Pam is really weird.

W

wilsondude

Banned
Pam Shriver, or something like that, I cant remember her name, but she is one of the commentators on TSN and shes just so annoying! I was watching the Kendrick match yesterday and so many things could have been said because I thought it was a good quality match, but this is what she decides to talk about instead; "WOW, the chair ump in this match is the best ive ever seen, because he can get out of his chair faster than any other chair ump ive seen on tournament grounds!" My response to this is who the heck cares????
 
Orion

Orion

Semi-Pro
I heard her say that and was like WTF??

She has always been a little off-center. Her commentating is like her game was, a tad erratic at times.
 
W

wilsondude

Banned
Orion said:
I heard her say that and was like WTF??

She has always been a little off-center. Her commentating is like her game was, a tad erratic at times.
Click to expand...

Haha I know right??
But like on a serious note all I want at the end of the day is to be able to watch a slam and have commentators talk about things that interest me or are important and certainly should be RELEVENT to the match, rather than talking about the time it takes for a fat umpire to get out of his chair.
 
L

LanceStern

Professional
Yea but when they do talk about the match or relevant stuff, whiners complain and say they don't know what they are talking about and mute the tv.

Never happy
 
S

slice bh compliment

G.O.A.T.
I think someone told her she's funny. She's just trying to up her game....stay relevant as she ages. It's a pretty good gig up there in the booth, ans she's probably trying to make sure she keeps it (as she's lost a LOT of money, from what I've heard).

As a commentator, I think she's got more cred than Mary Carillo, but she is trying to be pithy and intelligent like Mary. And it doesn't always come off as sincere. Or witty.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't, Pam. Overall, I think Shriver is wayy better than Chris Evert, Tracy Austin, Betsy Nagelsen, and most of the others. Pam's okay with me, as long as she stays off the black coffee and the sugar.

Even though I usually watch with the volume pretty low (and I agree completely with post number eight), it is great to have an entertaining and knowledgeable duo in the booth. I like John and Ted a lot. I miss Cliffy and Fred. Courier is cool with me. I feel Agassi would be truly great in there. Same with Pat Rafter. I also like the subdued, straightforward style of the great John Barrett. He is a purist.
 
Last edited:
W

wilsondude

Banned
slice bh compliment said:
I think someone told her she's funny. She's just trying to up her game....stay relevant as she ages. It's a pretty good gig up there in the booth, ans she's probably trying to make sure she keeps it (as she's lost a LOT of money, from what I've heard).

As a commentator, I think she's got more cred than Mary Carillo, but she is trying to be pithy and intelligent like Mary. And it doesn't always come off as sincere. Or witty.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't, Pam. Overall, I think Shriver is wayy better than Chris Evert, Tracy Austin, Betsy Nagelsen, and most of the others. Pam's okay with me, as long as she stays off the black coffee and the sugar.

Even though I usually watch with the volume pretty low (and I agree completely with post number eight), it is great to have an entertaining and knowledgeable duo in the booth. I like John and Ted a lot. I miss Cliffy and Fred. Courier is cool with me. I feel Agassi would be truly great in there. Same with Pat Rafter. I also like the subdued, straightforward style of the great John Barrett. He is a purist.
Click to expand...

Ya I agree and I especially feel that Agassi would be a great commentator. He's funny and he's been there and done that so he knows what hes talking about.
 
dancraig

dancraig

Hall of Fame
Tuesday one of the lady commentators, I'm not sure if it was one of the regulars or a guest, was talking about the strings the players were using. She referred to Luxilon as "nylon" several different times. I found it interesting that these "expert" paid observers knew less about strings than most of us on these boards.
 
K

Keifers

Legend
dancraig said:
I think in the UK tennis matches are aired without so much talk. It seems like they let you watch the match and only comment occasionally.
Click to expand...
It's a whole different experience, isn't it? They let the tennis speak for itself, adding only truly useful information, insights and comments. There's none of the mindless banter and sophomoric back and forth that the ESPN team engages in.

And most importantly, they don't try to be funny and then laugh at their own "jokes" a la Carillo, Shriver, Patrick Mc and Fowler. (Guys, you are not funny -- hire some writers, please!)
 
