Post by musicradio77 on Apr 5, 2005 19:00:11 GMT -5
From the Daily News:
YES Refuses to Spill Juice
Was Al Yankzeera, aka the Yankees Entertainment & Sports Network, airing the Yankees-Red Sox opener or another Jason Giambi press conference?
The question is certainly legit. During Giambi's four at-bats Sunday night neither play-by-play man Michael Kay nor analysts Jim Kaat or Paul O'Neill used the word "steroids" or dealt with Giambi's testimony to a grand jury that was leaked to the San Francisco Chronicle.
It is unlikely Kay, Kaat or O'Neill has a "steroids" clause in his contract. After all, during one spring training telecast, Kay and Kaat discussed Giambi's steroids situation. Unlike Giambi, using the "S" word would not put the voices at financial risk.
While it would not be surprising if word had come from Mt. George to pull a Mark McGwire and deal only with the Giambalco's future and not his past, the ultimate result still tainted the telecast.
It once again showed the suits running YES - George Steinbrenner's lackeys - do not place a priority on honesty or objectivity, especially in the fantasy environment of Red Sox-Yankees on Opening Night.
As he walked to the plate for his first at-bat, Giambi was greeted by a standing ovation. O'Neill went gaga proclaiming Giambi will have a good April. "He has to get off to a good start to get everything behind him," O'Neill said.
Was it too much to ask O'Neill to explain what Giambi had to put "behind him?"
Then, Kaat said after all the winter "quotes" and "articles" he was "shocked" by what he was seeing. "To think that (Giambi) was introduced as the Yankee first baseman on Opening Day, and got a standing ovation," Kaat said. "You never would think that would happen."
What "quotes" and "articles" was Kaat referring to?
Kay talked about how hard Don Mattingly, the batting instructor, has worked with Giambi, who singled to right. "All of a sudden, 2004 is gone," O'Neill said. "You're leading the league. You are hitting a thousand."
Oh, so one single erases everything that went down in 2004. One hit erases the fact Giambi admitted to being a steroid abuser, according to reported testimony. A hit erases the fact Giambi made a conscious decision to cheat. It's not surprising O'Neill thinks this way. He still is a Yankee. Always will be. That's why he's in the broadcast booth.
As the night went on, it was clear what was going on. The Yankees have an $81 million investment in Giambi. Despite O'Neill's optimism, no one knows what kind of a season he will have. Still, if you are a paid employee of the Yankees (and the announcers are) the plan is to build up Giambi - accentuate the positive.
If you are overpaying for a lemon, don't admit it.
The goal is to repair Giambi's battered image. And what better way than using the network you own to do it.
During his final time at the plate, in the sixth inning, Kay said Joe Torre was thrilled with Giambi's progress. "He has really been impressed how Giambi has bounced back from an awful season and the scandal of the BALCO situation," Kay said.
Steinbrenner must have had a crystal ball installed in the broadcast booth. This could be the only explanation for how Kay and O'Neill know Giambi has already "bounced back" from a terrible season. And this is how Kay knows Giambi has "bounced back" from the BALCO "scandal" (which he conveniently didn't elaborate on), a case that has not even been adjudicated.
Look, it is one thing to wave pom-poms, but in a game YES advertised as "the baseball event of the decade," there actually might be some casual fans tuned in. And, believe it or not, those viewers might not be familiar with Giambi's steroids situation.
But providing the entire viewing audience (the game was seen in 1.2 million homes, the highest-rated game ever on YES) with basic background of the Giambi story was not on YES' agenda.
And yet when it came to detailing another steroids story in the fifth inning - the story of Alex Sanchez's suspension - YES voices had no problem using the "S" word. And the network even used a full screen graphic to explain MLB's new drug policy.
Self-righteousness, and a sudden concern for complete reporting, came pouring out of the broadcast booth. Kay said he was "shocked" to see somebody had failed the test for steroids. "He (Sanchez) hit two home runs last year," Kaat said. "He is known more for his bunting ability."
"I guess they (the two homers) would have been doubles (if Sanchez wasn't on steroids)," Kay said.
Yeah, and maybe those two home runs Jason Giambi hit against Boston in Game 7 of the 2003 ALCS would have been long flyouts if he wasn't on the juice.
