Quote:
Originally Posted by Boreal
The title of this video is as accurate as Oiler fans intellect.
|
There are two memos at Sportsnet for on air talent, be it commentators or panel members.
1)Work McDavid and his skills, smarts, work ethic, into anything that remotely seems relevant. If he's done nothing all period, talk about how he does the little things away from the puck or motivates teammates through preservering after a tough shift, but it shows his hard work and commitment, or that his mere presence distracts the other team who are so focused on him as a threat so a plug on the 3rd line gets more ice. A guy like Draisital is just as potent and scores just as much, but gets 1/5 the air time McDavid does.
I've noticed too that both Cassie and Botteril have been given the panel role of being the people to shoehorn McDavid into a conversation the last few weeks, so it's clear they want to enhance their credibility by fawning over McDavid (while it's doing the opposite) and also having a different voice sing his praises rather then McLean or Amber all the time.
2)Go to similar lengths to paint Tkachuk as a villain and focusing on his failures and to keep the praise to a minimum. First really noticed it this year when Hughson did a game a month or so ago. His eyes were on Tkachuk, if he fell "he was trying it draw a penalty" and then when confusion on who got a delayed penalty immediately elicited "Is it on Tkachuk?" and Hughson's voice and tone of distain was clear a few addional times, attention that no other player got. And if he makes a good play, the commentators are quick to praise the other players that also made a play on the sequence in question, and sheepishly give MT any credit ...so the title of this video is a clear sign on the bias, whether it be real (maybe MT has shunned giving Snet the interviews it wants?) or for Snet to so desperately want a villian like a heel WWF character.