|
Post by joepuck on Sept 23, 2008 21:48:19 GMT -4
how come telus doesnt offer any HD feeds for the wildcats games?
|
|
|
Post by zambonidriver on Sept 24, 2008 5:30:48 GMT -4
how come telus doesnt offer any HD feeds for the wildcats games? Quite simply it's that the cost is too high. They charge the Cats to televise the games and from what I have heard in the past, they want too much. It's a business decision.
|
|
|
Post by spanz on Sept 24, 2008 6:23:51 GMT -4
I hear they are volunteer amateurs, so they need to be cut SOME slack. But I do agree, it is frustrating to try to watch their game. Why someone knowledgable in the area, maybe one of the local TV stations, does not come in and give a training seminar to these guys is beyond me. Basic skills are missing.
If no training is available, they should just train the 2nd camera on the scoreboard AND LEAVE IT THERE, and use the other camera for ALL OTHER work.
|
|
|
Post by sakss on Sept 24, 2008 7:14:43 GMT -4
I hear they are volunteer amateurs, so they need to be cut SOME slack. But I do agree, it is frustrating to try to watch their game. Why someone knowledgable in the area, maybe one of the local TV stations, does not come in and give a training seminar to these guys is beyond me. Basic skills are missing. If no training is available, they should just train the 2nd camera on the scoreboard AND LEAVE IT THERE, and use the other camera for ALL OTHER work. Well, its probably the same volunteers who does a good work in all the other arenas. All we are asking is to NOT switch camera angles while the play is going on, they can zoom as much as they want while the play is stopped.
|
|
|
Post by zambonidriver on Sept 24, 2008 20:12:53 GMT -4
Maybe they should watch a couple of NHL games and see how it should be done.
|
|
|
Post by Sébastien on Sept 25, 2008 1:01:03 GMT -4
Maybe they should watch a couple of NHL games and see how it should be done. I disagree and I think that's actually part of the problem right now. They try to make it "like an NHL game", because if you watch an NHL game, they change the angles often, but they can do that because they have very good, high-tech equipment and professional cameramen, compared to what the Q teams have available to them. I say the opposite. Know and accept your weaknesses. Stick with one camera.
|
|
|
Post by Chuck2k6 on Sept 25, 2008 1:49:41 GMT -4
Re: NHL coverage...
Not only do they have high-tech equipment and pros working the cameras, they have a trailer full of people working the switches and a director who knows what they're doing.
During an NHL fight you might see one camera change during the fight, and that's only if the first shot becomes unacceptable for some reason, be it fans in the way, or whatnot. Then on the replays you will see other angles.
The live action is not when you try and cover all the angles. If I'm watching a specific play in the game, be it an end-to-end rush, or a fight. I want to see it from one angle live. I don't want to feel like I'm being tossed into about six different seats in the arena.
My advice to the Moncton people is not unlike others' advice. Stick to your centre-ice camera for the live play. If you have the capabilities to show replays on the webcast then that's where you can show another angle or two, but even then don't continue to switch back and forth between them; it's disorienting. If you want to have more than one angle during the play, have one high in a corner to show the play in an end, then when the puck leaves that end switch back to your centre-ice cam.
If you don't have the capabilities to show replays on the webcast then it becomes more important that you don't miss anything! If you're constantly switching camera angles the viewers are constantly trying to get their bearings; who's where? who's doing what? where am I looking from? Is the net now to the left, or the right? Confusing your viewers is never good when you have people who want to follow the play and watch the play develop.
"Is the winger gonna cut to the open slot? There he........ damn, they changed cameras, now where is he?.... oh ther........ damn! Oh, there's the puck.. Pass to the point!... there you g..... damn!!! Now what........ it's in? I missed the goal.... great!"
|
|
jazz
Blue-Chip Prospect
Posts: 371
|
Post by jazz on Sept 29, 2008 18:43:57 GMT -4
anyone know why the Halifax game is not in the Telus archives??
|
|
|
Post by SteveUL on Sept 29, 2008 19:23:51 GMT -4
anyone know why the Halifax game is not in the Telus archives?? Because the Refs and Video goal judge screwed up and they can't have that out there.
|
|
|
Post by zambonidriver on Sept 30, 2008 16:43:12 GMT -4
anyone know why the Halifax game is not in the Telus archives?? Because the Refs and Video goal judge screwed up and they can't have that out there. I could be wrong but didn't the refs called it a goal right off and it was only after the review that it was waved off. There was no reason given at the time. Refs right, goal judge screwed up??
