Most Unintentionally Funny Headline Ever
ESPN: "If the winner of the Tour de France cheated, can we trust anyone again?"
Welcome to 2006, pal.
Welcome to 2006, pal.
posted by Todd Martin at 4:57 PM
posted by Todd Martin at 4:57 PM
7 Comments:
I didn't even think it was that funny, just sad, especially since it's from the "worldwide leader in sports." Besides, it's cycling, nobody will care even if EVERY cyclist is doping as long as Lance Armstrong isn't.
Speaking of ESPN, did anyone else find it ridiculous how the "Worldwide Leader" completely ignored baseball analyst Harold Reynolds' dismissal as a news items on shows like "PTI", "Around the Horn", etc.?
I understand the personnel issue and why the ESPN suits didn't discuss it publicly, but for the network to act like Reynolds just disappeared and no one would notice is a little hypocritical. ESPN makes such a thing out of creating "stars" and then cruises right past one of their more popular dudes getting axed.
If I recall, the same didn't happen at ESPN when NBC had to deal with the Marv Albert's antics years ago.
Thoughts?
- Matt in Anchorage
I'm pretty sure the ESPN headline was sarcasm since doping in cycling is as common as steroid in Vince McMahon's body.
As for the Reynolds thing, I'm sure the threat of litigation and the fact that sexual harassment cases must be kept very confidential means that discussing it on public air is prohibited.
Reynolds is dreadful at what he does so I'm glad he's gone. If only he could take Steve Phillips, John Kruk and Buster Olney with him. Anyway, they also kept quiet when Mike Tirico was accused of a several cases of harassment several years back.
Gary Miller also urinated on cops off a balcony and may or may not have been in possession of drugs. Like Tirico, no story and no serious disciplinary action.
I would like to think the headline was meant as sarcasm too, but I don't think it was based on the context of the article. Odd as it is to me, it seems the predominant view in this country is still that Lance Armstrong was always clean and just the victim of a conspiracy to taint his name.
I've always liked Harold Reynolds. I think he's smart, knows his stuff, and isn't as much of a blowhard as a lot of people in the ESPN family. I also have fond memories of him playing briefly for the Orioles before the end of his career. I don't think his firing is that big of a deal to where anyone would need to cover it. He's just a baseball analyst. He's nowhere near the profile of Alberts, so it's more of a story just because it's sexual harassment, and as Phil points out, ESPN has a sordid history in that regard. I give him the benefit of the doubt for now, but I have no tolerance for sexual harassment, so I may change my mind when I know more.
As far as the likes of Phillips, Kruk and Olney, you'll get no disagreement from me there. Phillips is okay, Kruk is dreadful and obnoxious, and Olney has always struck me as a guy that doesn't know what he's talking about.
ESPN: The Unauthorized History is a great read for a lot of the various problems that came about as ESPN was developing over the years. It's a very odd companion piece to the Big Show by Olbermann and Patrick, which is a tremendously fun read and much more sunny. No SportsCenter anchor will ever touch Olbermann in my mind. Sarcasm has become a staple of SC since then, but Olbermann is one of the few who pulled it off with some actual wit. I miss him doing sports, although he wouldn't have as many opportunities to undress O'Reilly if he kept that job, so it's not all negative.
You're right, Olbermann riding O'Reilly never gets old.
I guess I'm just fascinated with the way ESPN operates, making supposed stars/star vehichles, hyping them to no end (Stephen A. Smith, crappy movies like "Hustle", etc.) and then giving no credence to why the people/things fall off the face of the planet in a matter of moments.
All I'm syaing is this: if Tim McCarver left Fox in a similar situation/allegation, I'm convinced it would be a lead topic on most ESPN's shows.
- Matt in Anchorage
Oh, I'm totally with you as far as the way ESPN operates. But as far as Reynolds leaving, I don't think it's such a big story that it *has* to be covered as a news story. Obviously ESPN isn't running it for other reasons, but I think that is justifiable because the story itself isn't that important.
Post a Comment
<< Home