The Sunday Game

[easytiger95]

Wobbler, how much does it cost Armagh TV to broadcast their games? Surely one could extrapolate that business case out into a model for the entire country? I think you are over egging the costs involved and the revenue required.

This is the point that RTE are missing.

Noone is expecting a complete package or anything like it. I - and I am confident a huge body of supporters - would pay for the bare minimum. Do we not all get our hands on matches via a "DVD" which is a single fixed camera? What is wrong with streaming that live on a national league Sunday?

I would wager that noone wants the shite that RTE offer as analysis anyway and certainly they are space wasters on league sunday (which should be a Breaking Ball type program with no studio element).

Rough and Ready is infinitely better than what is laughably described as a "highlights package" currently.

Major Universities in the states have an inhouse sports streaming service. Pay your weekend pass and access their content across the varsity weekends. The might have 4/5 basketball games, 4/5 American football, Lacrosse, soccer, etc. More games than a full football and hurling weekend.

Camera quality varies from 3/4 and decent to single stationary. Commentary varies from well informed volunteers with some professional skills, through enthusiastic fans to no commentary. You know what you're buying and if you're looking for the soccer ladies thirds then you will take what you can get.

You should stop. Did you ever even watch Breaking Ball? You are embarrassing yourself. Is that condescending enough for you?

[DuffleKing]

The inference is obvious if you didn't want to deliberately miss it - the program should be devoid of studio content, presenters etc - as BB was. I note you just ignored my most recent post.

Is that condescending enough for you?

No more or less than your previous replies. The lack of any alternative thinking in how gaelic games is covered in this country is reflected in all of your posts.

[magpie seanie]

Easytiger - thanks for sharing your knowledge. Like others here I would have thought it was easier to get a better National League highlights show but yourself and Wobbler have made some excellent points. I do disagree slightly in one area. You both believe that the expectation on level of production would be very high......I'm not so sure about that. I think they Kildare game the last day, while it of course looked bad compared to the TG4 and Eir feeds was better than nothing and gave a small taste of the game. I think it gave enough for a 2 minute report, showing a few scores with a voice over giving a pretty general summary. Not saying it has to be in place for all games but it would suffice as a way of reporting on more games (and the full game footage could be available for a fee for the anoraks!).

[easytiger95]

The inference is obvious if you didn't want to deliberately miss it - the program should be devoid of studio content, presenters etc - as BB was. I note you just ignored my most recent post.

Is that condescending enough for you?

No more or less than your previous replies. The lack of any alternative thinking in how gaelic games is covered in this country is reflected in all of your posts.

I didn't ignore your recent post - I simply refuted it with your own words. You said you wanted to replace the current highlights programmes with a Breaking Ball style programme. It turns out what you actually want is a reel of highlight packages with no presenter and no studio. Apart from having no presenter, that bears no resemblance whatsover to Breaking Ball, as I have pointed out repeatedly.

So, basically, what has happened here is,  you have used as an example of the format that you want, a programme with a diametrically opposed format. And when faced with a member of the production team of that very show, pointing this out, instead of having the humility to say "sorry mate, that wasn't what I meant" - you doubled down, saying that the act of me pointing out your mistake was not only condescending but indicative of a groupthink within Irish media and the need for a new alternative.

If you never watched Breaking Ball, don't use it as an example of what you want. If you did watch Breaking Ball, and came away with the idea that it was similar to a highlights reel, you need glasses and a hearing aid.

[easytiger95]

Easytiger - thanks for sharing your knowledge. Like others here I would have thought it was easier to get a better National League highlights show but yourself and Wobbler have made some excellent points. I do disagree slightly in one area. You both believe that the expectation on level of production would be very high......I'm not so sure about that. I think they Kildare game the last day, while it of course looked bad compared to the TG4 and Eir feeds was better than nothing and gave a small taste of the game. I think it gave enough for a 2 minute report, showing a few scores with a voice over giving a pretty general summary. Not saying it has to be in place for all games but it would suffice as a way of reporting on more games (and the full game footage could be available for a fee for the anoraks!).

