Published December 10, 2024
Sometimes all I can do is shake my head when I try to figure out where some “rules” come from. Here’s one I’ve heard off and on for about 25 years, and it represents an editing philosophy that’s so heavy-handed, I can’t imagine having to follow it for an entire career.
The rule says a game isn’t tied, the score of a game is tied. It says you don’t tie a game, you tie the score of a game. It’s not a game-tying home run or goal, it’s a score-tying home run or goal.
I’m not making that up. But somebody at some time did, and people in insistent circles follow it religiously. Nobody talks like that, though. And barely anybody writes it that way. And yet …
On a recent sleepless night, I rediscovered some research I did for a project I haven’t been able to complete. A good bit of it came from the 1980 Olympic hockey game between the USA and the USSR.
Fit to be tied
The Soviet Union led 1-0 when Buzz Schneider scored for the United States against goaltender Vladislav Tretiak. Play-by-play announcer Al Michaels called it this way for ABC.
“That’s the type of goal you don’t expect somebody like Tretiak to give up, and the United States ties the game at 14:03 in the period.”
Mark Johnson barely beat the clock to erase another one-goal deficit at the end of that period, and Michaels described it like this.
“Right now the clock shows nothing, but it was stopped at 1 when we looked up as the goal was scored. Right now it shows nothing as the period apparently has come to an end, but the United States has tied the game.”
In the 2004 movie “Miracle,” Michaels re-created his call this way: “This game is tied at 2.”
Here comes another one
Michaels had this to say when Johnson scored to even things up again later in the game.
“So the Americans, just as the penalty had expired, to Krutov, score to tie the game, and finally, this building comes to life.”
In the movie, Michaels’ call was: “Mark Johnson ties the game at 3.”
(That’s the scoreboard used in the movie. The recording I have of the ABC broadcast doesn’t show the scoreboard or put the score onscreen. Thank goodness for Michaels.)
Anyway, “this game is tied” outnumbers “the score is tied” about eleventy billion to three, by my estimate after many years of watching sports.
When I re-watched Game 6 of the 1986 World Series for an October post, I thought to take a look at the Major League Baseball rules. This caught my eye.
If the game is tied after both teams have made 27 outs each, the game will go to extra innings.
This is the language of the sports world. It’s bizarre to me that editors think we can’t just roll with it. A game can’t be tied? We’re not doing physics problems here. It’s the vernacular of the world we cover, the register, if you will, of the world I’ve covered since 1983. People have been writing and saying “this game is tied” and “game-tying” since long before that.
If you search for “score-tying” as a modifier, you’ll end up finding “game-tying” as a modifier again and again and again.
When I have to stay on the right side of the law, I edit either to say “tying home run” or “tying goal.” But a little piece of me dies every time I remember this “rule.”
Wait, there’s more
Some people in newspapers don’t want you to write “a 3-3 tie” or “tied 3-3.” They insist on “tied at 3.” Whatever. We are overthinking all of this. I’d love to hear the rationale for these “rules.” All I’ve ever been told was, “A game can’t be tied! Only a score can be tied!”
Weird, because a series can be tied. A person can hit a game-winning home run or a series-tying RBI single. But a game-tying hit is somehow impossible?
All of this is fundamentally in opposition to how I see our role as editors. Being so heavy-handed strikes me as a joyless way to go through life. We should not serve language; language is there to serve us.
I am so tired. This Carly is tired.
♥
/”””””\ \ / /”””””\
\ 0 \( )/ 0 /
> l l <
/ o l l o \
\,,,,,,,,,/v\,,,,,,,,,/
If you appreciate what you find here and are feeling generous, you can check out the Tip Jar! Thank you for reading!