Jim hughson, he's the equivalent of Edwards with the bruins, what a homer, take your homer glasses off Jim and call the game with accuracy!!!
Except Edwards gives credit to the other team. He goes equally as crazy when the other team scores and is very passionate about the game.
However, if he sees a player dive or pull a cheap shot (yes even on the Bruins) he'll call you out. Usually in grandiose fashion.
I won't deny he's a homer. But it's just funny that people either forget or choose not to recognize that he's just as excited when your team scores a goal on Thomas/Rask as you are during the broadcast.
You can't compare Hughson to Edwards or to the Pens guys or any other regional network guys. Hughson does games for the CBC, a national broadcaster, and yesterday as he doubtlessly knew he was on the NBC feed in the U.S. as well.
In other words, almost everyone in the world who was watching this game was listening to Jim Hughson's play by play. It's fair to say that a good % of viewers was either neutral or cheering on the Kings.
Hughson's performance was quite simply unacceptable given that context. Note as well how when he finally notices it was a goal he makes practically no effort to actually call the goal for the Kings. The idea that a goal of the Kings in theory should be called at least similarly to a Canucks goal doesn't even enter his mind. His Canucks just got scored on, he could have sworn Tanev saved that. That's where his mind and mouth are at. Embarrassing.
It was even funnier later on in the game when he was certain that Dustin Brown was the only one getting a penalty and it turned out to be Kesler and a Kings PP.
I'm a Canucks fan and like Hughson but he shouldn't be doing Canucks games in the playoffs. He is obviously a fan and that brings its own biases. He's not Garrett bad, but CBC has other broadcasters that could be calling the series, leaving Hughson to do a different one.
Playoff broadcasters should try to at least appear impartial
As a Canucks fan, Jim Hughson is way too much of a homer. I grew up listening to Jim Robson, it was actually an honour to meet him later as an adult and he's a true gentleman, and unless he was on a Canucks specific broadcast his style was ridiculously neutral and his calling of the 1980 finals was epic and I wasn't even an Islanders fan. I was so disappointed when he retired.
Oh, man... I have so been there. I had a fly ball hit to left and though the left fielder got under it and made the grab, but it dropped down right over the fence and was a home run.
Those calls happen to every broadcaster. He'll feel terrible about it for a bit and move on.
To be fair, the Kings broadcasting crew missed it as well. Almost an identical call too
Yeah. I was watching the CBC feed, and I already knew the puck was in the net...I don't discount Hughson's error to homerism, I think he just missed it.
The ref is indeed pointing at the net, but if you are watching a monitor, its easy to miss that from the angle. I didn't see a light go off either.
I think those are announcer cues, because the L.A. Kings broadcast team missed it too. Bob Miller is a hall-of-famer but he went silent, lol...neither guy knew it went in.
Can't find a video of it, but it will show up sooner or later.
Except Edwards gives credit to the other team. He goes equally as crazy when the other team scores and is very passionate about the game.
However, if he sees a player dive or pull a cheap shot (yes even on the Bruins) he'll call you out. Usually in grandiose fashion.
I won't deny he's a homer. But it's just funny that people either forget or choose not to recognize that he's just as excited when your team scores a goal on Thomas/Rask as you are during the broadcast.
You say he calls everything equally, but don't deny he's a huge homer.....?
I'm missing something here.
Big thing here is though, that he's a regional Boston based network announcer, Hughson isn't.
I love Hughson...dont get the heat he is getting..
He probably shouldnt be doing any Canadien team games...but guys, he is a homer, he is on TSN, and he calls Canadien teams games...
the man calls an exciting game, his homerism is slightly bad, but he is much more enjoyable to listen to then 90% of the announcers I do hear..
no he calls games on CBC and specifically asks and gets canucks games furing the playoffs because he was their local play by play guy for them before he switched to CBC.
no he calls games on CBC and specifically asks and gets canucks games furing the playoffs because he was their local play by play guy for them before he switched to CBC.
noticed that...couldnt edit it as usual...but still like the guy and how he calls a game
I think this is an unfair label put on Hughson. He calls it down the middle and if people think he is a big time homer, they are just looking too deeply into it.
Having said that, I dont know what Hughson was thinking there. He's normally spot on, but you could clearly the kings celebrating and the ref pointing at the net.
The funniest thing about that is the "oh, it's a goal" near the end. It's just so comedically perfect that you figure that only an actual attempt at comedy like that could be close to as funny. Hughson comes close, though, and without trying to be funny. Honestly, the clip isn't that funny until Hughson says "did that puck end up in the net?"... at which point it's hard to resist laughing out loud. That's really what makes the clip... that and the fact that he says it after the praise without even taking a breath in-between.
Now that I think about it, his wording--"did that puck end up in the net?"--seems to suggest that he still thought that Tanev got a piece of it, even after he realized that it was a goal. I guess that he still wanted to believe in Tanev's great play.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheStinger
It was even funnier later on in the game when he was certain that Dustin Brown was the only one getting a penalty and it turned out to be Kesler and a Kings PP.
True. I'm not sure if it was the same moment, but it also happened when Richards went down (bloodied, even) and Hughson seemed sure that Richards was getting a penalty and the Canucks a powerplay, but the Kings were the one to get a powerplay. It's one thing to not be sure; it's another to be sure... and wrong. I'd rather commentators just admit that they don't know what's happening or is going to happen. That actually adds suspense for the viewer. Being so positive about a certain outcome that happens to be wrong, however, just confuses the viewer.
I think this is an unfair label put on Hughson. He calls it down the middle and if people think he is a big time homer, they are just looking too deeply into it.
Not really looking too deep at all. Just listening to the blatantly obvious.