Absolutely seanie, there is a place for 2 minute reports, but there has to be a recognition of what goes into that, and perhaps why RTE and others choose not to do it. For a report to be accurate and make sense over 2 mins, a single camera man has to go and record the game, either stream the feed back to base or bring it back physically on SD card (which is more likely), then have an editor and possibly an assistant producer cut it down, then write a brief script for v/o before playing it out. So it is an involved process, and the 2 mins you get is the best that you are going to get from that single camera footage.

So when people decry the 2 min option as being somehow disrespectful to the counties involved, I see it as a legitimate attempt to involve more counties, and infinitely preferable for viewers than 70 minute streams of single camera footage. I might be biased there, again, because I'm in the industry, and you're always pushing for things to look as good as they possibly can.

[Hardy]

I always thought Breaking Ball was the best template for a GAA magazine programme until I saw Breaking Bad. Especially when Tyrone are featured.

[trileacman]

Great points easytiger.

Armagh tv I find is a great service. It's obviously done off a small budget and has its limits but still it serves a good purpose.

Could RTÉ possibly do something like that? Say send one camera to a game and either stream it live or offer to stream the whole match during the week following? That would save the work of editing and production but still provide coverage of games that people were unable to attend in person.

[westbound]

Does anyone know who does the footage for the sigerson games?

This was available on youtube yesterday before this game was over!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_5w6XpARuzM&feature=youtu.be


I'd be very happy with this type of coverage of the lower leagues in the NFL.

Maybe easytiger can explain to me why this can't be done?

[OgraAnDun]

Does anyone know who does the footage for the sigerson games?

This was available on youtube yesterday before this game was over!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_5w6XpARuzM&feature=youtu.be


I'd be very happy with this type of coverage of the lower leagues in the NFL.

Maybe easytiger can explain to me why this can't be done?

I think that you may find the person that filmed this posting videos from other competitions on this forum.

[AZOffaly]

That's the user Any Craic...

[westbound]

And really, the question I'm getting at is why isn't it possible to do something similar for the NFL/NHL?

[easytiger95]

And really, the question I'm getting at is why isn't it possible to do something similar for the NFL/NHL?

Ok, let's look at what you have shown. It is a 40 second clip. It is shot by one cameraman, who has a nice elevated position. He has been clever and stuck a Go Pro in the goals - he probably stuck another one in the far goals. So he shoots the game, he goes home, sticks the SD card in the computer from the main camera, gets the goal out, puts it on a time line, then gets the Go Pro, downloads the footage from that, goes to the same timecode (if he thought to sync them both, otherwise he is spooling through it - no matter, only takes a few minutes) and then he tops and tails that clip from the Go Pro and puts that on the timeline - bish, bash, bosh, you have a 40 second clip.

Now let's think what would happen if you were actually streaming this footage live. Look at the clip, he stays with the scorer, pushes in tight on him as an identifying shot - which you should do. Then he cuts to his replay. If you were streaming that live, you wouldn't be able to cut to a replay, unless you had both cameras connected to a mixing desk (then you are getting into expense, someone manning that desk etc). So, assuming you don't want to do that, the cameraman now has to get back to the goalkeeper for the kick out - from where he is, on tight shot of the scorer. So he whips back to the goalie. It looks ugly and feels disorientating - depending on the kick out strategy and how high scoring a game it is, you are doing that 30 times in a game, more if you include reactions to wides, even more if you try and be ambitious and try and get manager/sideline/crowd reaction.

The very best single cameramen (and believe me guys, if you think it is just a matter of sticking a camera in someone hands, you are very wrong - even amongst the pros, there are lads who have reputations for being the best at single camera footage) will do all that and take those risks - and why? Because they know that single camera shouldn't be watched in full, that are you shooting for the edit, not for a live broadcast, and the more options and cutaways you give the editor, the better your 2 minute report will look.

