Even WORSE, are ex players that do the interviewing. Cassie Campbell is probably the absolute horibblest. She asks questions, using the cliched phrases.
"Is it gut check time now that your behind the 8-ball?"
"Did the momentum swing, change the chemistry in the room?"
"Did giving it 110% mean you brought your A-game"
"Was his Gutsy performance a catalyst for the troops to look in the mirror and take accountability for the lack of compete level in those hard areas covering all 200 feet of the ice in the competitors barn?"
She's. The. Worst.
Followed closely by Scott Oake. He's the master of the awkward interview.
One of his many gems...
Scott Oake: Dustin Penner scores for the Oilers in the first period, Dustin a lot of talk about how you're in the best physical condition of your time as an Oiler but what you say, uh, is really changed is your mental approach, how so?
Dustin Penner: I guess it has to do with the atmosphere I'm in now. You know, everybody got a clean slate with the new coaching staff and you tend to get one with the new year as well. And I've been taking advantage of it and using it as an opportunity to learn from new coach. I think positive attitudes are contagious and there's a lot of them in this room right now.
Oake: Well you are lighter, are you prepared to say what diet adjustments you made to, uh, lose some weight?
Penner: You guys haven't been paying attention, I've said it enough.
Oake: Not on network TV
Penner: Not on network? CBC isn't a network?
Oake: Well you haven't said it to us.
Penner: Oh. Okay. I guess it was everything in moderation. Right? I've already said the wheat or barley based drinks. So, that's the key, I'm going to write a book.
Oake: Fair enough. Maybe you can start selling that diet.
Penner: Are you going to buy it?
Oake: No, not a chance.
The Following User Says Thank You to Zevo For This Useful Post:
I think the guy who used the impressive word makes the best point; everybody that speaks their own mind/tells the truth gets absolutely roasted. To be able to speak your own mind, you have to have a serious case of DGAF - something which I imagine is hard to keep up when you're mid-way through a game or practice or whatever.
Best guy for this is a British Cyclist called Mark Cavendish; few years ago an interviewer asked "so who's the best sprinter in the world right now?", and Cavendish replied with "me".
Media went mental. Attempted to ostracise him, until a few days later he made the media look like fools said something along the lines of "well you asked the question and you got the correct answer, what's your problem?". Didn't get any bother after that.
I guess it's different in a team sport as blaming a player on your side can obviously cause problems but.. even something like "well, their keeper has been pretty poor recently so we hope to capitalise on that lack-of-form" just opens up many more avenues for conversation.
__________________
Anders Rasmussen's biggest fan
The Following User Says Thank You to Samuelsson For This Useful Post:
I find hockey to honestly be the worst with this type of thing. The reason being is they will grab a player for about 2 minutes as he is just about to go into the dressing room between periods. There is not much a player can really provide in this short a time frame and when the questions are so pointed as well. I'm not sure why other sports operate the way they do in terms of interview style and delivery. This isn't a knock against Canada but it will sure seem like one.
In other popular sports such as Football (soccer), Tennis, and Formula 1, the interviews occur after the action (and not inside the locker room). I find this gives the athlete some time to get more relaxed, actually think about their answers and give more than 10 seconds of "we need to work harder and not give away as many turnovers and start putting the puck in the net more." Those answers are boring and do nothing for me in terms of player likeability. I can't remember the last time I payed attention to player interviews during period breaks.
This gives the athlete a chance to give long winded, honest answers. If you want to have a look at how honest some athletes are watch some of Andy Roddick's interviews. He's probably one of the most honest and articulate athlete's out there.
Anyways, rant over for me. I can't stand a hockey broadcasts interview method, nevermind the cliche answers.
I think both players and fans could benefit a thing or two from having a few players answer questions post game outside the locker room rather than just the coach being the mouthpiece for the team, as much as Hartley delivers pure gold with every word.
I'm not big on watching wrestling, in fact I can't remember the last time I watched it but they can give the best interviews. This is where Ali learned to spout off by watching Gorgeous George.
Quote:
"I saw 15,000 people comin' to see this man get beat. And his talking did it. I said, 'This is a gooood idea!'" In the locker room afterward, the seasoned wrestler gave the future legend some invaluable advice: "A lot of people will pay to see someone shut your mouth. So keep on bragging, keep on sassing and always be outrageous."[1]
[QUOTE
Last edited by Vulcan; 03-23-2015 at 06:41 AM.
