Broadcasters not mentioning a no-hitter in progress

I don't have a problem avoiding the term "no-hitter"

You can do that without misleading the viewers/listeners. On the TV broadcast, it's not hard to look at the scoreboard before every commercial break to see that no hits have been allowed.

 

On the channel flipping argument, though, how often are they supposed to mention it? If you're only stopping long enough to see the score, odds are you aren't stopping long enough for them to mention it anyway.

As has been said, there are plenty of ways to communicate what's happening without mentioning that it's a no-hitter. In the case of this one, you could have mentioned that only two runners have reached, one via a passed ball strikeout and the other on a walk. Even a passing baseball fan would get that.

 

Agree with MileHigh.

Vin says it.

That settles it.

 

Isn't not mentioning it letting bias affect how you do your job in some sense? It's not my job to help the team or protect them. It's to inform the reader/listener/viewer. Same as if I saw a player on the police blotter. It's getting reported.

 

Why not just say no hitter? Why even dance around the phrase? I get it if you're in the clubhouse, but as a broadcaster your job is to tell me what's going on. Don't interject yourself into it. I don't care about your superstitions. I care about knowing what is going on in the game. If you don't want to tell me, then go sit in the dugout and abide by whatever little ritual you feel like. The idea that this broadcaster is going to "jinx" it by saying "no hitter" when millions of other people around the world are directly referencing it on the Internet or other TV/radio broadcasts is stupid beyond comprehension.

 

No.

These are not unbiased chroniclers of events. These are team employees hired to make the broadcast as enjoyable as possible.

I didn't see the broadcast, so I can't say how they handled it. I've seen plenty of no-hitter calls where the announcer avoided saying the word "no hitter," but would make it clear enough anyway -- "Stick around. After 8, the Twins have no runs, ON NO HITS." I have no problem with that. You make it obvious without crossing the jinx line, so you avoid pissing off the people who take that silly crap seriously -- and that group very likely includes a large portion of the team and front office.

 

You don't say no-hitter.

Plenty of other ways to let people know what's going on.

Which is always part of what makes the moment great. Reducing everyone watching to our superstitious nature.

 

It's even funnier when they do start talking about in the seventh inning or so...

"And after 6 2/3 innings, Sanchez is still perfect. Bob, have you ever seen someone pitch a perfect game?"

"I remember watching Len Barker as a... and Rodriguez got all of that one... the score is now 3-3."

 

I remember watching a no-hitter unfold on Sunday Night Baseball back in the early, mid 90s? A long time ago, before the ever-present scorebug in the corner of the screen, when scores only came in at :28 and :58 and preceded by the dun-dun-DUN-DUN! chirp. Anyhow, whatever damn team had a no-hitter going into the sixth, at which time the PBP guy (Berman?) would start announcing the losing team's scoreline to that point as "no runs, GRUNT hits, three errors"

Pencil me in the "endearing anachronism" lineup. There's plenty of ways to get the point across, either through on-screen graphics or thinly-veiled references in the commentary.