ESPN’s coverage of the 2010 World Cup has been spectacular. But if I must be honest, some of the commentators are beginning to get on my nerves. It’s normal, I guess – especially after you consider how many hours we’ve spent listening to these commentators since the tournament began on June 11.

Based on what I’ve seen from ESPN thus far, here are a few interesting observations regarding the World Cup coverage:

John Harkes. I have an incredible amount of respect for Harksey as a player at both the club and international level. And he seems a genuinely nice guy. But he’s not a brilliant co-commentator. I’ve already discussed how I feel he talks too much. But there’s nothing that annoys me more about commentators than when they seemingly jinx players.

For example, when I saw Landon Donovan walking up to take a free kick against Algeria, the last thing I want to hear is how Harkes thinks that Donovan is lethal with free kicks. When Harkes says that, the expectation level among viewers soars because many of them think that Donovan will score. But more often than not, a goal comes when you least expect it. And when it doesn’t come from a free kick, it’s almost as if Harkes is setting up the player and viewer for failure, although I realize that’s not his intention.

Ian Darke. I love Ian Darke, I really do. But during a high pressure game such as the United States against Algeria, the last thing I want him asking the viewer and John Harkes is how nervous we are. If we’re US fans, of course we’re nervous. And by asking the question, it only adds more pressure on top of what we’re already feeling.

Martin Tyler. There is no commentator on this planet who is better than Tyler. Having that said, Tyler sounds more understated this tournament than usual. At times, he sounds blase’ — much more so than usual. Other times, he sounds tired. While he’s a brilliant commentator, his delivery in this World Cup hasn’t been at his top form yet. But I trust that things will improve after the intensity of the first round concludes.

British commentators. I’ve been enjoying the myriad of British commentators that ESPN has hired to cover the World Cup. But I’m bemused by the amount of references the commentators continually make regarding the English Premier League. In many ways, it’s understandable. It’s the league that the British commentators are most familiar with. But I’ve found that in most games, a few references to the Premier League are often mentioned whether it’s about a player or manager. If it wasn’t for John Harkes (and Martin Tyler, to be fair), Major League Soccer would be forgotten in this tournament. Thankfully both Harkes and Tyler weave in mentions now and again to ensure that MLS is not overlooked entirely in this tournament.

The other thing about the British commentators is that every once in a while they’ll throw a British expression which may seem perfectly normal to them but may be befuddle some American viewers. When Darke describes a defense as at “sixes and sevens,” do most American viewers understand what he means?

Not that there’s anything wrong with using British expressions during commentary of games. I just find it interesting that we’re watching the games in America on American television yet the commentary is very Anglo-centric.

I play much more soccer than basketball.  But when it comes to the end of televised seasons, I watch much more basketball than soccer.  Maybe it has something to do with the excitement of a top quality league that actually has playoffs combined with the speed and high scoring of the NBA.  But it also goes to show just how much I watch the NBA… ‘cause I watch a lot of  EPL.

Anyway, I was sitting through the halftime show in game four of the NBA finals- my beloved Lakers up by a few points on our age-old nemeses, the Celtics (I grew up in LA).  Immediately following the first half review, there was a World Cup mini-preview.  It was on ESPN so John Harkes was the pundit who was given about 25 or 30 seconds to build anticipation with a notoriously apathetic US audience.  I’ll take or leave the guy as a color man.  I know some people say he talks too much, but, in my book, at least he’s not Max Bretos, and he has the background.  Then he got his 25 seconds.  The man actually came on and used the phrase, “bitter rivals” to describe the relationship between the footballing nations of the US and England.  He also dubbed Landon Donovan “the Steve Nash” of American soccer, which is so far off-base to anyone who knows both sports, it’s ridiculous.  His short segment was obviously, to any soccer fan, a scripted farce created by some ESPN exec who handed him a script and said, “Read this or else.”

Harkesy had to know that the balderdash he was putting out there for the listening public was exactly that:  balderdash.  Moonshine.  Rubbish.  Poppycock.  And yet, he said it, losing credibility with people who know the game, and making sure yet another American soccer pundit was made to look ignorant of even the gross details of the game- when we know that is not the case, at least not with Harkes.

It’s just frustrating.  I know he likes his job, but it would be nice for us Yanks to be able to rest our hats (or boots) on an American announcer that stays true to his/her ideals and the integrity of the sport, versus selling it and down the river for some hyperbolic hype with no legs.

p.s. Comparisons between Donovan and Nash welcomed.

Two Americans who will never be forgotten in English football are Clint Dempsey and John Harkes. Nothing is more memorable than scoring one of the goals of the season.

In 1990, John Harkes scored his first goal for Sheffield Wednesday and what a beauty it was. The 35 yard screamer ended up being the goal of the season. And to make matters even better, the goal was scored against legendary England goalkeeper Peter Shilton.

Then just this past Tuesday, Clint Dempsey scored an almost identical goal for Fulham against Stoke. Will this go down as the goal of the season? We’ll have to wait and see. But in the meantime, please enjoy both videos above. Just click the image to have the videos load.

ESPN’s broadcast of Euro 2008 was the best production ever of a soccer tournament for TV viewers in the United States. While it wasn’t perfect, it was clearly evident that ESPN had listened to the past criticism and corrected the annoying habits that had previously distanced diehard soccer fans from its network.

After ESPN vastly improved my impression of them this summer, I was then dismayed to discover that ESPN’s dirty habits had returned during the West Ham United against MLS All-Star Team game on Thursday night.

The four most annoying rules that were broken last night were:

1. On two separate occasions, while the match was still being played and the ball was on the pitch, ESPN broke away to “SportsCenter Right Now,” a brief news update on the day’s top baseball stories. Imagine how baseball fans would feel if the same thing happened to them during the middle of an inning and ESPN broke away to soccer news.
2. A few minutes before half-time, with the match still ongoing, ESPN cut away to presenter Rob Stone who discussed what food was available for sale at the concession stands. This completely distracted commentators JP Dellacamera and John Harkes so that they too ended up talking about the food and how they were hungry. Harkes mentioned he wanted to see Stone gobble the food. ESPN then cut away again a minute later to show Stone eating corn on the cob and a burger.
3. In the second half, we were “treated” to Rob Stone standing on top of the stadium roof introducing us to the bird, yes bird, who keeps the gulls from infesting the ground.
4. ESPN sideline reporter Allen Hopkins interviewed NBA player Steve Nash and striker Kenny Cooper at pitchside. Why not conduct these interviews before or after the match instead of wasting our time during the game?

By breaking away from the game, ESPN continues to commit the cardinal sin of soccer TV coverage. The message it communicates to the viewer is that the game isn’t exciting. I realize what ESPN is trying to do by putting their own spin on live coverage, but all four of the above rules broken didn’t add anything to the broadcast other than infuriating the viewer.

Yes, ESPN should be commended for providing HD coverage as well as great broadcasting of the game itself, but the network looks amateurish and hokey when it tries to liven up the broadcast with these idiotic cutaways.

It’s time for ESPN to treat its soccer coverage seriously rather than making it into a joke.

What do you think? Share your opinion by clicking the comments link below.