Gymcastic. Thoughts?

[irichluck21]

Okay, fine, whatever, they didn’t call him a disappointment, but you yourself said that they called his performance and placement disappointing, right? I mean, come on, we know what he meant.

Sorry, but he has the right to disagree with that. Maybe to him, it was not disappointing at all, and he doesn’t like people labeling it that way.

We don’t even know who was specifically referring to as he was vague in “whom” called him “the disappointment”.
It is quite common for commentators to point out that athletes “must be disappointed”. How many times have we heard NBC say “she is going to be disappointed with that routine.”

The difference is the commentator(s) discussing the emotions of the athlete, not their personal belief about the athlete aka “he/she is a disappointment”.

 

[Denn]

The commentators should stop trying to tell us how people are going to feel. They don’t know and it’s not their jobs to pretend they know.

Moreover, even if they had not said he was going to be disappointed, you also said “John basically said it was disappointing because Yoder made errors and missed a medal after qualifying 3rd.”

That’s saying that his performance and placement was a disappointment.

Fair point that we don’t know if it’s NBC he’s referring to.

 

[Doug1233]

The commentators should stop trying to tell us how people are going to feel. They don’t know and it’s not their jobs to pretend they know.

So if Murakami is in tears on the podium because she just won gold in her last ever performance, the commentator shouldn’t make any reference to her tears of joy?

Or are we only policing commentary when it’s negative?

I think it’s perfectly reasonable for a commentator to say the guy who qualified in 3rd place might be disappointed in a 5th place finish.

He didn’t say “Alec Yoder - you are a disappointment to the United States of America”. Of course, that would be out of bounds.

 

[Denn]

No! We’re policing when there’s no evidence.

Come on.

 

[Doug1233]

Ha so if he’s in tears we are allowed to say he’s disappointed? But if he’s not in tears, then we can’t?

What about when Melnikova got up from the “winners chair” in the kiss and cry during the FX final when Mai’s inquiry got accepted? We can’t say she looked pissed (when she was obviously SUPPERRRRR pissed). What if she “looked” pissed to us, but in her world or culture, it wasn’t being pissed it was just RBF.

Who says what the “evidence” is? Who decides that the evidence is sufficient for you to comment on the persons emotion, instead of not being allowed to comment?

Where do the rules end?!

 

[cats]

I think the athletes need to remember that they are not the audience for commentary. I am sure it is hard, but it’s OK for fans to be focused on podium finishes, mistakes, and other things that the athletes would rather us not talk about, and for us to have our own feelings about how things went.

Commentators need to have basic respect. I don’t think John was perfect here, because he did kind of put words in Yoder’s mouth that Yoder disagreed with, but I also don’t think he really did anything wrong.

 

[Denn]

John was wrong. And Yoder corrected him.

It’s really that simple.

Also simple: Commentators should not predict the athletes’ emotions. Maybe they can describe the emotions they see in front of them, but prediction… not their call.

 

[Doug1233]

I also don’t think he really did anything wrong

100% agree.

 

[Doug1233]

I took greater issue with Jessica’s first question here:



No “Well done” or “Talk us through your performances today” etc. Straight into “you look like your back is sore?” intrusive.

And what a weird follow up question. "How are you tumbling like this after so long being here?’

She’s an awful interviewer.

Kensley is so much better:



I bet Jessica doesn’t even know what a Cassina is.

 

[dweiss324]

I had a brief relapse of sanity, decided to put gymcastic on in the background while I made dinner for our boys, and 20 seconds in to the EF day 2 coverage, Jessica makes a point that no we weren’t hearing her incorrectly, that the sport is sexist bc men did have 6 opportunities to win medals and prize money and women have 5…

It was 20 seconds in. Who. Approves. Their. Scripts?!?!?!? Wow. I thought some people were being dramatic on their takes on Jessica but I was so so wrong.

 

[YurchenkoLoop]

she didn’t even get the numbers right XD

 

[irichluck21]

Who. Approves. Their. Scripts?!?!?!?

Uhmmmm…you can’t approve what doesn’t exist.

 

[dweiss324]

I really want to be like “fool me twice shame on me”, but I’m honestly more tempted to be like, “if you want to turn your fantasy of women doing five events sexist, I’ll gladly keep listening to hear what else you could possibly get wrong”. I mean is this some genius marketing ploy???

 

[JaJa]

Uhmmmm…you can’t approve what doesn’t exist.

Maybe to come up with 5 , Jessica was applying the rules of feminism

 

[rlayt]

It’s a shame. They built it up from scratch and it could really have been something for building up Gymnastics. Instead it’s squeeing fan girl stuff.

 

[irichluck21]

Instead it’s squeeing fan girl stuff.

Very much so…but also sending out misinformation as well, which is no bueno considering they have built up a base of followers/subscribers.

 

[ucrgirl]

Are there gymnastics podcasts out there worth a listen?

 

[Doug1233]

@irichluck21 is starting his own one soon.

 

[irichluck21]

@irichluck21 is starting his own one soon.

 

[Denn]

I’ve thought of starting one. I just never did it before and it’s got to be a lot of work.

For any faults you might find with Gymcastic, they do put in a lot of work, yes? And they get the credentials and post the interview videos, which we really aren’t getting from anyone else.