I’ve been thinking about my previous post and have decided that I was being a little mean and uptight myself, dang it.

So I’m going to amend all that I said and try something that, perhaps, will make everyone happy during tonight’s game. Here’s the deal.

Several people tuned in Sunday night expecting a traditional “play-by-play” description of each and every pitch and were, apparently, “pained” that we did not do that. While I still think it was ridiculous for people to leave such elitist-sounding email and phone complaints, (one guy, whose silly call we’ll be playing on the show tonight said he would rather that I had not broadcast anything than to have done what we did. Apparently his Windows Media Player will not cut off. Sorry. I have no suggestion for fixing that. I didn’t know Windows Media Player could override even the computer’s power supply button.), I offer an olive branch.

I will make more of an effort to give you a pitch-by-pitch account tonight. (Because the press box is still having a few technical difficulties, however, my attention may occassionally be called elsewhere. And I may not always have the player’s correct name. Nor do I have much information about any of the players on either team. But, given those limitations, I’ll definitely be more thorough tonight — the way some people expected we’d be last night.)

I will do this for tonight’s game, but don’t promise for future games. I will continue this approach only if my station’s core group of listeners — the people who are mostly interested in independent music — don’t complain too wildly.

See, part of the problem we’re having here is that music fans and baseball fans don’t mix well. They are two different breeds, and I’m trying to please both on this dang station.

Music fans don’t typically like a lot of talkin’ between the songs — unless it’s silly morning show-type stuff. And baseball fans, at least the ones who complained about last night’s show, are apparently no nonsense about their dang games.

I’ve been going to baseball games all my life and have always noticed that the vast majority of fans in any game (even a World Series game) pay attention to usually no more than half of the game. Most of their focus is on the mascots, the hot bodies in the crowd, the funny stuff on the scoreboard, what the guys in the dugout are doing, whatever. When one team threatens to score, the focus is on the game. But, otherwise, it’s everywhere else.

So, when I asked the Beach Dawgs if they’d mind if I broadcast during their games this year. I had the idea of experimenting with a new type of broadcast: one that focused on what was happening in the crowd and among the personalitiesin the press box as much as it did with what’s happening on the field. I figured we’d let people know when things were heating up on the field, but most of the time we’d do like everyone else in the stands… we’d just have a good time chattin’ it up about whatever else was going on and whatever was on our mind. And then, of course, we’d play music randomly. What’s a baseball game without music on the loud speaker? Why not integrate it into the broadcast too?

I figured such an approach to a broadcast would keep my core group of listeners who are, at best, only occassional baseball fans from abandoning the station during games, and it might even make some of them bigger fans. And, likewise, I didn’t think that the baseball fans would object too much to this approach.

Well, I see that I was wrong about the second thought. We’ll find out after tonight if the music listeners will abandon me if our baseball broadcast is more “traditional.” (The good thing about Internet radio is that audience feedback is usually immediate and honest.) If it does, then I may just make that complainer guy’s day. He might not have to listen to more of my baseball broadcasts on his Windows Media Player that, apparently, won’t turn off. He’ll just get music oriented programming instead.

This show and this station are a work in progress, dang it! That’s the beauty of Independence.