Jennifer Botterill is the worst analyst AINEC

[Ianturnedbull]

Fresh off that awful intermission of hers, I feel like we need to talk about this. For those that do not know her, essentially she does not believe physicality should be part of the sport, and gets into arguments where she gets incredibly worked up to the point of sounding like she is going to cry EVERY time they talk about any remotely physical play.

I am not suggesting especially Sportsnet has good analysts, but she is another level of terrible. At first I thought she had something against Bieksa, but it seems she gets worked up with everyone but Ron MacLean and Kelly Hrudey. She cannot handle being disagreed with, which is kind of a requirement when you are employed to discuss opinions with others.

I don't want this thread to be about that specific take. This is a consistent pattern with her. Please get literally anyone else.

Pretty bad take. I think you're in for a rude awakening here.

Why don't you actually talk about other bad analysts here? In a world of bad analysts, she's not even in the top 20.

 

[Mach85]

This is a bit of an evidence-of-absence fallacy, though.

Sexism/misogyny is a structural issue that can't really be measured in the way you advocate.

It is subtle and often the sexist/misogynist person aren't even fully aware they're doing it themselves. Like with the classic "I have a beautiful daughter, I love her as much as a son" argument for example.

If we're talking fallacies, what you mentioned there is unfalsifiable. If someone doesn't think it's sexism/misogyny, that's just because it's so subtle it can't really be measured. In that scenario, there's no way for someone arguing the position of sexism/misogyny to be incorrect.

That said, I don't mind Botterill. She's middle of the pack for talking heads. Mayers has a bit of a point but he didn't argue it effectively. The players do sometimes have to police the game themselves still, or else liberties will get taken. But he should've made that point more generally rather than seeming like he was supporting heavy stickwork on a bystander.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Their abilities relative to Gretzky are irrelevant because they spent significant time playing in the league they're covering. Once you get to that level the time and experience becomes more important than the talent, as far as relating to intermission panelist goes.

Bobby Mac allegedly played junior hockey so that one doesn't work. Bob McKenzie at eliteprospects.com Also I'd say him dedicating his whole life to covering hockey makes him more qualified than someone who played a very different game.

Your inconsistency abounds.

 

[JKG33]

Your inconsistency abounds.

Former NHLers are qualified because they played in the league.

Bobby Mac is qualified because he at least played junior hockey, and spent his entire life covering the NHL.

Botterill played a completely different game, and somehow is supposed to have relevant takes on the NHL because.... reasons? She's only above the spreadsheet jockeys you see on Twitter and that's not saying much.

 

[v00d00daddy]

the "what If that was your son" comment was completely unprofessional..... don't bring family members into a debate.

What if Kiprisov was Botterils husband?.....what if the Jets player goes blind?.......what if his mommy was watching?......what if , what if , what if

Not to be too hard on her, but caught another show where she could not hide her disgust with Anthony Stewarts comments.
If she wants professiomal respect she has to show some to the professionals who hapoen to have an opinion she doesn't care for. .

What if she reads hf threads and sees that she can be better at her job? That would be a great “what if”

Unfortunately, in todays day and age a lot of people are unable to improve because they believe their opinions are facts.

 

[Fishy McScales]

If we're talking fallacies, what you mentioned there is unfalsifiable. If someone doesn't think it's sexism/misogyny, that's just because it's so subtle it can't really be measured. In that scenario, there's no way for someone arguing the position of sexism/misogyny to be incorrect.

That said, I don't mind Botterill. She's middle of the pack for talking heads. Mayers has a bit of a point but he didn't argue it effectively. The players do sometimes have to police the game themselves still, or else liberties will get taken. But he should've made that point more generally rather than seeming like he was supporting heavy stickwork on a bystander.

That's not quite what I said, though. I was speaking to sexism being quantifiable in the example presented.

I.e. if there is no example of the OP having the exact same take on a male broadcaster saying the same thing we can label him a sexist, and because no such example exists, we can't.

What you're saying is that I claimed sexism is too subtle to be measured, and therefore can be used carte blanche to accuse anyone of sexism. That's a strawman.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Former NHLers are qualified because they played in the league.

Bobby Mac is qualified because he at least played junior hockey, and spent his entire life covering the NHL.

Botterill played a completely different game, and somehow is supposed to have relevant takes on the NHL because.... reasons? She's only above the spreadsheet jockeys you see on Twitter and that's not saying much.

There’s little consistency in your reasoning.

You don’t like female broadcasters doing hockey. Just own it.

 

[CN8]

These things are great for debate cause there’s no right answer. It’s all personal opinion. Personally I’d rather listen to the cats fight than her but just my opinion

 

[Washed Up 29YearOld]

Can a mod edit "botterhill" to Botterill? Driving me nuts

 

[Dr Pepper]

Former NHLers are qualified because they played in the league.

Bobby Mac is qualified because he at least played junior hockey, and spent his entire life covering the NHL.

Botterill played a completely different game, and somehow is supposed to have relevant takes on the NHL because.... reasons? She's only above the spreadsheet jockeys you see on Twitter and that's not saying much.

Sorry are we pretending Bob McKenzie got further in his hockey career than Jennifer Botterill?

What point are you trying to make?

 

[JKG33]

There’s little consistency in your reasoning.

You don’t like female broadcasters doing hockey. Just own it.

Sure there is. Playing the women's game doesn't qualify a person to commentate on the men's. Two different games. As the clip in the OP suggests, Botterill can't handle the conversation because she's never played full contact hockey.

