What lessons can Channel Nine learn from other sports broadcasts to make their rugby-league product better? After watching game one of the State of Origin, I couldn’t help but think I’d seen it all before.
Peter ‘Sterlo’ Sterling would try his best to ask questions to a panel of experts and they would look at each other awkwardly for a moment before answering.
Brad ‘Freddy’ Fittler would say something silly in his touchline analysis.
Darren Lockyer would be inaudible.
I’ve been watching the NBA finals this year, and boy do those Yanks know how to put on a show.
I like the way they use images combined with stats to tell the story of the match.
The players really are the focus, and the broadcasters do a pretty good job of putting them on centre stage (even with their pressing commercial demands).
For the American-football nuts and ice-hockey lovers out there, what do the broadcasters do to make those sports more watchable and enjoyable? Maybe you think some of those innovations could be applied to rugby league to make the telecasts better.
Innovation is dangerous ground, I know. Channel Seven like to ‘innovate’ and tinker with their AFL broadcasts (think mega-wall and shaking the camera), but they have just come off as lame and dorky.
It has raised the ire of the sporting public in Melbourne.
It’s sad to say that all the innovation in the world means nothing if the broadcast team aren’t giving 100%.
As another contributor to this website pointed out today, Channel Nine’s telecast of State of Origin on Wednesday night was a little flat.
The commentary team seemed disinterested and uncommitted – they were simply going through the motions of another game.
Even Phil Gould’s pre-game ‘final word’ discourse lacked fire and passion – it was maybe symbolic of the state of mind of the free-to-air broadcaster.
Or maybe they just have bigger fish to fry with the Olympics around the corner, something they certainly didn’t let us forget on Wednesday night.
Greg
Guest
Seriously, you're kidding yes? They are as dull as. Mumbles and drowsy. Wally has better sentence making abilities then some others, Fittler and Geyer don't even speak in English. It is all schoolboy dribble. How these people are allowed to grace our TV screens is a disgrace, but what else do you expect, when the day starts with those bufoons on the Today show.
Jeff McGinn
Guest
I would like to see the NZ commentary team over here.. their match comments are fair and not too one eyed , as opposed to Rabbits, he gets orgasmic when NSW teams are winning, but changes to low key and babble when interstaters get in front..
B.A Sports
Guest
Agree that Fox preset a far better morerounded coverage. I can't stand Ikin though. You would swear no individual has ever made an error as he is never critical of individuals and sometimes if you are going to be an objective comentator, you need to.
damoinaus
Roar Pro
Good points B.A - the US media circus seems to be more intimately involved with the players behind the scenes. There are lots of debates as to whether this is a positive or negative overall - but in this context, it does mean that broadcasts like the NBA Finals seem more informed and more in-depth. On your other point re: college education - In a generation or so, we'll see if the Toyota Cup policy of No Work, No Study = No Play pays off and we end up with a more rounded set of NRL retirees.
damoinaus
Roar Pro
I think Joel Caine presents and communicates very well - a relatively obscure player in his day, but does some pretty good work on camera. I think he's proof that legendary status on the field does not necessarily translate to the same status on camera (ie. Lewis, Lockyer, Fittler).
Edward Kelly
Guest
Some ex-players do not make the cross to TV very well, I think Lockyer and Lewis both do not add anything, whereas Ben Ikin and Mark Gasner have something to say about the game we are watching and are often spot on. Fox does a far better pregame show and their commentary teams seem to actually like calling the game. Sometimes I think the director of the telecast is mostly to blame as it seems they sometimes don't know the game (perhaps no interest in the NRL) and just do the same thing, perhaps also the camera operators (especially in melbourne) seem to not be able to capture the game. Overal there is a lack of professionalism and professional pride in the Nine NRL broadcast.
GD
Guest
Perhaps they are were all overcome by the realisation they may all shortly be looking for new jobs? Sterlo in particular seemed distracted and struggled to complete a sentence during the pre-game presentation. For what is supposed to be the code's marquee game the whole thing seemed to lack a certain sense of occasion, even by Nine's low, low standards.
B.A Sports
Guest
YOu could watch a match from 2002 and the coverage wouldn't be much different. WHile some inovation would be geat, I think just getting the basics right would be a start. Lewis can not construct a sentance. He starts saying words, he adds some more random words then just stops. I have no idea how this guy was able to be a creative football player, when he can't come up with a single rational thought. The US commentators you speak of go to team practices, so they see what the players are doing in training and it helps the comment on whether players and teams are executing specific things they worked on. Warren (in particular) has clearly got complacent. He just appears to turn up an hour befoer kick off and goes through the motions. Overall our commentators, come across as uneducated and the boys club situation prevents them from saying anything controversial. Charles Barkley may not be the smartest guy, but if he thinks someone is a terrible player, he will say it (and its funny when he says "terrible" as well). It shows though with the US guys (x-players and career commentators) that they all went to college and at some stage all had to learn how to communicate and construct an arguement in an essay or presentation. Our guys are showing the impact of a lack of education when they were younger.
B.A Sports
Guest
I was completely confused by that one. We were also told in half time as Sterlo cut to commercial we were about to get a sneak peak of Nine big new series (i guess half time adds have the largest audience of almost any ads on TV), but instead we (on WIN) got an add for "Tricky Business". Weird.
GD
Guest
What was the story with the "Come on Aussie" cricket ad shortly after the end of the game? That was downright bizarre. Did anyone else see that or did my TV temporarily tune into a broadcast from 1982?
Boomshanka
Guest
If the commentary team were able to commentate on the game instead of cross promoting other 'Nine' programs or other agendas (whatever happened to threw pokies debacle), the experience would be vastly improved. Four million people did not tune in for updates on the block, the voice and upcoming olympic coverage. And why can't we have the number one, highest rating sport in HD (like the olympics are, supposedly)?
Cameron
Guest
"The commentary team seemed disinterested and uncommitted – they were simply going through the motions of another game. " Maybe their attitude gives us an insight as to how the new tv deal negotiations as going for nine.