Join 3,557 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Is Univision's coverage of the World Cup, like, way better than ESPN's
June 25, 2002 5:24 PM   Subscribe

Is Univision's coverage of the World Cup, like, way better than ESPN's or what?
posted by brookish (16 comments total)

 
sounds like it. Not sure what the hell Univision is though.
posted by howa2396 at 5:52 PM on June 25, 2002


I agree. Univision is a lot more fun. Also, the screen is much less cluttered with unrelated scores and ads for upcoming curling tournaments and whatnot.
posted by muckster at 5:56 PM on June 25, 2002


The nation's largest Spanish language network, competing with NBC-owned Telemundo.

Brookish - The World Cup is still going on? I thought that everything stops when the USA loses...
posted by PrinceValium at 5:57 PM on June 25, 2002


Do they schedule games for one channel, move them to another, make no significant announcements, and screw everybody with a PVR or VCR? If not, then they are already leagues above ESPN.
posted by benjh at 6:05 PM on June 25, 2002


The announcers on Univision love the sport, they adore its moments, its human passions. The ESPN guys, in contrast, sound clinical and cold, like medical examiners attending a dissection. I prefer to watch the Univision broadcast because the excitement is infectious - like the sounds of hearing the crowds roar.

I'm tempted to add that its a Latin vs. U.S thing. The Spanish announcers will make very personal comments about the players - the kind of stuff you wont hear English commentators make on hockey or any other sport. Examples like "He's obviously faking his fall. Poor cry-baby!", "Man, that guy has a big-nose!" etc. Its funny, if sometimes cruel.
posted by vacapinta at 6:07 PM on June 25, 2002


I live in a very heavily Latino neighborhood, and I can keep track of every soccer game with the TV off and every door and window closed. The roar and excited Spanish as each play comes to a head from next door and across the street is deafening.
posted by majick at 6:09 PM on June 25, 2002


i thought espn didn't even air the first round live (nor every game for that matter).
what's the best thing on television at 4am saturdays?sabado gigante, baby!
posted by elle at 6:49 PM on June 25, 2002


I watched the Brazil/England match at a place that had ESPN on the main two tvs. A third out of the way tv had the Univision broadcast on. Univision was about 20 seconds ahead of the ESPN broadcast. It was interesting to watch a goal and then turn around and watch a crowd of people, knowing that in about 15 seconds they would burst out yelling. Is univision's set up always slightly ahead of espn?
posted by gluechunk at 7:00 PM on June 25, 2002


I don't speak Spanish, but I'd still have to agree.

I find the picture to be brighter and clearer (odd, since I thought everyone used the same feed-- I guess this shows my ignorance about broadcasting) and I also hear less asinine commentary. Or, at least, if there is more, I can't understand it.

It was interesting to watch a goal and then turn around and watch a crowd of people, knowing that in about 15 seconds they would burst out yelling.
This happened to me watching the Rice-UT college world series game; I was sitting outside, watching through a window, listening to the radio feed. Hear about a home run and then three seconds later see everyone inside jump up. Ah, good times... more entertaining than the game (if only because Rice lost).
posted by nath at 7:06 PM on June 25, 2002


ESPN is running a 7-second delay so that they can post-process and add in their goofy scroller graphics and all that.
posted by donkeymon at 9:20 PM on June 25, 2002


Dunno, last few World Cups, I would find a nice non Anglo bar to watch the games as I find watching them with a crowd is a grand ole time but due to the times these are being shown, I tend to watch the ESPN ones and I must say, the commentary has improved a buttload.

In the previous ones, some Yank prattling on, explaining what an offside trap was, behooved me. A Lot. Now, the guys know what they are talking about (although the American tendency to love stats is a bit weird. I've never seen time of possession broken down so nicely.......not that it means anything) and they do bring a love and joy of the game to my room.

So, I think ESPN is doing a bang up job and I expect them to get better with the next one.
posted by Dagobert at 1:31 AM on June 26, 2002


There's nothing universal about shouting "Goooooaaaaalllll!!!!!" with every score. I always loved David Coleman's understated "One Nil!" for the first goal.
posted by salmacis at 2:04 AM on June 26, 2002


The two Irish guys on ESPN are ridiculous. I'm just afraid that many Americans will think these guys, being on ESPN, actually know their shit. They don't.
Just one example: one of them is obsessed by Turkish striker Hakan Sukur, he's always talking about what a great player Sukur is. Well, Sukur couldn't score a single goal in 5 games, he's slower than a dying elephant, and the Turks back home are waiting for him to come back so they can lynch him or something (Turkey just lost against Brazil, 0-1: Sukur of course sucked)

Anyway, it's useful to watch ESPN if you like soccer, they have the goods. But turn the sound off, please please please
posted by matteo at 6:46 AM on June 26, 2002


Jack Edwards sucks and the two Irish guys suck, but J.P Dellacamera and Ty Keogh are both pretty good analysts.

Even though I have problems with ESPN (aforementioned announcers, 1/6 of the screen obfuscated by a sports ticker, etc.), it is way less annoying than Univision. The Univision guys go absolutely ass crazy whenever someone (especially if they are on a latino team) makes a good pass, much less a good goal. I can't handle that kind of enthusiasm in the mornings.
posted by catatonic at 7:04 AM on June 26, 2002


I used to watch ESPN in Asia and their football coverage was the poorest I've seen. For many of the matches the commentators were in the studio commentating on the TV pictures. As they weren't particularly knowledgeable about football and they weren't at the ground, their commentary added nothing - where did they get them from? UK hospital radio stations have more knowledge and enthusiasm than these jokers.
posted by niceness at 7:31 AM on June 26, 2002


Not only were the play calling on Univision better than ESPN, their full coverage of the World CupTM as a whole was much better than NBC, CBS, etc. major network's coverage of similar global sporting events from foreign countries. Even though Univision is an 'American' Hispanic network, it seems their coverage philosophy is a bit more global than the other 'American' 'American' networks. Moving over to MLS/ESPN even dulled the edge Veronica Paysse had while working at Univision.

Some memorable moments from the full coverage (in random order):Annoying ESPN moments (also in random order):I don't think the time of possession and shots on goal stats are an 'American' invention. I remember seeing them in European feeds from Spain '82 and Mexico '86.
posted by tamim at 7:31 AM on June 26, 2002


« Older Brazil is in some trouble....  |  Captain America - Black Man.... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments