The problem with the live broadcast scenario in track is what do the networks do with the "dead" time between events. Just as 1966 as 2003, an on-air
commentator can only be so entertaining while the viewer is waiting for the hurdles to be set up..or whatever. Or annoying re: all the Carol Lewis threads. Just a side note: the Oslo meet is on CBC Saturday 10:30AM local time.
I understand that huge meets like Oly and WC are so spread out as to make live tough, but even these meets (and certainly the invitationals) can schedule a 2-hour 'prime time' centered on the marquee races. During track downtime you recap field events and previous track action. That should only enhance the excitement of the on-the-scene fans. I realize that several (many) of the meets are trying to do precisely this, but then TV always RUINS it with the pointless interviews (so how'd it feel to win? pant - pant - great - pant), pointless 'expert' commentary (talking heads), and the cutesy background crap. Everyone, even the 'casual viewer' that the networks seem to pander to, want to see ACTION!! How tough is that to understand?
Many of us on this board fail to realise that track and field may not be easy to cover on TV. In addition, you can't show a track meet in the United States the way you show it in Canada and Europe, even if you wanted to.
CBC, BBC and the networks abroad do not have to deal with 1) expenses 2) advertising and
3)revenue the way the American networks do. That's why they may be able to show a 10,000m uninterrupted.
Track and field in the US does not make any money. And you do not have advertisers drooling over a 30 sec spot on a track meet. Also, the networks have to do SOMETHING during that "dead time" between events. So that is why they may do interviews and "up close and personal" stories. Peace.
What is irritating with television coverage is that they will show 10 replays of a false start in the 100 meters but they will only show the last 100 meters of a 5000 m. They also frequently show the athletes warming up for the sprints while you see a distance race being run in the background.
I realize that showing a full 13 minute race won't happen but when they devote a full 10-15 minutes to a ten-second race and not much more than 10 seconds to a 13 minute (or 27 minute) race something is wrong. Need some balance.
I agree , the presentation of the D1 NCAA was a typical prepackaged event. I have had this discussion with others before. The audience for track is pretty thin to start with, the people who do watch I would think are recreational type runners.ie 5k-10k et, not many recreational sprinters. I have nothing against the sprints, I like watching them too, but I don't understand showing the false start and then the 2-3 minutes of sprinters strolling back to the start. Its a shame when the women's 1500 m D1 record is broken, they can only fit in the finish line crossing.
>Yeah-- why not show the last 10 meters of a
>a sprint event? It make as much sense as the
>current appproach of showing only the last few
>strides of a distance race.
That's one of the advantages of having a government subsidized network. The CBC showed the last 4 minutes of the Oslo 5000. NO doubt it was some kind of Euro feed but at least we got it. Does anyone know what Bekele's last 200 was? The fact that he has develped the ability to lean when he comes from a cross-country background is nothing short of amazing to me.
ESPN , NBC Sports , have applied to the CRTC ( Canadian Television regulators ) to broadcast in Canada . I hope there is a technology available to filter out Carol Lewis!
Also:The Olso meet , CBC, was a decent broadcast, It is interesting to watch the tactics of the final 2K of the 5000. Not the Kenyans vs Eth et. , but watching how the shoe company teams work together.
Nike vs puma vs adidas. cheers
I love living close enough to Canada to get CBC. I can't believe I got to see the last five laps of the best 5K this year. Their field event coverage was also very good except for the non-existent coverage of the men's PV. grrrr