These broadcasts are 'this close' to being really good....

[tomclen]

These ESPNU and ESPN2 broadcasts of regionals and now the finals are really close to being really good.

The camera work is excellent, especially in the finals. Multiple camera angles are outstanding. And, hey, they started both matches today on time...no missed points for a basketball broadcast.

But it's just mind boggling that they continue to make some very basic mistakes.

They're still missing serves. Frequently they would miss the serves at key points in the matches (and let's face it, when you get to this point, every point is key) because they tried to squeeze in a second angle of a replay. I understand if it happens once a set, maybe twice. But it's an ongoing, consistent problem. Is there no one in a position of authority who can say, 'People, serves are important. If you can't cut away from a replay in time to show the serve, then we will find another director who will.' How is it possible that some of these directors and the people above them can't seem to do this one basic thing. Show the ****ing serve. It's real simple. Baseball broadcasts NEVER miss the pitch. Football broadcasts never miss the kick. Don't miss the serve!

And then there is the commentary. For the love of God can you please talk about the action on the court. They consistently talk thru points and plays with a story about an earlier play or an earlier time or some anecdotal incident or Olmstead's 'stash. All those things are nice filler and color, but they have to take a back seat to the action on the court. At one point they went to the sideline reporter, who talked during a live play...and she was talking about earlier hitting errors. Meanwhile, as she's talking there was a BYU hitting error. But that never got mentioned.

It's almost as if they have their production meeting, and broadcast plan, and scripted items they need to cover, and the match itself just happens to be there in the background to support their pre-planned items.

And I'm sorry, I realize Karch is a volleyball legend and a great coach and, yes, he can offer some incredible insight, but he is the biggest offender of ignoring what's happening on the court. Ironically, I suspect he doesn't miss much of what's happening, but he just doesn't understand how to keep his on-air comments focused on what is happening in the match at that moment.

You can do all the filler and the sidebars and the human interest stories...which they do very well...but you can't do it at the expense of the actual play.

If they would just start with two simple iron-clad rules, these broadcasts would be outstanding:

1. Never miss a serve. Never. Ever.

2. When the ball is in play, talk only about what is happening on the court. Period.

My guess, however, is the wrong people are in place in the position of management and direction to make those two basics happen.

[badgerbreath]

They just don't have the rhythm of the game down. It's hard though. Hockey is as fast, or even faster, but there are frequent breaks when he puck goes out of play that allows the production crew to catch up. Soccer is continuous, but they find time to get replays in on throw-ins, or when nothing is really happening. Basketball is probably most similar, but there are frequent breaks when the ball goes out or subs are made. You don't get the sense that the understand the amount of time they have between serves in volleyball, or they can't seem to anticipate breaks, as when subs are coming in.

Karch actually has some good insight, but he is caught between being introducing the basics of the game to novices and explaining the finer points to more experienced watchers. I though it was hilarious when he was describing what a good pass was, and the play in front of him was a shank, which he was forced to point out was "not a good pass." He also seems loathe to correct Mowins, as on the double hit call which he clearly saw but Mowins thought was a block. He took his time getting to what actually happened.

[badgerbreath]

In short, I just think there is not enough experience covering volleyball matches in production crews to use the time right, or to come up with graphics that don't interfere. That's not going to change until more get covered.

[gb77]

Dec 19, 2014 1:13:30 GMT -5 badgerbreath said:

..there is not enough experience covering volleyball matches..

agree - too bad they won't hire the polish crews & hispeed HD replay cams - that was excellent VB viewing

[volleyfan24]

During the evenings first match they lost almost an entire play because they were showing old pictures of Sean Olmstead for who knows what reason it was ridiculous.

[mikegarrison]

Dec 19, 2014 1:11:11 GMT -5 badgerbreath said:

Soccer is continuous, but they find time to get replays in on throw-ins, or when nothing is really happening.

Some might say that this describes the vast majority of all soccer games.

[bc2016]

Every aspiring VB player should watch the Final Four and listen to the comments provided. Great learning experience.

[Wiswell]

So I complained to gobuckyspouse that it was a bit demeaning to open every broadcast with the rules of volleyball. The response was that I was being a volleyball snob. I responded that I barely know the rules of soccer (which can be said of most American not aged 12), and yet there is no series of dot points on those rules at the beginning of broadcasts. I know hockey rules; I assume they are similar and go with that.

Is it because it's primarily a women's game? If they assume we know something about soccer because we are watching it shouldn't they assume we know a bit about volleyball too.

And side out scoring has been gone for what, 12 years? Why do they keep referencing it is no longer done?

Nobody says the goal posts in football are no longer at the goal line.

That being said, I think the broadcasts are getting better. I like the overhead view, although I wish it were a little wider.

And how tall is Holly Rowe? I know she interviewed 6'2 Harmotto and Walsh, but they seemed a foot taller.

[sisyphus]

I can't think of any other televised sport that spends any time explaining the rules to the viewer. (But I haven't thought that hard.)