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Sept 30, 2008 18:24:59 GMT -4
Because the Refs and Video goal judge screwed up and they can't have that out there. I could be wrong but didn't the refs called it a goal right off and it was only after the review that it was waved off. There was no reason given at the time. Refs right, goal judge screwed up?? The goal judge had no say in it if it went to replay.
|
|
|
Post by SteveUL on Oct 1, 2008 8:12:26 GMT -4
I could be wrong but didn't the refs called it a goal right off and it was only after the review that it was waved off. There was no reason given at the time. Refs right, goal judge screwed up?? The goal judge had no say in it if it went to replay. I think he meant video goal judge. But on the webcast ... John Moore seemed to indicate that the Ref called it a goal when it happened ... and the red light went on. Even the Video goal judge may have not screwed up ... if he can't see the puck in the net or completely over the line in any of the views he has at his disposal ... then he says "I can't see the puck ever fully over the line" ... that doesn't mean he is wrong. But is that enough to overturn the call on the ice ? I would think the video goal judge would have to say that "it is conclusive that the puck never crossed the line". Ultimately it is the Ref's decision if he is going to overturn the call ... it depends on what he hears from the Video judge. I wonder if they have the ability to add a goal to the score (days later) if in fact an error was made. I know it makes no difference and it would be pointless in this case. But perhaps in another case where a team has a goal overturned like this ... go on to lose the game in OT ... and miss the playoffs by getting bumped with the first tie-breaker ... wins. It could really make a difference.
|
|
|
Post by chootoi on Oct 1, 2008 8:41:25 GMT -4
they've overturned scores before, but for other reasons. remember when the cats lost to victoriaville (i think) a couple of years ago and then a few days later the league ruled that victo had used an ineligible 20 yo. they overturned the win, but i'm not sure how it affected scoring statistics.
i don't think they would do anything for the scenario you're describing though. the call is what it is. they certainly wouldn't overturn a score because of a bad call. refs and replay judges make mistakes all the time and teams have to live with it. legit goals are called off all of the time and vice versa. it's part of sports i guess. it sucks sometimes for your team but it happens.
|
|
|
Post by SteveUL on Oct 1, 2008 9:04:03 GMT -4
they've overturned scores before, but for other reasons. remember when the cats lost to victoriaville (i think) a couple of years ago and then a few days later the league ruled that victo had used an ineligible 20 yo. they overturned the win, but i'm not sure how it affected scoring statistics. i don't think they would do anything for the scenario you're describing though. the call is what it is. they certainly wouldn't overturn a score because of a bad call. refs and replay judges make mistakes all the time and teams have to live with it. legit goals are called off all of the time and vice versa. it's part of sports i guess. it sucks sometimes for your team but it happens. This is a little different than a bad call though. The Ref called it a goal on the ice ... and then only after talking to the video goal judge (without seeing the replay himself) did it get overturned ... when it seems it should not have been overturned. Maybe in the future they'll go the baseball route ... have the Ref go into the Officials Room and view a replay feed himself.
|
|
|
Post by habh8er on Oct 1, 2008 9:19:39 GMT -4
Maybe in the future they'll go the baseball route ... have the Ref go into the Officials Room and view a replay feed himself. I think this is the way it should be anyways. The NFL model works well(now). There is no reason there can't be a monitor in the scorekeepers box. The guys upstairs could run through the different camera angles, and forward the ones that give the referee the best view of the call in question. It makes no sense leaving the call to some guy in a video room, who may or may not make the right call. It should be up to the referee who is working the game(or end in a 2 ref system) to make the right call with aide of the video.....the way it is now the referee is as useless as that guy that sits behind the net who turns the red light off and on when it comes to the most important calls in the game. Leave it up to the ref, makes no sense to take it out of his hands, when he is the one who knows what it is that he wants to review.
|
|