So, if we can agree that in terms of broadcast (and I'm talking about on a national basis, not club websites) single camera 70 minute footage isn't a runner, than we need to look at what we can get from the 16 or so games that take place on a football weekend (and more if it is a hurling weekend as well). What do we want from these games?

The TV companies only have the money to do about three games each live or deferred on Saturdays and Sundays. And the GAA wouldn't want them doing full coverage of much more in case it affects the gate for other fixures. So you have say roughly 10 games going uncovered at any one weekend.

Do you propose sending a single cameraman to each of those games? Ok, do it (you might have a problem finding that many decent pro sports camera man - remember there are 6 OBs happening that weekend as well, and they would be booked for them first - but let's assume you do).

What are you asking them to do - a two minute report from each of them? Because if you do that, you not only need 10 camera men, you'll need assistant producers to watch over the cut, and editors to do the cut, and a couple of reporters to script and V/O those reports. And by the way, you have just allocated 20-25 minutes of your programme to footage whose quality in no way resembles the six games that weekend that did get full 3 or more camera footage. You only have an hour in the schedules (maybe an hour thirty if there is hurling on as well). And although a lot of people on message boards don't like it, you do have to provide some analysis, where is your time for that?

Or perhaps you just want one clip, say around 40 secs, from each of those 10, possibly more games. You are still paying for cameraman to be in each location - you still have some editing costs, because he is not just doing it for a college communications unit himself - he is bringing the footage into you in RTE/Eir/TV3/TG4 whererever.

And so you do all that, you do a round up for everyone - 40 secs from each game - and someone on a message board says it is a disgrace that you only gave 40 secs to their county. And then you reach for the brandy and a revolver.

These are all the decisions a producer faces - they are editorial, they are budgetary, they are time and schedule based. Producers don't have time to be biased against smaller counties. County websites have the luxury of catering for the highest common denominator - the absolute GAA buff who would watch anything. A producer on a national broadcaster doesn't have that - he has to go for the widest audience, and the widest audience expect quality above a youtube video.

And that is why, in general, the matches beyond the live games, don't get covered universally.

[AZOffaly]

And really, the question I'm getting at is why isn't it possible to do something similar for the NFL/NHL?

Ok, let's look at what you have shown. It is a 40 second clip. It is shot by one cameraman, who has a nice elevated position. He has been clever and stuck a Go Pro in the goals - he probably stuck another one in the far goals. So he shoots the game, he goes home, sticks the SD card in the computer from the main camera, gets the goal out, puts it on a time line, then gets the Go Pro, downloads the footage from that, goes to the same timecode (if he thought to sync them both, otherwise he is spooling through it - no matter, only takes a few minutes) and then he tops and tails that clip from the Go Pro and puts that on the timeline - bish, bash, bosh, you have a 40 second clip.

Now let's think what would happen if you were actually streaming this footage live. Look at the clip, he stays with the scorer, pushes in tight on him as an identifying shot - which you should do. Then he cuts to his replay. If you were streaming that live, you wouldn't be able to cut to a replay, unless you had both cameras connected to a mixing desk (then you are getting into expense, someone manning that desk etc). So, assuming you don't want to do that, the cameraman now has to get back to the goalkeeper for the kick out - from where he is, on tight shot of the scorer. So he whips back to the goalie. It looks ugly and feels disorientating - depending on the kick out strategy and how high scoring a game it is, you are doing that 30 times in a game, more if you include reactions to wides, even more if you try and be ambitious and try and get manager/sideline/crowd reaction.

The very best single cameramen (and believe me guys, if you think it is just a matter of sticking a camera in someone hands, you are very wrong - even amongst the pros, there are lads who have reputations for being the best at single camera footage) will do all that and take those risks - and why? Because they know that single camera shouldn't be watched in full, that are you shooting for the edit, not for a live broadcast, and the more options and cutaways you give the editor, the better your 2 minute report will look.

