Master Index of Archived Threads


No H****r

MFS62 Jul 27 2006 09:06 AM

Some announcers say the words "no hitter" while someone is still pitching one. Some don't because, respecting baseball tradition and superstition, they don't want to be the one who "jinxes" it. What are some of the expressions you've heard announcers use in place of those words to still let the listeners/ viewers know what's in progress? (Many of the telecast graphics I've seen only show the score, not the number of hits for each team) I remember Red Barber would say something like "there have been __ hits so far in the game and the __________ have all of them". Later

Yancy Street Gang Jul 27 2006 09:17 AM

I remember once turning on the radio and hearing Bob Murphy or Lindsey Nelson say, "Tom Seaver is pitching a no-hitter!" Tim McCarver would also say the forbidden word. And that's how it should be, for three reasons: 1. There's no such thing as a jinx. 2. Even if there was such a thing, it's their job to report, not to influence the outcome either way. 3. Since it's their job to report, they're not servicing their listeners by neglecting to share information.

metirish Jul 27 2006 09:25 AM

I agree with Yancy, and how many games have you watched that you didn't know yourself that the pitcher had a no hitter going?

MFS62 Jul 27 2006 09:42 AM

Didn't say whether they should or shouldn't. I just find it amusing that some announcers get into verbal gymnastics trying not to say it and was looking for some memorable/funny examples y'all have heard. Just trying to start something we can enjoy on an off-day. Later

Yancy Street Gang Jul 27 2006 09:44 AM

And I'm just sharing my opinion on the topic. As we've seen again and again, threads don't always unfold exactly the way the creator of the thread intends. How come you didn't put the words "All-Purpose" in front of the thread title, by the way? That seems to be in vogue lately.

MFS62 Jul 27 2006 10:02 AM

Yancy Street Gang wrote: How come you didn't put the words "All-Purpose" in front of the thread title, by the way? That seems to be in vogue lately. I try not to do that. I think the title, as written, conveys the theme of the thread. Later

seawolf17 Jul 27 2006 10:03 AM

Yancy Street Gang wrote: How come you didn't put the words "All-Purpose" in front of the thread title, by the way? That seems to be in vogue lately. I always thought the "Apropos Of Nothing" thread should just be called the All-Purpose All-Purpose Thread. I think the no-hitter jinx is always such a big whoop, but I always thought you had to be a fan of the team in order to jinx it. Therefore, announcers (in theory) couldn't do it, and, say, a fan posting "Joe Cubspitcher is throwing a no-hitter" forty-eight million times wouldn't do it either. But maybe that's just me.

ScarletKnight41 Jul 27 2006 10:03 AM

I prefer it when announcers don't use the term "No Hitter" when one is in progress. Aside from respect for baseball tradition, I appreciate the creativity that the better announcers display in explaining the situation to the listener without using the words.

Elster88 Jul 27 2006 10:32 AM

ScarletKnight41 wrote: I prefer it when announcers don't use the term "No Hitter" when one is in progress. Aside from respect for baseball tradition, I appreciate the creativity that the better announcers display in explaining the situation to the listener without using the words. What creativity are you looking for? There's only so many ways that an announcer can say that a pitcher hasn't given up a hit yet, and I don't really see how any one is necessarily more creative than another.

ScarletKnight41 Jul 27 2006 10:48 AM

I'll respectfully disagree. When an announcer can paint the picture of a no-hitter or a perfect game without using the words I find it to be a more satisfying listening experience.

Yancy Street Gang Jul 27 2006 10:53 AM

I'd rather they speak plainly. There's no need for the word to be forbidden.

Elster88 Jul 27 2006 11:11 AM

ScarletKnight41 wrote: I'll respectfully disagree. When an announcer can paint the picture of a no-hitter or a perfect game without using the words I find it to be a more satisfying listening experience. How else can an announcer paint the picture? "The pitcher hasn't given up a hit" "No Red has a hit." "No Red has reached base" "The pitcher hasn't allowed a base runner." These variations more satisfying than "The pitcher has a no-hitter going"?

ScarletKnight41 Jul 27 2006 11:17 AM

To me they are. Your mileage may vary.

Willets Point Jul 27 2006 02:35 PM

No Husher? - an anti-librarian ordinance No Hasher? - a diner hiring for waitresses but no cooks No Hatter? - March Hare sips tea alone No Healer? - Jaerock Lee fails to show up for crusade No Heller? - Catch 22 never gets written No Hitler? - Read Making History by Stephen Fry for an alternate history of a world without Hitler No Heater? - Put on a sweater No Hooter? - Chipper gets to keep more of his salary

Centerfield Jul 27 2006 03:05 PM

I like when announcers dance around the words. It makes it feel like they're one of us. And like I said before, I have no problem with homers, I don't like announcers who lack perspective. And I know logically superstition is silly. But it's part of what makes baseball fun. We all know rally hats don't do dick either...the fun is in wearing your hat like a fool and pretending it's helping your team.

TheOldMole Jul 28 2006 09:11 AM

I agree with Scarlet. I like dancing, and I like tradition. Waltz, anyone?

Elster88 Jul 28 2006 09:24 AM

Centerfield wrote: We all know rally hats don't do dick either... Some people don't know this.

Willets Point Jul 28 2006 11:32 AM

seawolf17 wrote: ="Yancy Street Gang"]How come you didn't put the words "All-Purpose" in front of the thread title, by the way? That seems to be in vogue lately. I always thought the "Apropos Of Nothing" thread should just be called the All-Purpose All-Purpose Thread. This sounds like a good idea for the next version since the current thread is reaching critical mass.

