2020 Non-Crows AFL Discussion

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.


This week, under the condition of anonymity, I asked AFL coaches and team analysts a simple question: would they be able to understand a game of modern AFL football from the television broadcast alone?

Their blunt answers of "no" gave way to detailed observations that painted a picture of AFL broadcasting as something closer to a coaching fraternity in-joke.

The outline of grievances is simple enough:

  • The tactical battle can now only be truly understood with vision from behind the goals, an angle from which the home viewer rarely sees anything other than replays of goals or reportable incidents
  • How a team sets up at a stoppage is crucial to the outcome of the contest but a total mystery on TV
  • There are too many lingering close-ups that serve no purpose other than to familiarise viewers with players' haircuts and tattoos, and obscure what is really happening in the game
  • When the game slows down and the ball carrier is launching a transition of play, home viewers rarely, if ever, see the options available to him
  • Some of these gaps in knowledge could be overcome if commentators explained tactical scenarios or anticipated the decision-making of players, but they rarely offer anything other than a description of what has already occurred.
I could be wrong but I vaguely recall that boundary riders were also more informative in the past, providing us with more insight into what was happening off camera. These days some, like Ling, seem to add little in that regard and look to be more concerned with being a part of the "fun" that's going on in the commentary box.
 

Log in to remove this ad.



This week, under the condition of anonymity, I asked AFL coaches and team analysts a simple question: would they be able to understand a game of modern AFL football from the television broadcast alone?

Their blunt answers of "no" gave way to detailed observations that painted a picture of AFL broadcasting as something closer to a coaching fraternity in-joke.

The outline of grievances is simple enough:

  • The tactical battle can now only be truly understood with vision from behind the goals, an angle from which the home viewer rarely sees anything other than replays of goals or reportable incidents
  • How a team sets up at a stoppage is crucial to the outcome of the contest but a total mystery on TV
  • There are too many lingering close-ups that serve no purpose other than to familiarise viewers with players' haircuts and tattoos, and obscure what is really happening in the game
  • When the game slows down and the ball carrier is launching a transition of play, home viewers rarely, if ever, see the options available to him
  • Some of these gaps in knowledge could be overcome if commentators explained tactical scenarios or anticipated the decision-making of players, but they rarely offer anything other than a description of what has already occurred.
Foxtel used to allow you to watch games from a high up view with the red button. It was the best way to watch it on TV.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk
 
I could be wrong but I vaguely recall that boundary riders were also more informative in the past, providing us with more insight into what was happening off camera. These days some, like Ling, seem to add little in that regard and look to be more concerned with being a part of the "fun" that's going on in the commentary box.

"Down to you, Knuckles".
"That's 5 frees to 1, Carlton's way".
"Thanks Kerls"
 
Agree that the tactical part of an AFL game is far more interesting at the ground and missed at home.

Not just the vision though, my biggest issue with the broadcast is that I'd rather get my "comedy" from other sources and prefer a more analytical option for watching sport.

With Kayo it would be great to pick and choose how you watch and who you hear.

I used to use the alternate Foxtel angles with just crowd noise when that was available, but just a bit, would ultimately end up going back to the produced product, it wasn't quite there, especially when TVs were smaller.

Certainly not the biggest issue or the problem that needs to be solved right now.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)



This week, under the condition of anonymity, I asked AFL coaches and team analysts a simple question: would they be able to understand a game of modern AFL football from the television broadcast alone?

Their blunt answers of "no" gave way to detailed observations that painted a picture of AFL broadcasting as something closer to a coaching fraternity in-joke.

The outline of grievances is simple enough:

  • The tactical battle can now only be truly understood with vision from behind the goals, an angle from which the home viewer rarely sees anything other than replays of goals or reportable incidents
  • How a team sets up at a stoppage is crucial to the outcome of the contest but a total mystery on TV
  • There are too many lingering close-ups that serve no purpose other than to familiarise viewers with players' haircuts and tattoos, and obscure what is really happening in the game
  • When the game slows down and the ball carrier is launching a transition of play, home viewers rarely, if ever, see the options available to him
  • Some of these gaps in knowledge could be overcome if commentators explained tactical scenarios or anticipated the decision-making of players, but they rarely offer anything other than a description of what has already occurred.

My seats to Crows games are in the Riverbank stand just left of goals. I have been enjoying this view far better as I can see the structure and play unfold up the ground. Far better than sitting on the wing for that reason.
 
My seats to Crows games are in the Riverbank stand just left of goals. I have been enjoying this view far better as I can see the structure and play unfold up the ground. Far better than sitting on the wing for that reason.
Next to me then
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top