So, if we can agree that in terms of broadcast (and I'm talking about on a national basis, not club websites) single camera 70 minute footage isn't a runner, than we need to look at what we can get from the 16 or so games that take place on a football weekend (and more if it is a hurling weekend as well). What do we want from these games?

The TV companies only have the money to do about three games each live or deferred on Saturdays and Sundays. And the GAA wouldn't want them doing full coverage of much more in case it affects the gate for other fixures. So you have say roughly 10 games going uncovered at any one weekend.

Do you propose sending a single cameraman to each of those games? Ok, do it (you might have a problem finding that many decent pro sports camera man - remember there are 6 OBs happening that weekend as well, and they would be booked for them first - but let's assume you do).

What are you asking them to do - a two minute report from each of them? Because if you do that, you not only need 10 camera men, you'll need assistant producers to watch over the cut, and editors to do the cut, and a couple of reporters to script and V/O those reports. And by the way, you have just allocated 20-25 minutes of your programme to footage whose quality in no way resembles the six games that weekend that did get full 3 or more camera footage. You only have an hour in the schedules (maybe an hour thirty if there is hurling on as well). And although a lot of people on message boards don't like it, you do have to provide some analysis, where is your time for that?

Or perhaps you just want one clip, say around 40 secs, from each of those 10, possibly more games. You are still paying for cameraman to be in each location - you still have some editing costs, because he is not just doing it for a college communications unit himself - he is bringing the footage into you in RTE/Eir/TV3/TG4 whererever.

And so you do all that, you do a round up for everyone - 40 secs from each game - and someone on a message board says it is a disgrace that you only gave 40 secs to their county. And then you reach for the brandy and a revolver.

These are all the decisions a producer faces - they are editorial, they are budgetary, they are time and schedule based. Producers don't have time to be biased against smaller counties. County websites have the luxury of catering for the highest common denominator - the absolute GAA buff who would watch anything. A producer on a national broadcaster doesn't have that - he has to go for the widest audience, and the widest audience expect quality above a youtube video.

And that is why, in general, the matches beyond the live games, don't get covered universally.

tiger, that makes a lot of sense to me, and I understand what you are saying. However I think you are trying to consider something very different than I am. I'm not looking for gold standard live production, with cutaways, close ups and replays. I'm not even necessarily talking about live streaming.

In my simple head, with absolutely no TV experience, I am picturing the lads who are currently recording every single county game, and a lot of club games, with an elevated single camera, for video analysis etc. I see them at every game (unless the GAA ban them in Croke Park!) up on a scaffold, or the top of a van. They tape it, warts and all, and then they create DVDs which the clubs and counties look at, and splice for tactical analysis. They also show them in the pub on monday!

I'm just wondering what the commerical realities would be to take those DVDs, on a Monday, and upload them to a cloud based storage solution, and then sell subscriptions to allow access to download and view the ones you want. It would still be Paddy Joe's recording, single camera.

So take away the perfectionist in you for a moment, is that feasible, or would it be cost prohibitive? Given the cameras are there anyway in most of the cases, I'm thinking the major cost factors would be data storage/access, and the cost of doing the video itself?

I'm not trying to belittle the effort and skill that goes into making a top class highlights/live production show, I'm just trying to see in this digital age is there a low cost, low tech way of at least allowing people see games in a library, for a manageable cost.