Sorry are we pretending Bob McKenzie got further in his hockey career than Jennifer Botterill?

What point are you trying to make?

Further? No, unfortunately not. But the level Bob played at would beat any of these pro or international women's teams. Let's not pretend I'm wrong there.

See my response above for the point I'm making.

 

[hangman005]

Can a mod edit "botterhill" to Botterill? Driving me nuts

Turns out we can.

 

[hairylikebear]

Sure there is. Playing the women's game doesn't qualify a person to commentate on the men's. Two different games. As the clip in the OP suggests, Botterill can't handle the conversation because she's never played full contact hockey.

This makes no sense. How would experience in men's hockey help her 'handle' a conversation?

 

[Suntouchable13]

Sure there is. Playing the women's game doesn't qualify a person to commentate on the men's. Two different games. As the clip in the OP suggests, Botterill can't handle the conversation because she's never played full contact hockey.

Further? No, unfortunately not. But the level Bob played at would beat any of these pro or international women's teams. Let's not pretend I'm wrong there.

See my response above for the point I'm making.

Experience doesn’t equal knowledge, though. By that logic, Wayne Gretzky is the best hockey commentator? Come on. Jon Cooper never played any real meaningful hockey, yet I would trust his opinion on something hockey related than Wayne Gretzky. Just an example. But anyway, Jen was right. High sticking a young guy in the face is not tough hockey. It’s gutless.

 

[JKG33]

This makes no sense. How would experience in men's hockey help her 'handle' a conversation?

Then she would understand how the game is played, with players policing themselves and all that, which you don't get in the women's game

 

[hairylikebear]

Then she would understand how the game is played, with players policing themselves and all that, which you don't get in the women's game

But a grown adult can easily 'handle' a conversation even when its outside their expertise. That's what I don't understand. What do you mean by that?

 

[JKG33]

Experience doesn’t equal knowledge, though. By that logic, Wayne Gretzky is the best hockey commentator? Come on. Jon Cooper never played any real meaningful hockey, yet I would trust his opinion on something hockey related than Wayne Gretzky. Just an example. But anyway, Jen was right. High sticking a young guy in the face is not tough hockey. It’s gutless.

I've addressed this in my other posts. It doesn't matter if its Wayne Gretzky or Chris Stewart. They've both played at the highest level, and understand from first hand experience how it works.

But a grown adult can easily 'handle' a conversation even when its outside their expertise. That's what I don't understand. What do you mean by that?

By handle, I meant have a logical argument without getting emotional. Botterill got emotional in the clip in the OP, something that maybe doesn't happen if she'd actually played men's hockey.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Agree one hundred percent with the OP

So that makes a total of 3 people.

I've addressed this in my other posts. It doesn't matter if its Wayne Gretzky or Chris Stewart. They've both played at the highest level, and understand from first hand experience how it works.


By handle, I meant have a logical argument without getting emotional. Botterill got emotional in the clip in the OP, something that maybe doesn't happen if she'd actually played men's hockey.

Sticking someone in the face, isn’t how it works lol.

 

[Golden_Jet]

I would search for some, but I am not subjecting myself to willingly listening to her takes again.

You should learn how to search for something and just post the link, it’s eas.

Hint: you don’t have to listen to it.

 

[PaulD]

Pretty bad take. I think you're in for a rude awakening here.

Why don't you actually talk about other bad analysts here? In a world of bad analysts, she's not even in the top 20.

you have list do you?

 

[hairylikebear]

By handle, I meant have a logical argument without getting emotional. Botterill got emotional in the clip in the OP, something that maybe doesn't happen if she'd actually played men's hockey.

So basically, she's not hardened to NHL play, so to her this is upsetting whereas to Mayers it's something he dealt with game to game and not a big deal. Would that be accurate?

 

[JKG33]

So basically, she's not hardened to NHL play, so to her this is upsetting whereas to Mayers it's something he dealt with game to game and not a big deal. Would that be accurate?

You put it much better than I did, yes.

I wouldn't limit it to the NHL play though. This is something that happens everywhere from Jr C up

 

[PaulD]

Mayers was telling us what happened on the ice and how NHL some players choose to respond to some cheap shots.
Botterill was questioning his statements and telling him/us how to "sell the game"
Don't know about you but I watch hockey for the entertainment and don't mind listening to ex players give their interpretations of what goes on out there in the "game within the game" When all is said and done players dictate what happens in the heat of a game. Media and fans have so say.
I could care less about how any of them think we should be "selling the game"
Especially when they use "selling the game" to mock others who happen to have an opinion different from their own.

Botterill: "what if it was your son!"
lol. The drama.

 

[hairylikebear]

You put it much better than I did, yes.

Gotcha, thanks for clarifying, I think it would be tough to apply that standard to every broadcaster, including Bobby Mac, but I also think you could easily find a similar justification so I'll leave that be.

Basically, she got emotional because she has only played women's hockey is superficially very similar to she got emotional because she's a woman.

I'd be careful with constructions like that in this day and age.

 

[JKG33]

Gotcha, thanks for clarifying, I think it would be tough to apply that standard to every broadcaster, including Bobby Mac, but I also think you could easily find a similar justification so I'll leave that be.

Basically, she got emotional because she has only played women's hockey is superficially very similar to she got emotional because she's a woman.

I'd be careful with constructions like that in this day and age.

Yea I was trying to avoid that whole thing, but really it's not limited to women. I'd expect that from anyone, men included, who haven't played at a level where the players are allowed and maybe even expected to police themselves and have retaliatory type plays.