
|
|
|
Post by quiksetz on May 12, 2009 10:22:56 GMT -5
anyone have any luck finding this interview online yet?
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on May 12, 2009 10:47:27 GMT -5
Legally it's not entirely clear whether the broadcaster is responsible or whether both the broadcaster and whoever says the word are jointly responsible. Also, it's not clear that when "!!!!###$$$!!!ing" is used in a context outside that of describing sexual activity whether it is really "indecent" according to the rules.
|
|
|
Post by BearClause on May 12, 2009 11:41:00 GMT -5
It was "This is F*&*(&*# awesome!"
|
|
|
Post by volleyballer4life on May 12, 2009 11:51:51 GMT -5
This whole thing blows my mind. Is it good for TV to have that slip through the cracks? Of course not. You're dealing with a 22-year old who was thisclose to not returning his senior year, only to bounce back, become a leader of the team, play the game of his life and beat a team that swept them 2 weeks earlier in an incredible 5-set thriller to win the national championship in the last match of his collegiate career. If you ask him at the peak of the excitement what he's feeling, a slip-up like that is obviously very possible.
I'm sure if he could do it over, for POLITICAL reasons he wouldn't have said that. I can tell you that personally I do not swear just for the sake of doing it, but there are certain moments where it's simply the only word that comes to mind that describes the situation.
Case in point: Going to family's for mother's day. driving on highway, see a car's front half torn to shreds as someone hit a barrier head-first. I proceed to say "holy $*&%" out loud with my 5 year old brother in the childseat behind me. I don't swear in front of him, it wasn't intentional, but it was my initial thought. Would I do it over again if I could? Yes. I can't though, so it is what it is (luckily I haven't heard a repeat of it since).
The intent of the word was not malicious on Ammo's part, give it a rest. If they want to fine ESPN for not having a 5-second delay, so be it. But make the decision and let's move on. Can't believe this is still being talked about 3 days later, instead we should be talking about what a great match it was!
|
|
|
Post by Cubicle No More ... on May 12, 2009 15:25:07 GMT -5
Will FCC fine ESPN or Ammerman for this moment? Just wondering...... If they go after anyone it would be ESPN. I believe there's a current court case about this very thing right now. the case before the US Supreme Court involves the major networks (and yes, it involves nipplegate, as well as other incidents, like Bono cursing on some awards show). but the issues there don't necessarily include cable networks (like ESPN), so at best, the issue here is unsettled. (for the moment at least...) for whatever reasons (mainly dealing with reach of audience/viewers), cable is held to a different standard than the big networks who are perceived to reach more children and families than cable (where, of course, you have to pay a premium in order to view). this incident won't draw the attention of the FCC so much than if it happened on ESPN's sister network, ABC ...
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on May 12, 2009 17:13:09 GMT -5
for whatever reasons (mainly dealing with reach of audience/viewers), cable is held to a different standard than the big networks who are perceived to reach more children and families than cable (where, of course, you have to pay a premium in order to view). The technical reason is that cable TV comes into your house by subscription, while broadcast TV is radiated in through the air. The assumption, interestingly, is that you can just unsubscribe from cable or satellite service any time you want, so it's your choice to let it come into your house. But apparently they assume you can not choose to not receive that broadcast TV transmission.
|
|
|
Post by ohiostatetad on May 12, 2009 20:25:46 GMT -5
anyone have any luck finding this interview online yet? Well, I recorded it to DVD and finalized it so I can put it on YouTube. Why the hell I can't figure it out on my PC is beyond me. When I try to upload it to YouTube, the DVD Drive lists a bunch of "Video_TS" files. I'm not getting this. If anyone knows what the heck to do, contact me. Oh, my editing sucks, but it's very funny.
|
|