Grrr, they've been doing this for a few years now, and it pisses me off every year: They no longer show the NYC marathon live, only a one-hour highlight reel later in the afternoon. It just kills me. I still remember that awesome NYC when Rod Dixon ran down Geoff Smith in 1983. The drama was so intense, and its weight could only be felt by watching the full race unfold. I think that might have been the first marathon I ever watched on TV, and it helped cement me as a young running fan.
But no surprise -- after all, this is same network that quadrenially screws up the Olympics in spectacularly horrible fashion.
Lee-I agree. When I was a kid I remember watching the '84 and '85 races live. Both had very exciting finishes. I'd watch the tapes over and over and get pumped up about running. Sure, I was a weird kid, but I worry that the kid that could be a potential track fan will gravitate toward some other sport if such big races aren't shown live on network TV.
When it comes to the Olympics why hate NBC?
The real villians here are the IOC which sells "their" product to the highest bidder, without any care as to what is done with it.
As for the NYC marathon it stopped being interesting years ago.
I'm in complete agreement with you. It's abominable what NBC has done to these events and the Olympics. What they put on is un-watchable -it's all production with no content. To watch these events as NBC presents them, one will get no perspective of what is going on. The focus is on the storyteller/reporter, not the event. Out of the "hour" of the marathon, they will spend no more than ten minutes, TEN MINUTES, on the race and the racers. There's no way to associate with what's being accomplished. Any half a** track fan can do a better job, simply call the race as it transpires. Yes, this would require some knowledge of race strategy and persons in the race, the different phases of a race, the tactics being employed at a given moment, interpretation of facial expressions or body posture...but all we're going to get is some fluff piece on "one" of the runners the production crew has decided will likely win the race, disgusting.
Pego and Larwood have it right. If you want good TV coverage of the OG, leave the US. It's that simple. Practically any other place will be better: Canada, England, Australia, hell, probably even Tibet. The US broadcasts are geared to the lowest common denominator, which--no surprise--is VERY low indeed. As feeble as NBC's coverage will probably be, no other major US network would do much better--it's simply the nature of the Olympic beast. The IOC could very well demand a certain quality or range of coverage from their winning bidders--but they do not. They simply pocket "their" money (made, of course, on the talent and labor of the world's athletes) and go home.
>Pego and Larwood have it right. If you want good
>TV coverage of the OG, leave the US.
Well heck, if you're going to leave the U.S., you might as well actually GO to the Olympics. I don't think my wife would have much patience for me booking us a trip to London and then sitting in a hotel room watching TV for two weeks.
Of course, your suggestion doesn't apply at all to watching a marathon -- the only good way to watch a road race is either on TV or riding in the press truck.