Analyzing the analysts

When watching tennis matches, I am constantly amazed at how the commentators always state the obvious such as “It was a great shot.” Yes, the ball was placed very well, but was the execution of the hit good? This is never addressed. How well the player executes the skills, how well the player moves on the court, how well he serves, aside from what the radar gun says, are never addressed. This shows that the commentators do not understand what is involved in execution of the different shots, but merely where the shot goes and if the shot was executed. Is this an analysis or a mere observation? Another brilliant statement heard during a football game was that the safety or cornerback’s job was to prevent touchdowns. Is it solely their responsibility? Don’t the other players have anything to do with it? In fact, this is the objective of the entire team, not of any one or two players.

In baseball I always marvel at the announcers who talk about a breaking ball or a fastball or some other pitch that is thrown. How they can determine what each pitch is from sitting up high and looking down is quite a feat. Even a statement that the pitch was a breaking ball — what does this mean? Did the ball break downward, outside, inside, or a combination of directions?

Even golf commentators are great with their comments that the player does not want the ball to get into the rough or doesn’t want the ball to get behind a tree, or some other such obvious situation. It is rare to hear one of the analysts talk about how well the golfer executed his swing. Instead, we hear comments describing where the ball went and, therefore, it became a great shot or a poor shot because of where it landed, not how well it was executed. Thus, the analysis is of the obvious, not of how the player performs.

There are many such examples in many different sports as, for example, the player is too quick for his opponents. Does this mean he is capable of greater acceleration, has a faster first and/or second step, or that he has better cutting abilities? These are not addressed. Even when they talk about a player having great cutting and running abilities, we often see the player take many stutter steps before he is capable of making a change in direction. This is not indicative of someone who has great quickness abilities. So, again, they describe the obvious, not the actual skill executed by the player.

Many more such examples can be given, but these should suffice. They all point to the fact that analysts do not analyze skills. They analyze the general overall play, and, on occasion, specific plays. They are not capable of looking at a performer and determining his good or weak points in execution of the skill. This is understandable because very few have the knowledge to do this. Understand that most coaches, if not all, are not educated in the sport when it comes to player improvement or player performance. Most coaches deal with strategy and how to psychologically and socially get players with big egos to work together toward a common goal. They have brilliant minds in this area. When it comes to improving players’ skills, which play an extremely important roll in game success or player success, they are unable to do this. This is why they must constantly seek, not only nationally, but internationally, players who can execute the skills well and then recruit or buy them to carry out their strategies.

Much more effective would be to identify the weaknesses and skill execution for the players in question, and then work to improve them. For example, if a player is not sufficiently quick and if it’s because of his cutting abilities, these can be improved. He can be taught how to cut, and then do exercises to improve the physical abilities to enable his cuts to be sharper and quicker. If we are looking for more throwing speed, we need analyzation of what the thrower does with his body to develop the force, and then do exercises, and then make corrections in his technique to enable him to throw faster, as well as exercises that duplicate the specific actions. In other words, for every error that is identified, corrections can be made to enable the player to perform even better. Thus, rather than talking in generalities about what is going on for an analysis, if we had people capable of identifying which player is breaking down, what needs improvement, and then work on these aspects, we would develop much better athletes. In fact, the athletes would rejoice for work of this nature rather than simply “working harder,” which usually consists of more grueling conditioning exercises rather than specific skill-type exercises that have an immediate effect on his or her performance. For more information on this topic, see Build a Better Athlete and Sports: Is It All B.S.? by Dr. Michael Yessis.