Announcers talking about no-hitter during game

[Matthew]

A question after listening John Miller talking ad nauseum about Lilly pitching a possible no-hitter: In baseball, I make no bones about it, I am a traditionalist, and it bugs me to no end to have announcers talking about a no-hitter! I say: let tradition rule the airwaves! What does everyone else think?

[Neal Pomea]

I wasn't hearing Jon Miller or the game, but I always thought the tradition was for the team and the coaches to refrain from mentioning no-hitter while the game was in progress, not the TV and radio announcers. I have no problem with that at all. That's just doing the play by play. Even for Don Larsen's perfect game in the World Series, the announcers were giving the run down: No runs, no hits, no errors. They would have been remiss to not include that information after each at bat.

Edited June 14, 2010 by It Should be You

[Matthew]

I wasn't hearing Jon Miller or the game, but I always thought the tradition was for the team and the coaches to refrain from mentioning no-hitter while the game was in progress, not the TV and radio announcers. I have no problem with that at all. That's just doing the play by play. Even for Don Larsen's perfect game in the World Series, the announcers were giving the run down: No runs, no hits, no errors. They would have been remiss to not include that information after each at bat.

A lot of announcers don't mention a no hitter while it's in progress. During Mr. 209's perfect game, the Oakland announcers made a point of not mentioning the words "no hitter" and "perfect game."

[Dan Gould]

I'm with our resident Nats fan. Announcers should announce the pertinent facts about the game and to my mind, the "tradition" is that you don't mention it on the bench - or in the stands. That doesn't extend to the broadcast booth.

[sonnymax]

A lot of announcers don't mention a no hitter while it's in progress. During Mr. 209's perfect game, the Oakland announcers made a point of not mentioning the words "no hitter" and "perfect game."

Tradition, or superstition? A good announcer (increasingly rare these days) can highlight the drama of a situation like this without interfering with the course of the game. I mean, it's not like they're interviewing teammates during the game, after all. My biggest gripe is that too many sportscasters talk incessantly, ruining the tension normally created by brief periods of relative silence as the pitcher looks for the catcher's signals, eyes the base-runner, stares at the batter. In addition, you're visually bombarded with every statistic and TV special effect that's available. Remember, Miles said the space between the notes was as important as the notes themselves. The same applies to baseball, imo.

[Jazzmoose]

I dunno, when an announcer says "after seven, that's no hits, no runs, no errors", I figure I ought to be pretty attentive already if I'm a baseball fan. I don't need an announcer adding "see, the no hits part means it's a no-hitter!" to heighten the tension.

[Brad]

The announcers say they have to, for fans just tuning in, etc. I still prefer they don't but I understand that they need to.

[GregK]

I never had any opinion on it until Galaragga's perfect game (yes, it was a perfect game, despite the umpire), when by the 7th inning the radio announcers began pointing out that not only were there no hits, no runs, no baserunners, no walks, no errors, but it was a PERFECT GAME! I thought that they shouldn't be saying it. Just mention the usual box score-type updates and be done with it until it's official.

[GA Russell]

I agree with Matthew and Moose. The words "no-hitter" or "perfect game" should not be mentioned. That custom is part of the fun of being a baseball fan.

By the way, It Should Be You mentioned Don Larsen's perfect game. My parents had tickets to see My Fair Lady on Broadway that night, and they spent the day driving down to New York from Boston, listening the game! Some day!

[papsrus]

Seems like if it's the broadcast crew for the team pitching the no-hitter, they'll avoid using the term and speak more vaguely about "something special developing here," or words to that effect. For a nation broadcast though, I guess the "homer" factor is out the window and the announcer just describes what's happening.

So, if the broadcasters are pulling for a no-hitter, they'll only refer to it in general terms. If they're impartial, they should have not qualms about saying, "Lilly's got a no-hitter through seven innings in Chicago."

[GregK]

Seems like if it's the broadcast crew for the team pitching the no-hitter, they'll avoid using the term and speak more vaguely about "something special developing here," or words to that effect. For a nation broadcast though, I guess the "homer" factor is out the window and the announcer just describes what's happening.

So, if the broadcasters are pulling for a no-hitter, they'll only refer to it in general terms. If they're impartial, they should have not qualms about saying, "Lilly's got a no-hitter through seven innings in Chicago."

But that's not what happened in the Galaragga perfect game I just described two posts above. The Tigers announcers were clearly discussing a perfect game for at least 3 innings!

[Tim McG]

I'm with you, Matthew.

If the announcers want to talk about a no-no, then do it after the game is over. Have a blast and blab all you want, but don't jinx it during the game!

Edited June 16, 2010 by GoodSpeak

[Son-of-a-Weizen]

I think the announcers should try to keep their lip(s) buttoned. Coincidentally, I was rearranging the contents of my 'junk' drawer a few days ago and found this. Probably the only one I'll ever see. How many have there been since the 1950's? A hundred or so? I'm sure someone else here has seen one?

[Tim McG]

I had a ticket to the Jonathan Sanchez [of the Giants] no-no last summer.

We got into The City way late and I passed on it.

I still kick myself over it.

Grrr

Edited June 17, 2010 by GoodSpeak