TheOldMole Jul 28 2006 01:10 PM

What makes critical mass?

Yancy Street Gang Jul 28 2006 01:32 PM

Offhand, I'd say somewhere between 500 and 1000 replies. When a thread gets that large, I think that it ought to be locked and restarted. That way the locked version can make its way to the offline archives.

MFS62 Aug 08 2006 10:37 AM

From Bob Raissman's column in today's Daily News. quote] Meltdown just plain Kay-razy Thinking before one speaks has never been a prerequisite for gaining employment as a sports radio talkie. In fact, some mouths are encouraged - in the name of ratings or buzz - to flap their yaps with no regard for truth, accuracy, or rationale. And yet, there are times when a talkie totally loses it. There is never shtick involved when a guy has purchased a one-way ticket to Insaneville. That's the city ESPN-1050's Michael Kay, who also is the TV voice of the Yankees on the Yankees Entertainment & Sports Network, visited Friday. Kay's meltdown (that's being kind) was triggered by the contention that baseball voices can jinx teams they work for. During the discussion, Kay was accused of putting the whammy on Chien-Ming Wang because he once informed viewers Wang was pitching a perfect game. The notion any announcer could put the kibosh on a no-hitter or perfect game, by alerting viewers to the fact one is in progress, is absurd. Still, it is one of those age-old superstitions some fans still believe in. Kay was right in taking issue with it. Unfortunately, he went about it the wrong way. And wrong is not nearly a strong enough word to describe the way he went about it. In essence, a caller - Jimmy - pushed the right button to set Kay off. He sent Kay to Wig City by simply saying it is against "baseball etiquette" for an announcer or analyst to even mention that a pitcher is working on a no-hitter or perfect game. Kay became extremely defensive and defiant. He flipped, going into a full scream/rant mode. Kay: "... Why shouldn't I say it (that a pitcher is throwing a no-hitter or perfect game)? Tell me Jimmy. Why?" Jimmy: "Because it's not baseball etiquette." Kay: "... Don't tell me it's baseball etiquette. It used to be etiquette to have black people as slaves. ..." You could hear Jimmy groan and the air going out of other listeners, too. Kay's inappropriate comparison was over-the-top. A few seconds later, he topped it. Kay: "Jimmy. Tell me why? Tell me why I can't say it." As if he was waving a red cape in a bull's face, Jimmy, again, parroted his "baseball etiquette" line. Kay: "That's a stupid, stupid thing to say. ... Baseball etiquette? There's a lot of rules that don't make sense. That's why there was Nazi Germany. Why did they march people into ovens? Well, that's what they told them to do ..." Even I'm not presumptuous enough to try explaining how Kay's mind (moving from no-hitters to "baseball etiquette" to slavery to Nazi Germany) was functioning on this occasion. Unless, of course, it was not functioning. So, never say "baseball etiquette" around Kay. Especially if his mouth starts to move. Or he's holding a bat. Or some other blunt object. See ya.

Later

Centerfield Aug 08 2006 12:02 PM

I'm thinking this needs its own thread. I can't believe Michael Kay still has a job. He has to be the dumbest person on TV/Radio. And that is saying something.

MFS62 Aug 08 2006 12:21 PM

Centerfield wrote: I'm thinking this needs its own thread. I can't believe Michael Kay still has a job. He has to be the dumbest person on TV/Radio. And that is saying something. We have a "So you think you're a sportswriter" thread. And I think we used to have one about sports broadcasters, but I couldn't find it. So I threw the comment about Kay here. Later

metirish Aug 08 2006 02:08 PM

WOW, that was way over the top from Kay, what a bollox he is.

Elster88 Aug 08 2006 03:07 PM

Seeing Michael Kay agree with my position...that the "rule" you shouldn't say the word no hitter is dumb superstition...makes me rethink it. Of course, I never equated it with the Holocaust.

Centerfield Aug 08 2006 03:22 PM

Your position is not wrong. Michael Kay is.

Edgy DC Aug 08 2006 03:29 PM

Two weeks ago, Ms. Edgy and I were dining with a friend of mine, her children, her mother and her grandmother. The friend had spent six months with her daughters in Mexico, and likes to mess with the dishes she enjoyed there, serving Chicken Mole on this occasion. After about the third time her great-grandmother siad "Well, I'm an American and I like American food, the precocious 13-year-old started in with boilerplate phrasings about "Just because you eat foreign food doesn't mean..." and "A lot of 'American' foods aren't actually... ." Her mother yelled from the kitchen that "We don't need a geography lesson, honey." I gave the chastened kid a look that said "It's cool. You're right, but today it isn't about being right, it's about being respectful." Don't run away from your perspective just because Kay is on your side. I imagine he drives on the right side of the street and locks his house at night also. That he backs up his opinion like an idiot doesn't make him wrong either. In this case, anyhow. But...sometimes, while we all know it's a superstion, it's harmless and fun to play along with, and respectful of tradition.and (more importantly) the gravity of the situation. Even if it isn't technically correcct.

Willets Point Aug 08 2006 03:31 PM

Chicken Mole is the Old Mole's cowardly cousin.

Elster88 Aug 08 2006 03:32 PM

]Don't run away from your perspective just because Kay is on your side. Well, I wasn't really. But thanks for the support.

Edgy DC Aug 08 2006 10:50 PM

That's why I'm here. That and to pay for the hamster food.