Bennett slams TV stoppages

[Quidgybo]

As was just pointed out to you, the debate isn't about the game being stopped for ad breaks. It's about the restart of play being delayed. The game is already stopped at the time the ad breaks are taken. A small difference perhaps, but a significant one none the less.

Leigh.

 

[griff]

No, the game should never be stopped for ad breaks. But I think we could get many more games live on free to air TV and get a better price for TV rights if we utilised existing breaks in play to show more ads.

 

[Quidgybo]

Murray OK with ad-break delays


ANTONY STEWART
19Mar07

COWBOYS coach Graham Murray is more than happy to sacrifice a few seconds if it means Friday Night Football is live on television.


The NRL season opener between North Queensland and Brisbane created a stir when numerous kick restarts were delayed by up to 30 seconds to allow for commercial breaks during Channel Nine's coverage.


Referee Steve Clark, who would call time out, could be heard repeatedly telling players they could not recommence play following conversion and penalty goal attempts until the advertising was over.


The breaks stopped any chance of a quick restart.


Following the match, won by the Cowboys 23-16, both Broncos coach Wayne Bennett and Murray said they were unaware that the stoppages would be occurring.


Bennett even went on to say that the time outs were `tampering with the fabric of the game' and robbing teams of momentum.


For Murray, though, the major inconvenience was just that he and his players were not informed prior to the match and had been caught by surprise.


"I think it's all been agreed upon that there will be a couple of ads between the try and the kick off," Murray said.


"What should have happened, and obviously didn't happen, was that no-one informed the clubs.


"Wayne Bennett and myself didn't have time to explain to the players what was happening.


"The only thing that was different the other night was obviously (Darren) Lockyer wanted to kick off earlier and so did (Johnathan) Thurston and those guys didn't know what the league had in mind.


"But, as of this week, everyone knows what they have got in mind."


The NRL released a statement on Saturday saying the stoppages would continue. According to the agreement between the league and Channel Nine: `the network are allowed a 30-second window between the signal of touch judge's flags after a successful conversion and the ensuing kick off'.


It said that extensive research had shown that most restarts usually took 30 seconds regardless of the telecast requirements.


Now aware the stoppages would be a part of Friday Night Football, Murray said he had no real complaints.


And after years of the matches being telecast on a delay, he said a slightly slower kick off was a small price to pay to watch the game live.


"What will happen is you just walk back slow to the kick off, it's no big deal," he said.


"If we have to give away 20 seconds at a kick off so that we can have live television on a Friday night, I will be happy to do that. You just wander back, there's no panicking about it, there's no real reason to run back and look for the kick off."

http://www.townsvillebulletin.com.au/article/2007/03/19/1091_cowboys.html

No surprise that the evaluation is little different from the coach that didn't need to find an excuse for losing.

Leigh

 

[Willow]

As was just pointed out to you, the debate isn't about the game being stopped for ad breaks

That's exactly what the debate is about.
Am I to assume that you do not support the TV networks dictating stoppages in play?

 

[griff]

COWBOYS coach Graham Murray is more than happy to sacrifice a few seconds if it means Friday Night Football is live on television.

at least the coach of one Qld club has the game's best interests at heart

 

[Quidgybo]

No, the game should never be stopped for ad breaks. But I think we could get many more games live on free to air TV and get a better price for TV rights if we utilised existing breaks in play to show more ads.

Hullo?!? These *are* existing breaks in play. We're just making three or four of them a few seconds longer each half. Anyone reading this thread could be forgiven for thinking we're calling time outs on the third tackle ten metres out from the try line.

Leigh.

 

[griff]

Hullo?!? These *are* existing breaks in play. We're just making three or four of them a few seconds longer each half. Anyone reading this thread could be forgiven for thinking we're calling time outs on the third tackle ten metres out from the try line.

Leigh.

I think that's what some people who haven't been paying attention must think is going on. As I'm trying to point out, no one is suggesting that, but I'm saying we should have ads shown in existing breaks in play as it benefits the game enormously.

 

[Quidgybo]

Am I to assume that you do not support the TV networks dictating stoppages in play?

As I said earlier in this thread, in this instance I not only support the compromise agreed with the television network but think it is a fantastic development for the coverage of RL. A delay of around about one minute per half during natural breaks in play for live FTA coverage *every* week. We've given away peanuts to ensure we get great coverage.

Leigh.

 

[Willow]

at least the coach of one Qld club has the game's best interests at heart

The same article also said:

"For Murray, though, the major inconvenience was just that he and his players were not informed prior to the match and had been caught by surprise."

 

[Willow]

As I said earlier in this thread, in this instance I not only support the compromise agreed with the television network but think it is a fantastic development for the coverage of RL. A delay of around about one minute per half during natural breaks in play for live FTA coverage *every* week. We've given away peanuts to ensure we get great coverage.

