The Olympics are a worldwide sports spectacle that only come around every four years (or two years, depending on how you view things). Some could care less about the Games, some might only become sports fans during these two-week spans every few years and some may be salivating at all the sports overload they encounter during the Games.
Often times, viewers will likely prefer one set of Games to the other (winter versus summer). If you know me and my dislike for winter at all, it's not that far of a stretch to guess which I prefer. (Summer, in case you missed it.) This may seem contradictory since I am such a huge hockey fan. But I really get hooked watching the swimming, diving and gymnastics competitions during the summer games.
Game basics
The winter games have a variety of competitions to offer. While hockey is my obvious favorite, speed skating is also not bad, as well as some of the skiing races and figure skating competitions.
There are a few sports that I really haven't watched all that much, and I don't really see them grabbing my interest. The two that are on my mind right now are curling and the biathlon. Case in point: Trying to watch either of these while doing a cardio workout at the gym isn't too exciting.
Even though the future of NHL players participating in the Olympics seems to be in jeopardy, the tournament so far has been a good one. I think it's cool just to see all these NHLers spread out on the different teams of their home countries. Rivals in their profession, but teammates in the Games (or vice versa).
I'm not a fan
As far women's hockey goes, here's my proposal. Let's have the USA and Canada duke it out for the gold medal. The other games have been complete blowouts. Take an 18-0 Canada win against Slovakia. I mean, are you kidding me? The team was actually criticized after this for running up the score. When you're ahead 17-0 (or 15, 14, 13, 12, etc.), why keep shooting? Do you really need the practice?
I'm not the biggest fan of women's hockey anyway (more on that another time, but basically, no checking/physical play=not hockey). At least in the men's tournament there's a few good, competitive teams out there, making for some exciting games. With the women, it seems like Canada and the USA are the only teams that have a chance. I'd be very shocked if these two don't go one-two for the gold and silver medals.
Back to hockey
Now that my women's hockey rant is done, let's get back to the men's side of the puck. I haven't watched every single moment of ice time, or even a good amount of hockey, but what I've seen has been good. I enjoy watching the Wild representatives including Mikko Koivu, Martin Havlat and Niklas Backstrom. I just love the dynamic of all these NHL opponents jumbled up and playing for their countries.
Take Sunday's game against neighbor-to-the-north Canada. It was a highly-anticipated day of hockey that lived up to the hype. Canada was considered the favorite in this match-up, but the USA pulled off a 5-3 upset. The boys in red, white and blue struck first, less than a minute into the contest. In fact, the first two goals given up by New Jersey Devils netminder Martin Brodeur were a bit out of character.
From the parts of the game I saw, it was exciting, but no more so than during the last few minutes of the game. USA made it 4-2 before Canada got within one with about three minutes remaining. It was an intense finish with steady pressure from the Canadians and a heroic empty-net goal scored by a diving Ryan Kesler.
Questioning the coverage
Unfortunately, I have missed some ice action, or forgotten about games, because the coverage carrier NBC has sent the premier sport hockey onto its sister networks USA, CNBC and MSNBC. It would have been so nice if I could have watched a hockey game while I was pedaling away on the elliptical at the gym, instead of looking at curling.
I've seen a few Tweets describing NBC as standing for "Nothing But Curling," because... I guess they show a lot of curling. There has also been a lot of Tweet-venting regarding the hockey games not being televised directly on NBC. I know it's 2010, but I'm sure there are those out there without cable. They can't enjoy hockey right now. (Note: NBC did switch over to the USA/Canada game when it was near the finish.)
It just seems a little odd since the men's hockey gold medal is the one that's most important to Canada and the interest seems great for the fans that are there in person. So why isn't NBC showcasing this premier sport?
One other point about coverage: Why do we watch skiing races on tape delay? The Games are in Vancouver, not exactly half-way around the world where timing would be an issue. I'm sure it's NBC wanting to show the big events in primetime to make money, but then the fun often gets ruined for those who want to be surprised with results.
Rant over
While this may sound like a big complaining rant, these points have all been talked about and debated among the media and online communities. They're all valid points regarding the Games.
In the meantime, the Games are now about half over. We've seen some great competitions so far, so much that it's hard to write about everything.
I hope to watch more of the Olympics in the coming days, including more hockey, which should only get better as it gets closer to the medal stages.
No comments:
Post a Comment