Can Broadcasters Ruin No-Hitters and Perfect Games?

It's part of baseball tradition -- like pitchers using rosin and hitters using pine tar. Players do not speak of no-hitters and perfect games as they are unfolding. It's just the way the superstition works. But do the same rules apply to broadcasters? Possibly, considering some fans were upset that during Greg Maddux's excellent outing (he was perfect through five and a third) on Monday, Padres television broadcaster Matt Vasgersian did not shy away from using the terms "no-hitter" and "perfect game" during his play-by-play. Vasgersian (pictured) defended himself.

"That's clubhouse stuff. That's dugout stuff," he said. "It's so ignorant to suggest the announcers shouldn't mention that. Because somebody's channel surfing and you want to suck that person in, you're doing them a disservice by not mentioning what's going on.

"It drives me insane. We've heard that before. There were a couple players that gave us grief when Adam Eaton had his no-hitter going in the eighth (in 2004). It was like, 'It's TV. It's different than the clubhouse. We're not sitting on the bench.' You turn to every broadcasting executive who's worth a damn, he'll tell you the same thing."

I think it's ridiculously far-fetched to think what an announcer says has any sort of effect on what the pitcher's doing. But even I'll admit that as soon as the announcer mentions that a basketball player has made his last 15 free throws, it always seems as if the shooter promptly misses his next one. A few announcers feel that you can get the same message across without mentioning "no-hitter or perfect game" -- you can just reverse it. For instance, they can say "the other team has failed to get a hit in the game," or "the other team hasn't had anyone reach base in the game." But I agree that these aren't the "catchy" phrases which grab a viewer or listener's attention. I side with Vasgersian in the case (and apparently so did Vin Scully).

Previously at FanHouse:
Greg Maddux Still Has the Goods