Leigh.

lol. I asked a straight forward Q:
Do you support the TV networks dictating stoppages in play?

I assume the answer is yes?

 

[Quidgybo]

As this seems to be the right place, can I say that after just watching the Titans match, I think the Gold Coast were robbed. They didn't lose that match because of Preston Campbell turning over posession while on attack in Saints half with ten to go, or Walker failing to take a bomb close to his line soon after. It wasn't even the breather Naiguama got his side when he went down for a minute with cramp or the time out while a Saints player sat pouring blood out his nose with the trainer. No, it was obviously nothing the players did or didn't do during the game. It was all down to the disgraceful two minute "time out for drinks" (Ray Warren's words) in the second half immediately after the Titans first try in their comeback. If it hadn't been for that break robbing the Titans of momentum and giving the Saints a chance to recoup for the final run home I have no doubt the Titans would have put on another six tries. Saints were gone. I intend to write to the League, call my local MP and pickett David Gallop's house until this this disgraceful rule endangering the fabric of the game is repealed and a formal apology issued to the Gold Coast Titans and RL fans in general.

Leigh.

 

[Quidgybo]

lol. I asked a straight forward Q:
Do you support the TV networks dictating stoppages in play?

And the answer is no. But I do support TV networks dictating small delays in the restart of play of no more than 15 seconds after a natural stoppage has already occurred three or four times per half. Happy now?

Legh.

 

[Quidgybo]

The same article also said:

"For Murray, though, the major inconvenience was just that he and his players were not informed prior to the match and had been caught by surprise."

As I said in my first post in this thread, I knew about this eighteen months ago. And I was living in Ireland at the time and haven't been near Australia since. I can't see how anyone who actually works within the NRL competition can possibly use ignorance as an excuse when someone with no official connection to the game, living on the opposite side of the planet, knew more than a year ago. But regardless, what little weight that excuse has is valid for exactly one day. Everyone knows now, see you next week.

Leigh.

 

[God-King Dean]

So, you are not willing...

Thick as a brick. It's not about us sitting at home. It's about the game, & ad breaks, should never ever directly affect the game.

 

[Knight76]

When a try is scored the teams used to wait for the conversion and head back to the half way to restart the game again.

Now, they score a try, convert, and are told by the ref "Drinks break" and they all head over to get some drink into them. Then when the adds are over head back to the half way to restart play.

This to me can be described as stopping play. Q. Does the ref blow time off for this break? Did he used to blow time off after a conversion?

 

[Bengal]

What a strange world some people live in. Television has been changing the game on the field for thirty years. From red lines, thicker lines, painted 10 meter digits and syntheitic white footballs to wired refs and video refs. Be in no doubt if it wasn't for slo-mo television replays showing up refereeing errors, we would never have ended up with in-goal judges and video refs, nor with touch judges able to rule on forward passes and off sides. And if it wasn't for television we would never have ended up with players on report instead of being sent off.

And who instigated these changes – League people or media folk and for what reason(s) were these done for, to enhance the game’s appeal over television or to please TV moguls?

You’re arse about face…all these changes were instigated by League people to make the game more appealing over TV, to enhance the game’s appeal overall. League has (or shall I say had) used TV for its benefit, it’s slowly but surely heading the other way now…TV is using and ringing League dry. These ad breaks do nothing, absolutely nothing for the sport.

One last point to consider while we're busy arguing over three or four 15 second delays each half during natural breaks, the NRL has for quite a few years now had a rule that allows for full 2 minute time outs each half during natural breaks in play if the weather is too hot. Personally I think we should just let the whinging players die of heat exhaustion rather than compromise the fabric of the game like that. Compared to the short pauses for television, these full 2 minute stoppages are an absolute scandal.

Players dying aside (we get the mickey), these stoppages are for the games benefit (looking after our #1 resource), that's the big difference Your stoppages are for the moguls benefit only and worst of all, have the potential to stuff up our game good n proper, especially if they want an even bigger pound of flesh in the future, and given the way business operates - that's more than likely.

Just 15 extra seconds! I'll repeat that - just 15 seconds.

If it's just 15 seconds then let the game continue, after all, the average punter will only miss out on 15 seconds play, I repeat - 15 seconds!

As was just pointed out to you, the debate isn't about the game being stopped for ad breaks. It's about the restart of play being delayed.

The debate (as per usual) is about who actually runs this game! The fact that the coaches and the players had no idea that this was on the cards speaks for itself - unbelievable, but a clear sign of who actually runs this game.

We're just making three or four of them a few seconds longer each half. Anyone reading this thread could be forgiven for thinking we're calling time outs on the third tackle ten metres out from the try line.

Who is "we" and how come 'whoever you are' can do this without the most important people in the game knowing!! Again, unbelievable. One shudders to think what else 'you guys' are capable of doing when the feeling takes ya!