The Following User Says Thank You to Vulcan For This Useful Post:
I can sit and listen to Pat Steinberg and Rob Kerr chase each others tails all afternoon
Speaking of that, boy do these 2 give me a headache together. They both want so badly to talk over each other but are also too afraid to have a disagreement to have any genuine discussions, and end up agreeing on pointless platitudes.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by JobHopper
The thing is, my posts, thoughts and insights may be my opinions but they're also quite factual.
The Following User Says Thank You to saillias For This Useful Post:
Major bonus points to Bollig for his "get the ketchup bottle flowing" answer.
I forgot about that, hahaha.
There's no way he doesn't read CP. That was around the time that one of the PGTs turned into an argument about ketchup and was full of hot dog gifs. No way it was a coincidence.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by CroFlames
Before you call me a pessimist or a downer, the Flames made me this way. Blame them.
I know what you're saying, but, meh, I personally don't care too much what their personality is like. I watch them because I like watching hockey. They could all be mute for all I care.
I think the only interviews I remotely enjoy are locker room celebrations. Guys tend to let it all hang out with pressure all released. Can make for some unpredictable stuff!
Was this an intentional Darren McCarty PPV post game reference?
I find it a lot easier to cheer for a team of good people rather than a team with a few ****** bags on it like the Canucks.
Honestly the biggest d-bags are sometimes the most interesting interview. Roenick is a d-bag. Roy is too. Kevin Bieksa is obviously a total ###### but this was hilarious. http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-pu...lkA1lIUzAwMl8x
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
Last edited by CorsiHockeyLeague; 03-23-2015 at 10:30 AM.
Even WORSE, are ex players that do the interviewing. Cassie Campbell is probably the absolute horibblest. She asks questions, using the cliched phrases.
"Is it gut check time now that your behind the 8-ball?"
"Did the momentum swing, change the chemistry in the room?"
"Did giving it 110% mean you brought your A-game"
"Was his Gutsy performance a catalyst for the troops to look in the mirror and take accountability for the lack of compete level in those hard areas covering all 200 feet of the ice in the competitors barn?"
She's. The. Worst.
Impressive word... I had to look it up, which doesn't happen often on the internet.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Incogneto For This Useful Post:
I saw some special on TSN about players, media and their agents. They are trained to be boring. Just say pucks at the net and show no emotion, adlibbing is bad. They are told specifically to show as little as possible. Makes sense why the interviews suck. They can't say anything they are really thinking. Their lexicon is basically;
Pucks on net, lucky to be here, excited about the event, couldn't have done it without my team.
The Following User Says Thank You to AcGold For This Useful Post:
He was probably the most insightful and genuine Flames interview the media have had access to in years. He would actually think about his answers, and give you good insights about the game. I still remember last year when some reporter flippantly asked a question about how much Gaudreau needs to bulk up to succeed in this league. Most guys would've probably just nodded their head and gave a dumb cliche answer, but he went out of his way to say how he actually thinks that may not be something that is right for a shifty guy like Johnny, and that he should do what works for him.
He was a really smart representative and leader for this team, and I still wish the circumstances would've worked out for him to stay here. As good as Hudler has been for Johnny, I think Cammy would've possibly been even better.
I saw some special on TSN about players, media and their agents. They are trained to be boring. Just say pucks at the net and show no emotion, adlibbing is bad. They are told specifically to show as little as possible. Makes sense why the interviews suck. They can't say anything they are really thinking. Their lexicon is basically;
Pucks on net, lucky to be here, excited about the event, couldn't have done it without my team.
But why hockey. Players in other sports give good interviews without being controversial. Stars need to promote.
__________________
Watching the Oilers defend is like watching fire engines frantically rushing to the wrong fire
But why hockey. Players in other sports give good interviews without being controversial. Stars need to promote.
The culture of hockey is extremely conformist. Maybe it's a Canadian thing. The nail that sticks up gets pounded down.
With more Americans playing in the NHL, things might start to loosen up (it's no coincidence most of the best NHL interviews are Americans players). They have a different attitude towards athletes.
When I went to a 49ers game in the early 2000s, every second person at Candlestick had an Owens jersey. This was when Jeff Garcia was a pro-bowler, and yet I hardly saw any Garcia jerseys. They like their athletes to be entertainers down there.
I'm not saying everyone has to be Terrell Owens. But if the players association and agents are coaching the players to not say anything in interviews, why even have them? The players dislike them. They have no value to fans. Are interviews just a way to justify jobs for a few journalists?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by fotze
If this day gets you riled up, you obviously aren't numb to the disappointment yet to be a real fan.
The Following User Says Thank You to CliffFletcher For This Useful Post:
