Rugby union's TV problem isn't viewers - it's the viewing

Tell me about it I have been whinging at Sky Sports over their abysmal coverage for years One year - it seemed some plonker had splashed out on Segways and they wanted to make sure they got used a lot - one entire Blues attacking movement and try was shown completely from the sideline and all we got to see was some backs fat arse If its not pointless sideline shots its closeups when it should be panned out or panned out when it should be a closer in Sideline shots should only ever be used in reply Closes only ever used in ruck situations (where appropriate) Too many of the modern sports directors haven't a clue

The problem is not the camera work. Nothing to do with camera work. It is the amount of Rugby Union shown or given coverage on free to air television. It is simply VFL, NRL, VFL, NRL, VFL, NRL, Soccer and if there is any more space, Rugby Union. Anyone brought up in the daze of televised black and white snow-delayed filming of a week later showing test matches will appreciate the technilogical advances we have made. I am wondering if Seven is going to give us any, if anything, on that drug-free, assault-free, team-game, global game of Sevens at the Olympic Games. It will be merely the Australian Teams matches covered I suppose. Yet if the recent Commonwealth Games are anything to go by Rugby was the best enthusiastically supported event. The stands were packed and the crowd atmosphere was brilliant. No. It will be all about the swimming or Usain Bolt or as I recall the 'Didn't Want to Know You" non interview of Stephanie Rice after coming fourth in the World. Forget camera angles. It is the coverage of the game itself. It is non-existent. I will admit that I am mind-blown however that Offsiders this weekend is having Michael Cheika on their programme. Well I never! You could have knocked me over with a hair-pin.

It was and it doesn't.

sheek... I thought Katipo's article was about Rugby's present TV coverage being crap... when it could easily be much, much better. And, therefore, had nothing to do with Aussie Rugby apparent struggles per se??

You can learn a lot from the wide angle AND a commentator who spots strategies the average viewer doesn't.

I agree. When there is just one thing happening then my all means zoom in. When most of the field is in motion then stay on the full field. Doesn't seem that hard.

Good article. The thing I like best about going to games is that I can focus on a player and what do they do that is different from me. Reference to Wellington NPC games in the 80's. I was fullback after playing hooker forever (back injury) and I could watch John Gallagher for positional play and when he saw opportunities to pop up and make the extra man. You can learn a lot about a team and structure with the wide view. They could quite easily produce a wide view telecast and the normal one and you could have one in the corner of the screen and toggle back and forth between the two. We have the technology.

A better response than the one I gave yesterday, is this: Most people are touching on relevant issues why Australian rugby is struggling. But many of the points raised are dancing around the edges, like TV coverage. Let's get to the meat of the matter, like woeful domestic structures & poor individual skills & a lack of a cohesive understanding of the nuances of rugby.

This has a lot of merit.

To be honest I prefer Kafer, Gregan, Horan and Kearns over Gordon Bray, Poido and Buddha - those days were the nadir of commentary. I actually find these guys pretty fair - I even find it hard to get too worked up - there's always a cool head explaining the play.

Agree entirely. It has seemed for years, and getting worse, that non-rugby people are operating and managing the televising of the game. Who wants to look at the close profile of a sculpted back's gritted teeth while play is occurring metres away. Delete the gratuitous stats from "Clarkie" as well and we'd have a half-decent rugby spectacle.

Katipo, Nice article, well thought out even if I struggle to agree with it. Personally, I blame Pauline Hanson for Australian rugby's woes. And Toby Abbott. Donald Trump & Vladimir Putin are probably culpable somewhere as well. Indeed, Shane warne reckons Joe the cameraman has always been the culprit. In fact, Australian football & rugby league have been extremely uncooperative taking many of the best players far too often. In fact, I think everyone bar rugby itself is to blame for this calamity.....

I worked in television and the general rule of thumb was that the action needed to be consistent in the way the action flowed ie for motor racing the cars always need to be going from left to right regardless of where they are on the track. Similarly for horse racing so that the horses are going in the one direction. Unfortunately directors seems to lose control of that simple rule and they change shots all the time to confuse audiences. In their defence, they have many more cameras to choose from so they are damned if they do and damned if they don't. Sometimes though less is more and an overall view of the field is lost and the perspective is hard to find. As Ned Kelly would say, such is life. I notice the Aussie commentators are always criticising and saying how the game should be played rather than simply giving a description of the game. As for our beloved Gordon Bray, every time a team gets the ball he says "now there's a chance" regardless of the position on the field. Those who criticise Marto and Kearnsey need to realise that they both wear monocles which is just as well because if they had both eyes opened we would drown in their one eyes garbage. Whew, glad I got that off my chest, it is wonderful being perfect (and modest too).

I've often had a similar discussion about the need for a wider view to be used with mates and soorts mad uncles. I regular posit that Rugby like AFL is a game best observed in person as there's often just as much ongoing on away from a ruck than at it. From an Australian broadcast perspective I think sports like League and Cricket have developed a centralized action mentality. Most of the play in League between the two 20m lines is concentrated in an narrow corridor. The same for Cricket.

Thanks for this, Katipo, as I thought I was the only one having this problem. My other pet hate is the use of the Ref Cam, which is popular with Foxtel and I have no idea why. The picture has always been awful the first time I saw it being used and the quality hasn't improved a jolt since then. It is also disorienting. Stop it, Foxtel.

I agree Steve, it's nice to see the width on the passes and the gaps in the defence, too. Isn't so clear from side on

I also like sitting behind the posts for simular reasons. While you don't get the full view, its actually nice to see the back lines working in space from the pov of the teams. Seeing a team work a gap in a backline is can be pretty impressive. Nice article Kapito. Pretty much all areas of the broadcasts could do with improvement, and if we could actually see the whole game, the commentators might not be so annoying.

No.

Hey Katipo. I'd excuse the apparent typo - it's how the logo is supposed to be stylised: https://www.google.com.au/search?q=super+rugby&espv=2&biw=1920&bih=979&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjvioHC0v7NAhUBkpQKHVd0CJYQ_AUICCgD Nice article, BTW.