Origin of the woeful "makes no mistake" broadcasting phrase?

[The Panther]

Okay, I know this is both trivial and probably obscure, but I have to ask: Does anyone know which broadcaster originated the much-repeated (and, frankly, absurd) hockey phrase, "He makes no mistake!"

It kind of makes me cringe nowadays, but lots of broadcasters are still saying it often... on HNIC... on ESPN.... you name it.

Does this go back to Foster Hewitt or something? Or, was it 'borrowed in' from another sport?

Click to read more...

 

[frisco]

It beats "Johnny on the spot"...

My Best-Carey

 

[Minar]

For me it's better than the ' you gotta get pucks deep' and the like. Last time I checked the game was played with one puck.

 

[ESH]

I don’t know if this is very helpful, but I feel like that’s the main way people like to describe Nicklas Lidstrom

 

[Johnny Engine]

I don’t know if this is very helpful, but I feel like that’s the main way people like to describe Nicklas Lidstrom

In this case, I think what the OP is describing is just an interjection that announcers use when the moment is moving faster than their brains. As in, you could substitute "golly gee" with no loss of information.

"Mackinnon goes right for the net, and make no mistake, it's in the top shelf"
"Mackinnon goes right for the net, and golly gee, it's in the top shelf"

 

[Staniowski]

In this case, I think what the OP is describing is just an interjection that announcers use when the moment is moving faster than their brains. As in, you could substitute "golly gee" with no loss of information.

"Mackinnon goes right for the net, and make no mistake, it's in the top shelf"
"Mackinnon goes right for the net, and golly gee, it's in the top shelf"

No, I don't think that's it.

It's "he makes no mistake".

Example:
Kucherov makes a beautiful pass through the slot to Stamkos, who has an open net, and he makes no mistake....buries it.

 

[Johnny Engine]

No, I don't think that's it.

It's "he makes no mistake".

Example:
Kucherov makes a beautiful pass through the slot to Stamkos, who has an open net, and he makes no mistake....buries it.

Re-reading it, yes, you're right.

 

[MS]

In decades of watching hockey I've never thought this turn of phrase was the least bit strange or cringe?

 

[Staniowski]

In decades of watching hockey I've never thought this turn of phrase was the least bit strange or cringe?

Yeah, it doesn't bother me either.

It's certainly been around hockey for a long time, but I don't know the origins of it. I can just hear certain announcers - like Harry Neale - saying it.

 

[The Panther]

It's just so random, and so unique to hockey.

Like, if a fan of any other sport hears it on a broadcast, they'd say, "What...?"

It's as ambiguous as if the broadcasters instead said (when reviewing a goal): "He commits no error!"

 

[95Tal]

That one never bothered me, but color commentators saying the goaltender "had no chance" on goals always has, because there's always a statistical chance that a save can be made. You hear "no chance" all the damn time in older broadcasts. My better self understands that the guy is just trying to say that it wasn't the goalie's fault, but still...

 

[The Pale King]

Weird you never hear a baseball commentator say "he had no chance" after a strikeout or an out, even though a really excellent hitter only succeeds like 30% of the time.

Vs. hearing that phrase pretty regularly in hockey when goalies are stopping over 90% of the shots on net.

 

[Johnny Engine]

Weird you never hear a baseball commentator say "he had no chance" after a strikeout or an out, even though a really excellent hitter only succeeds like 30% of the time.

Vs. hearing that phrase pretty regularly in hockey when goalies are stopping over 90% of the shots on net.

I mean, the nature of the game is that goalies position themselves so that a good portion of that 90% go right at them, and the offensive team is in a constant tactical battle to find a place to shoot where the goalie isn't and can't get to, right? As opposed to baseball where the pitcher and batter are always standing at the exact same distance and angle from them, and there's a defined area where the pitcher is allowed to throw the ball, which conveniently is the area where batters can hit it.
Like, I suppose Martin Brodeur may have had a chance to direct Sakic's rebound somewhere else on Tanguay's 2001 cup winner, but he also had a chance to take up photography as a kid and then that goal definitely wouldn't have gone in on him,and in either case, once the puck was on Tanguay's stick, the go-go-gadget move required of Brodeur to stop that shot isn't something goalies realistically do.

