Analysts have to be neutral on sports broadcasts. Last night, Garry Galley was not neutral in the Pittsburgh-Ottawa Stanley Cup Conference quarter-final game.
Galley's point of failure came on the disputed goal that would have tied the game at 2-2 late in the second period. It was kicked in by Antoine Vermette. It was relatively clear when it happened that it had been kicked in. Yet Galley continued to blather on about the INTENT of the player when kicking the puck into the net. As the play-by-play announcer brought up replay after replay that showed Galley was wrong, totally wrong, he clung to the intent defence as if he had a vested interest in Ottawa succeeding.
Galley works out of Ottawa and has worked FOR the Senators.
You'd expect such blinkered analysis if Donald S. Cherry ended up at the mike at a Maple Leaf, Bruin or Canadian National Team game. But the CBC doesn't pay Galley to support Ottawa uber alles.
And the worst part, the play SHOULD have been a penalty against Pittsburgh defender Kris Letang. Had the down time been spent asking if the review process can allow the referee to assign a penalty to Letang while over-ruling the goal (no, as it turns out), the wasted verbiage coming from Galley would have had some use. It wasn't until the goal was waived off that the announcers even brought up the penalty that was escaped.
With as many as five games in any given night, the CBC and TSN need a roster of analysts. Like the teams they cover, the analysts must do well enough to earn a spot in the next round, where there are fewer opportunities. Like the Ottawa Senators, I think Galley lost out on his chance to move on.
At least, he should have lost out.
No comments:
Post a Comment