***Edit

As an example, because I am a nerd, I subscribe to MILB.com. It's Minor League Baseball. Now I don't know if you know minor league baseball, but it goes from Triple A, all the way down to Single A, Rookie Ball and various Fall and Winter Leagues. The crowds can be pitiful. The grounds are small and very basic. But they show almost every single game, every night. I can be watching the Hickory Crawdads versus the Greensboro Grasshoppers from North Carolina on a Tuesday night. It's a fixed camera set to a wide shot, and every so often it jerkily moves into focus on the next batter before panning out again. Golden Globes it ain't but it does a job, and allows me to watch a small town minor league game in the middle of the summer. Probably 10 people worldwide actually bothering to watch this particular game

[easytiger95]

I'm probably the wrong person to be asking AZ, because the essence of my job is to be a perfectionist. We used to say when I was directing you had to be frame perfect, and even making one mistake during a live broadcast used to drive me wild (so it is probably a good idea that I only do it very rarely now)

Can you do what you are suggesting? Absolutely. Where Syferus has it right, is that with new technology anything is possible. Where we differ is that I would look at anything with a producer's eye and ask myself is it worth doing? Bearing in mind all the questions I said producers must ask, that I posited at the end of my last post, it is definitely not a project that I would be getting involved in.

Here is why

I work in broadcast - none of this material is broadcast quality. Indeed even the stuff you are talking about being done by the teams, a lot of the times is done to frame a specific view. Back in my day it was common place for both teams before a game to ask for an isolated feed on DVD of the high behind camera from each match. Watching just a high behind of a game doesn't give me, as a viewer, any of the info I want - individual battles, close ups of skills, catches, fouls etc

Now, I know that what are you talking about is an online resource - but here are the questions I would ask -

Who are the cameramen?
Are they being paid centrally by one body or are we asking them to be hired by each and every county board? (If the latter, then there will be a huge variance in quality)
How are we getting the material back to our production hub? I argued with Syferus before about the implausibility of streaming all these feeds back both on an expense and on a logistics basis -the bandwidth just isn't there at the moment.
Are we curating these matches (are we editing them at all and when do we put them out - because edit and storage have costs)? Is there an archive (speaks to expense again)? Are we asking people to go through a pay wall (will people see value for money in grainy enough footage)? Is that on a subscription basis? And if these are even club games, who owns the rights? Because I know Eir and TG4 will want to know what the hell I'm doing with this stuff.

When I was arguing with Syf, he said that cloud storage was less expensive, the less people accessed it - he put this forward as a way of justifying his costs - it won't be that expensive, because there will be barely anyone interested. Well, why would anyone or any company be involved in a project like that? It just doesn't wash its own face and is wrongheaded in conception.

It was interesting that you mentioned baseball. Two things here - America is both big enough in terms of population and advanced enough in technology that pursuits such as minor league baseball can actually provide a business model that makes a profit. there is just not the same scale here, and new technology isn't going to change that.

Secondly, I have directed, in my time, football, hurling, rugby, soccer, swimming, hockey, boxing and American football. You direct them all differently. Something like baseball and cricket, can be covered on a wide because they are boundary based games. Football and hurling are completely different. I've seen big time directors come over from the UK and try and do GAA games and leave the trucks practically in tears. The essence of our games is the personal duel - taking on a man and beating him. You need to get in tight. Compared to a soccer game, where you can hang on a wide for a lot of the game, you can't do that with GAA. You're just not getting an idea of the game.

So, to sum up - yes it can be done. But for the life of me, I can't understand why you would do it, and where you would get the money and patience to do it.

[easytiger95]

As a PS

America has a huge network of local TV stations and affiliates - so each local area already has a broadcast structure in place. You can guarantee that the local producer goes down to the minor league baseball stadium, fits a couple of robotic cameras feeding into a fibre back to the station, so he can show games really cheaply, and then also gets a few shillings from minor league baseball to upload them to the website.

There is just not the same level of tiers here, and never will be, because of the population. If you don't have that structure already on the ground, you can't do things cheaply. And if you have enough of these feed coming into you, like MILB.com has, then you can leverage the crap stuff with the better stuff - you're getting filler when you don't have premium live stuff, and the swivel eyed obsessives (not saying that is you AZ  ) have something to watch in the wee hours.