Might as well get used to it because, despite the best intentions of some, it's not going away. In fact, the countdown to Armageddon continues to accelerate. One can't go anywhere or do anything without being caught on tape or eavesdropped upon. Besides phones, emails, etc, next time you're in your car and stop for a red light, look up at the poles and supporting structures and you'll see cameras checking you out.
What to do about this? I suppose one could throw themself in front of a speeding semi on the interstate or jump out of a tall building. But even though it only hurts for a little while -- that's a bit messy. To totally escape reality while remaining technically alive -- kind of like yours truly -- mind altering drugs are an option, though not recommended. Either that or read a few more of my blog posts. The results are pretty much the same, except one has a chance at regaining their sanity after the effects of the drugs wear off.
But this is supposed to be about sports. Right. Which brings me to....
Did you ever notice those concave dishes on the sidelines at major sporting contests? That's serious high-tech audio stuff, and they can zero in and pick up a hushed conversation from quite a distance. All of this is recorded, of course, but viewers of the "live" game are never privy to it with any sort of replay action. We get all kinds of video at the time, but not audio. If we get to hear it at all, most times it's several years later, when some TV station is running a documentary about the life and times of a former coach or player that has been long gone from the game for years. In other words, when it doesn't much matter anymore. Though sometimes entertaining and informative at a future date, how come such sound bytes take so long to become public? Wouldn't it be a lot more fun to hear them while they were still relevant?
Sure, some game-time conversations need to be kept confidential, lest the other team spy on them and be immediately privy to strategies. I get that. But keeping such conversations for years in a classified vault somewhere the CIA would be proud of hardly seems right either in this day and age. After all, it's hardly war but only a game, so why not make such things public immediately following the contest, or the next day at the latest? Fans would dearly love to hear this stuff, and they're the ones paying for it all.
But that seems to be where the plot thickens. The media, with the fans sucking it up, can run wild with speculation as to what MIGHT have been said. Scribes will furiously write their opinions. The talking heads will go into hyper-speak debating it. Stuff will pop up on the internet the world over. Tweets will fly back and forth and the social media will be abuzz. But in the end, none of them really know. They're just speculating. It's a story, gossip, what have you, but people will certainly get caught up in it.
The recent Richard Sherman debacle is a good example. The media was all over the Seattle cornerback for his post-game "rant" regarding San Fran receiver Michael Crabtree. This was a big story. Sherman had made a helluva play on the deciding play of the game, breaking up a pass intended for Crabtree, which was eventually caught for an interception by one of Sherman's teammates. The game was basically over. Seattle had prevailed.
Sherman approached Crabtree and said something. Crabtree responded by shoving Sherman away in the face. Surely, Sherman was rubbing it in -- right? Wrong. Turns out that big concave dish picked up the audio. After three hours of battle, Sherman actually said, "Helluva game. Helluva game", and even stuck out his hand for Crabtree to shake. From one warrior to another, that was a very respectful thing to do. Instead, Crabtree ignored the gesture and dissed Sherman on national TV with the hand to the face. So should it come as any big surprise that Sherman trash talked Crabtree a few minutes later when some bimbo reporter stuck a microphone in front of him? What goes around -- comes around.
Nevertheless, the point has been made. Instead of the usual years, this audio surfaced after only a few days, and seems to vindicate Sherman. Yet yours truly still maintains it should have been aired immediately following the game.
But alas, then there wouldn't have been such a big speculative story for the media to prey on.
And we couldn't have that -- right?
No comments:
Post a Comment