That's one line you will never, ever hear on YES.
YES Refuses to Spill Juice
Was Al Yankzeera, aka the Yankees Entertainment & Sports Network, airing the Yankees-Red Sox opener or another Jason Giambi press conference?
The question is certainly legit. During Giambi's four at-bats Sunday night neither play-by-play man Michael Kay nor analysts Jim Kaat or Paul O'Neill used the word "steroids" or dealt with Giambi's testimony to a grand jury that was leaked to the San Francisco Chronicle.
It is unlikely Kay, Kaat or O'Neill has a "steroids" clause in his contract. After all, during one spring training telecast, Kay and Kaat discussed Giambi's steroids situation. Unlike Giambi, using the "S" word would not put the voices at financial risk.
While it would not be surprising if word had come from Mt. George to pull a Mark McGwire and deal only with the Giambalco's future and not his past, the ultimate result still tainted the telecast.
It once again showed the suits running YES - George Steinbrenner's lackeys - do not place a priority on honesty or objectivity, especially in the fantasy environment of Red Sox-Yankees on Opening Night.
As he walked to the plate for his first at-bat, Giambi was greeted by a standing ovation. O'Neill went gaga proclaiming Giambi will have a good April. "He has to get off to a good start to get everything behind him," O'Neill said.
Was it too much to ask O'Neill to explain what Giambi had to put "behind him?"
Then, Kaat said after all the winter "quotes" and "articles" he was "shocked" by what he was seeing. "To think that (Giambi) was introduced as the Yankee first baseman on Opening Day, and got a standing ovation," Kaat said. "You never would think that would happen."
What "quotes" and "articles" was Kaat referring to?
Kay talked about how hard Don Mattingly, the batting instructor, has worked with Giambi, who singled to right. "All of a sudden, 2004 is gone," O'Neill said. "You're leading the league. You are hitting a thousand."
Oh, so one single erases everything that went down in 2004. One hit erases the fact Giambi admitted to being a steroid abuser, according to reported testimony. A hit erases the fact Giambi made a conscious decision to cheat. It's not surprising O'Neill thinks this way. He still is a Yankee. Always will be. That's why he's in the broadcast booth.
As the night went on, it was clear what was going on. The Yankees have an $81 million investment in Giambi. Despite O'Neill's optimism, no one knows what kind of a season he will have. Still, if you are a paid employee of the Yankees (and the announcers are) the plan is to build up Giambi - accentuate the positive.
If you are overpaying for a lemon, don't admit it.
The goal is to repair Giambi's battered image. And what better way than using the network you own to do it.
During his final time at the plate, in the sixth inning, Kay said Joe Torre was thrilled with Giambi's progress. "He has really been impressed how Giambi has bounced back from an awful season and the scandal of the BALCO situation," Kay said.
Steinbrenner must have had a crystal ball installed in the broadcast booth. This could be the only explanation for how Kay and O'Neill know Giambi has already "bounced back" from a terrible season. And this is how Kay knows Giambi has "bounced back" from the BALCO "scandal" (which he conveniently didn't elaborate on), a case that has not even been adjudicated.
Look, it is one thing to wave pom-poms, but in a game YES advertised as "the baseball event of the decade," there actually might be some casual fans tuned in. And, believe it or not, those viewers might not be familiar with Giambi's steroids situation.
But providing the entire viewing audience (the game was seen in 1.2 million homes, the highest-rated game ever on YES) with basic background of the Giambi story was not on YES' agenda.
And yet when it came to detailing another steroids story in the fifth inning - the story of Alex Sanchez's suspension - YES voices had no problem using the "S" word. And the network even used a full screen graphic to explain MLB's new drug policy.
Self-righteousness, and a sudden concern for complete reporting, came pouring out of the broadcast booth. Kay said he was "shocked" to see somebody had failed the test for steroids. "He (Sanchez) hit two home runs last year," Kaat said. "He is known more for his bunting ability."
"I guess they (the two homers) would have been doubles (if Sanchez wasn't on steroids)," Kay said.
Yeah, and maybe those two home runs Jason Giambi hit against Boston in Game 7 of the 2003 ALCS would have been long flyouts if he wasn't on the juice.
That's one line you will never, ever hear on YES.