S

shrakkie

Semi-Pro
Keifers said:
It's a whole different experience, isn't it? They let the tennis speak for itself, adding only truly useful information, insights and comments. There's none of the mindless banter and sophomoric back and forth that the ESPN team engages in.

And most importantly, they don't try to be funny and then laugh at their own "jokes" a la Carillo, Shriver, Patrick Mc and Fowler. (Guys, you are not funny -- hire some writers, please!)
Click to expand...

Banter? Do they actually try and have conversations whilst commentating about tennis? if so major LOL!

I certainly am gratefull for our british commentators!

P.S Slice had it spot on with Barret!
 
P

pound cat

G.O.A.T.
Keifers said:
It's a whole different experience, isn't it? They let the tennis speak for itself, adding only truly useful information, insights and comments. There's none of the mindless banter and sophomoric back and forth that the ESPN team engages in.

And most importantly, they don't try to be funny and then laugh at their own "jokes" a la Carillo, Shriver, Patrick Mc and Fowler. (Guys, you are not funny -- hire some writers, please!)
Click to expand...


Yes, it's almost as if the viewers in the UK knew something about tennis and had brains. On the other hand, in the USA , it would be great if the commentators knew something about tennis and had brains. Or likely it's what most viewers like...mindless TV.
 
nickynu

nickynu

Semi-Pro
wilsondude said:
Ya I agree and I especially feel that Agassi would be a great commentator. He's funny and he's been there and done that so he knows what hes talking about.
Click to expand...

Do you even know that Pam Shriver was number 3 in the world in singles and number 1 in the world at doubles with a combined total of 133 titles and that she has an olympic gold medal. Respect Dude
 
K

Keifers

Legend
pound cat said:
Yes, it's almost as if the viewers in the UK knew something about tennis and had brains. On the other hand, in the USA , it would be great if the commentators knew something about tennis and had brains. Or likely it's what most viewers like...mindless TV.
Click to expand...
Well put.

Re your last sentence, I do find myself wondering time and again what audience or demographic does ESPN think their style of tennis commentating appeals to. Is it knowledgeable tennis fans? Or sports fans tuning in casually? Or people in a sports bar who would find it too disturbing to have long periods of silence on the flat screen in the corner?

Who really likes or needs to be reminded constantly of the score and the weather and the occasion and ... and ... by the master of the obvious, Dick Enberg? It's almost as though he needs to motor mouth because if he were to pause for even a minute, he'd lose the thread of what's happening on court and never find it again.

And Bud Collins referring to Nadal as Federer during the Rafa-Hewitt match... aren't these increasingly frequent UEs an embarrassment to the network and the sport?

Doesn't American tennis commentating need a major overhaul? It's the same old thing year after year after year, grand slam after grand slam after grand slam. The commentators are bored out of their minds and we shouldn't have to listen to their droning any more.

Surely it's time to shake things up, for all our sanities!
 
Fedgasm

Fedgasm

New User
I've hated Shriver for as long as I could remember. She randomly inserts comments into matches that simply don't fit. A lot of the time they have her doing sideline work at the slams and she always tried to insert humor into her segments that ended up completely failing.
 
S

slice bh compliment

G.O.A.T.
In Pam's defense....and in the defense of commentators in general:

sometimes genuinely smart, funny people deliver a great line with a deadpan expression. At a party, it's hilarious. In the booth, not so much. Then they feel they've got to laugh at their own joke just to let on that they're kidding. Then the partner laughs, and the audience at home may or may not quite get it. Meanwhile, some of us got it, but we're trying to watch a tennis match.

I don't know, man, I enjoy some silliness with my tennis on tv, but I'd be happiest with a secure/quiet/accurate color man and a knowledgeable former pro whose agenda is to edu-tain ... between [not during] points.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
Is Kiefer serious?
2
Replies
52
Views
5K
TheTruth
TheTruth
B
Pam Shriver is HILARIOUS!!!!!
Replies
13
Views
2K
PDJ
PDJ
N
What's the definitive rule on net-touching?
Replies
9
Views
45K
Tennisman912
T
F
Ivanovic is hot, but her return feet noise is Cheating
3 4 5
Replies
224
Views
17K
rooski
rooski
O
ok just a few observations on the french.
Replies
15
Views
1K
dubsplayer
dubsplayer
Top