It's probably an overused phrase.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Not sure if related, but I noticed the term "make no mistake" becoming popular in politics circa George W Bush in the early 2000s. It became a popular way of underlining a single sentence within a speech so that it sounded particularly aggressive and tough on whatever subject, without the risk of sounding unhinged. It seems particularly popular when talking about antagonistically-driven issues like drugs and war.

It may have just crept into sports from the general TV-watching culture of that era.

 

[Big Phil]

I honestly have never minded this phrase. It is normally used when a player buries a for sure goal that they ought to have anyway (eg. wide open net). If it is only done in hockey, well, so be it. "He shoots, he scores" is only a hockey thing too. Whatever, I never thought of it as cringe worthy personally.

 

[MarkusKetterer]

I honestly have never minded this phrase. It is normally used when a player buries a for sure goal that they ought to have anyway (eg. wide open net). If it is only done in hockey, well, so be it. "He shoots, he scores" is only a hockey thing too. Whatever, I never thought of it as cringe worthy personally.

I’m sure it’s a phrase that applies to biathlon too

 

[Michael Farkas]

Heard Bill Hewitt says this during game 5 of 1962 Stanley Cup Final.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Feels like its a hockey thing because of playing on ice. The ice adds a dimension of unpredictability, the puck could go on edge, slide enough down your stick that you hit the post, etc. Having what looks like a sure goal fall apart because of the ice/puck/etc is common enough that a commentator adding a throw away phrase when it does result in a goal isnt doesn't bug me.

 

[Mike C]

I don’t know if this is very helpful, but I feel like that’s the main way people like to describe Nicklas Lidstrom

It's also the main way my in-laws like to describe themselves!

 

[Neutrinos]

"Unbelievable" is used at least a dozen times every game

unbelievable = not able to be believed; unlikely to be true.

Nothing unbelievable has ever actually taken place during a hockey game

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

"Unbelievable" is used at least a dozen times every game

unbelievable = not able to be believed; unlikely to be true.

Nothing unbelievable has ever actually taken place during a hockey game

I don't know, I think I'd call Malarchuk's incident (and survival) pretty unbelievable.

 

[frisco]

What about it's colleague, the non-descriptive, "There was nothing the goalie could do on that one"?

Which is one of the two types of goals according to the Kelly Hrudey analysis of goaltenders. The other course being, "He probably wishes he could have that one back."

My Best-Carey

 

[The Panther]

What's with the broadcasters being such 'fraidy-cats' nowadays? They're all scared to say anything that might displease the athletes.

If you watch clips from the 70s / 80s / 90s, you'll often hear the broadcaster say, "This is NOT a very goal for (so-and-so) to give up", or "Not a great play by (so-and-so)". You'll occasionally hear the word "terrible". Harry Neale used to called short-side goals "American League goals".

But now, the worst thing anyone says is "he might want to have that one back", and recently the broadcasts I see don't even say that. Remember in spring 2022 when Mike Smith let in that 135-foot flip shot from center ice in a round-two playoff game? The broadcasters didn't get on him at all.

Sometimes, you gotta call suckage what it is.

 

[Michael Farkas]

The one that I love is when a player is clearly having a bad game, they go "he's been pretty average tonight" ...which is a bigger insult to me, because they're normally a good player, if this was his average, no one would have heard of him.

Yeah, no one is analyzing the game really...Ferraro is, but not many else. It's local guys, who are doing work with these guys, need interviews from these guys, go to charity golf events with these guys...so if you say **** about their game, a lot of players will get upset about it. It robs the audience of a chance to learn more about the game and the players in my opinion...but, hey, at least we found out how many dino nuggets Chico Resch can fit in his mouth at one time...

 

[njdevils1982]

The one that I love is when a player is clearly having a bad game, they go "he's been pretty average tonight" ...which is a bigger insult to me, because they're normally a good player, if this was his average, no one would have heard of him.

Yeah, no one is analyzing the game really...Ferraro is, but not many else. It's local guys, who are doing work with these guys, need interviews from these guys, go to charity golf events with these guys...so if you say **** about their game, a lot of players will get upset about it. It robs the audience of a chance to learn more about the game and the players in my opinion...but, hey, at least we found out how many dino nuggets Chico Resch can fit in his mouth at one time...

chico once said, "the macho nachos from mucho nachos..........it was heavier than the stanley cup....but it was good"

who talks shit about chico?