As for the "side out", shouldn't we have stopped talking about that when the rules changed to eliminate "innings", you know, back in 1900. (History of VB Rules PDF) Perhaps that point is pedantic, but I am tired of hearing talk about the scoring in general. The main idea behind changing the scoring system was so it could be understood by anyone watching so it didn't need explaining. We are ruining that in the US by explaining it anyway. Interesting to note that all-rally scoring has been in place since 1999. That's 15 years. Saying it that way makes it seem that talking about side out scoring on the air should be preceded by the phrase "back in my day".

The LIbero has been around since 1999 as well. I'm not sayin', I'm just sayin'.

[rockhopper]

What I notice is that when there is a replay of an awesome point, they almost always show the end of the play when someone gets the kill. Often, the remarkable part of the play was an amazingly athletic set that almost impossible or an unbelievable dig ending up as a perfect pass. But all they show is the kill at the end.

I'll start hollering to my family, "Oh man you've GOT to see this incredible set! Watch this!" Then the replay starts just after the set and we watch the kill. Meanwhile, we miss the next serve...

Recently we watched a televised match of North Dakota or South Dakota or some team from the Dakotas and the announcers were outstanding. It was more like a radio play by play. The announcers were two young guys and they were quite professional. They obviously had done their homework as they called the players on both sides of the net by name only occasionally referring to the visiting team by number. I'll have to ask my spouse which team we were watching.

[tomclen]

Here's the other thing that, for me anyway, is frustrating about the missed serves or the cutaway from a replay just as the server is hitting the ball: who the hell is serving?

If I'm watching a Washington match, I'm familiar enough with the team to usually remember who is next in rotation to serve.

But If I'm watching Texas or PSU or BYU, I have no idea who is next in rotation. So they cutaway from the replay, you see the server hitting the ball (if we're lucky), but who was it? And isn't that important?

I mean, Karch talks non-stop about the importance of serving tough and serving smart. So not only might you want to think about showing the damn serve, but maybe you could mention who is serving and let us see 2 to 3 seconds of the server's approach.

It seems like if it's someone like Hancock serving, they stop and make a big deal about it and talk about her serving states, etc. But most servers get no mention or get totally ignored and it's up to the viewer to figure out "who was that who just served?" or "I wonder who hit that ball that I'm now seeing zooming across the net?"

Several times during the second match Karch made a point of talking about match-ups and when Inky was in the front row and when she was out, but for the most part that important part of the game gets totally ignored as well.

[James]

I wouldn't mind the occasional missed serve if the replay they were showing us was always something worth seeing again. Most of the times it seems they're just showing us a replay for no other reason than because that's what they think they're "supposed" to do between points.

[Deleted]

I'm amazed that after all these years we STILL don't have a graphic showing rotations for each team. Karch talks about the rotations changing, but we never know the lineups.

And that goes to what tom is saying. If you have this graphic, and use it before each serve or before each new server, we have basic, vital info.

[coachk2]

Dec 19, 2014 1:11:11 GMT -5 badgerbreath said:

They just don't have the rhythm of the game down. It's hard though. Hockey is as fast, or even faster, but there are frequent breaks when he puck goes out of play that allows the production crew to catch up. Soccer is continuous, but they find time to get replays in on throw-ins, or when nothing is really happening. Basketball is probably most similar, but there are frequent breaks when the ball goes out or subs are made. You don't get the sense that the understand the amount of time they have between serves in volleyball, or they can't seem to anticipate breaks, as when subs are coming in.

Karch actually has some good insight, but he is caught between being introducing the basics of the game to novices and explaining the finer points to more experienced watchers. I though it was hilarious when he was describing what a good pass was, and the play in front of him was a shank, which he was forced to point out was "not a good pass." He also seems loathe to correct Mowins, as on the double hit call which he clearly saw but Mowins thought was a block. He took his time getting to what actually happened.

Well said.  Many things to like about ESPN's production values, but the play by play announcer (and the director) must absolutely understand the "rythym of the game".  I do both play by play and analysis for women's college volleyball - play by play is much, much harder.  According to my director from the 2010-2011 NCAA DIII championships on NCCA.com, you have approximately 8 seconds between serves.  That said, you must show and name every server in the match as well as talk about the play on the court while it is occurring, as tomclen said!  Replays and other human interest stuff must not take away from the actual live volleyball action.

It's very, very challenging to be an analyst if your play by play announcer does not really know volleyball (how many DI matches does she broadcast or attend during a season?).  Karch would have the opportunity to provide better analysis if he had a better play by play annnouncer (I laughed the year he had to correct her on the net height - no, it's not 8', only 7'-4").  I am available in 2015 for Omaha  - I just want that great courtside seat instead of where I was last night!

[tomclen]

I think replays is one of the things that many volleyball broadcasts get hung up on.

It's just not necessary to show a replay after every single point. And as was mentioned above, we usually only get to see the end of the point anyway, and often miss the serve-receive or the great dig or pass that set up the point.

When I attend a match in person, the arena shows replays on the big screen frequently. But I probably only look up at the screen two or three times per set. There are much more interesting things happening between plays - coaches reactions, subs, player interaction - than watching the replay.

There is no need to show a replay after every point...and certainly no need to show 2 angles of a replay, especially if you're going to miss the serve.