[JJJ]

not just this game - espn announcers in particular like to talk to each other rather than call the women's bball games. i presume that the producers direct this or, at minimum, tolerate it. imo it's a sort of male chauvinism, a patronizing, "this is about women, so they want to chat; they probably don't even know the rules."

As long as the camera stays wide enough to see most of the ten players and at least 2 referees, then I am good.   They can talk about Tara, COVID protocols or whatever works for them.   My problem is when commentators stop talking about the game and the camera team starts a series of tight shots on only a player or two.    Then it is harder for me to understand the possible incoming subs, whether the stoppage was merely to inbound the ball or because of fouls, etc.    As long as I can see most of the players on floor I will be fine.   Same is true in football, BTW.   I have noticed recently broadcasts will replay the same play 2 or 3 times and often will miss the next snap.   Give me a steady shot with all 22 players, and I'd be happy.

I guess that comes from watching the games in the stands.   If you know the game you don't need the commentators to entertain or the production crew to replay the action multiple times in slow-mo when you followed the play in real time.

TV is about the ratings ultimately.  Most commentators know that if the game is out of hand that they should talk about other things to keep the audience.     Tara's teams often get commentators wandering on tangents because the games aren't very close and there is no real doubt the team will ultimately win.

True, but without a crowd in attendance, you don't get the roar when a "did you see that?" play happens and the announcers are yapping away. I fully realize that isn't the biggest problem in the world at the moment. ;)

[JJJ]

not just this game - espn announcers in particular like to talk to each other rather than call the women's bball games. i presume that the producers direct this or, at minimum, tolerate it. imo it's a sort of male chauvinism, a patronizing, "this is about women, so they want to chat; they probably don't even know the rules."

As long as the camera stays wide enough to see most of the ten players and at least 2 referees, then I am good.   They can talk about Tara, COVID protocols or whatever works for them.   My problem is when commentators stop talking about the game and the camera team starts a series of tight shots on only a player or two.    Then it is harder for me to understand the possible incoming subs, whether the stoppage was merely to inbound the ball or because of fouls, etc.    As long as I can see most of the players on floor I will be fine.   Same is true in football, BTW.   I have noticed recently broadcasts will replay the same play 2 or 3 times and often will miss the next snap.   Give me a steady shot with all 22 players, and I'd be happy.

I guess that comes from watching the games in the stands.   If you know the game you don't need the commentators to entertain or the production crew to replay the action multiple times in slow-mo when you followed the play in real time.

TV is about the ratings ultimately.  Most commentators know that if the game is out of hand that they should talk about other things to keep the audience.     Tara's teams often get commentators wandering on tangents because the games aren't very close and there is no real doubt the team will ultimately win.

True, but without a crowd in attendance, you don't get the roar when a "did you see that?" play happens and the announcers are yapping away. I fully realize that isn't the biggest problem in the world at the moment. ;)