As I said earlier in this thread, in this instance I not only support the compromise agreed with the television network but think it is a fantastic development for the coverage of RL. A delay of around about one minute per half during natural breaks in play for live FTA coverage *every* week. We've given away peanuts to ensure we get great coverage.

No, there is absolutely nothing fantastic about this at all....all it does is graphically illustrate how powerless we are to the moguls.

But I do support TV networks dictating small delays in the restart of play of no more than 15 seconds after a natural stoppage has already occurred three or four times per half. Happy now?

And where will this dictating end? What will they dictate next...

As I said in my first post in this thread, I knew about this eighteen months ago.

Aha, you and who else? One person knowing is hardly something to shout about!



.

 

[jed]

If it's just 15 seconds then let the game continue, after all, the average punter will only miss out on 15 seconds play, I repeat - 15 seconds!

Yeah, right, imagine the uproar if in that 15 seconds of missed play, there is a line break by Karmichael Hunt, he runs the length of the field and scores a try under the black dot, and the TV coverage returns just in time to see the ref blow his whistle and point at the spot.

 

[Razor]

Yeah, right, imagine the uproar if in that 15 seconds of missed play, there is a line break by Karmichael Hunt, he runs the length of the field and scores a try under the black dot, and the TV coverage returns just in time to see the ref blow his whistle and point at the spot.

They've tried that before. Whenever they miss action on the field showing live games, they get a massive number of complaints.

 

[jed]

For Murray, though, the major inconvenience was just that he and his players were not informed prior to the match and had been caught by surprise.

As Quidgybo mentioned earlier, this is hardly news, this was all discussed here middle of last season.

Delays to restarts for more ads
Jacquelin Magnay
July 7, 2006

RUGBY league rules will be changed at the request of broadcasters so there is a 30-second delayed restart to slot in an advertisement.

As part of the $100 million-a-year contract signed off by Channel Nine and pay TV operators for the rights to NRL matches, a deal has been struck allowing a guaranteed time between any try conversion kick attempts and the re-start of play. The rule change will be introduced for the start of next season.

It is understood Channel Nine and Fox Sports were keen to have a green and yellow light system - similar to that which has been in operation in AFL - that would tell the referee when it was OK to restart the game. As well as offering a time slot for an advertisement, it would also allow a small window of opportunity to show replays of the try.

However NRL chief operating officer Graham Annesley said the referee would control the restarts, not a television director.

"It will not be done with lights," Annesley said. "We have agreed to at least 30 seconds' break between a conversion taken and a game restarting so that they can fit in one television commercial. It will prevent quick restarts."

Annesley said the change to the rules was "negligible". He said a survey of restart times had shown there was an average break of 25 to 40 seconds.

"The change, if any will be negligible and it is not a big deal at all, it will be completely invisible to people watching the game," he said.

In last night's Origin decider in Melbourne, there was criticism of Channel Nine's quick switch to an ad break before a replay of a crucial match-winning try by Darren Lockyer was shown. The critical pass thrown by Blues fullback Brett Hodgson which was scooped up by Lockyer was replayed just once - from a wide angle - after the conversion attempt and an ad.

"It would be unacceptable to miss the quick kick-off, and we did show the replay, but we wanted to show the ecstasy of Lockyer and the agony of Hodgson because sport is about theatre and we had to go to the celebration," said Channel Nine's director of sport, Steve Crawley.

More than 400,000 viewers in Melbourne tuned in to watch the riveting decider live on Channel Nine on Wednesday night.

Source: http://www.smh.com.au/news/league/delays-to-restarts-for-more-ads/2006/07/06/1152175720265.html

 

[Willow]

As this seems to be the right place, can I say that after just watching the Titans match, I think the Gold Coast were robbed. They didn't lose that match because of Preston Campbell turning over posession while on attack in Saints half with ten to go, or Walker failing to take a bomb close to his line soon after. It wasn't even the breather Naiguama got his side when he went down for a minute with cramp or the time out while a Saints player sat pouring blood out his nose with the trainer. No, it was obviously nothing the players did or didn't do during the game. It was all down to the disgraceful two minute "time out for drinks" (Ray Warren's words) in the second half immediately after the Titans first try in their comeback. If it hadn't been for that break robbing the Titans of momentum and giving the Saints a chance to recoup for the final run home I have no doubt the Titans would have put on another six tries. Saints were gone. I intend to write to the League, call my local MP and pickett David Gallop's house until this this disgraceful rule endangering the fabric of the game is repealed and a formal apology issued to the Gold Coast Titans and RL fans in general.

Leigh.

Well I was at the game and I was spared the problem of networks doing my thinking for me.

Once again, you are getting decisions made on the field mixed up with those broadcaster's decisions made off the field.

With respect, you need to consider the arguments. You seem to have gone to a lot of trouble to miss the point.