Interviews during the game

[Guest Redleg_24]

Having just watched the epic last half of Game 7 of teh NBA finals and observed the 'American Style' of broadcasting, I have found myself pondering the qustion 'Is the AFL broadcast headed in the right direction?'. The question came to me upon observing, recently, the trend of our TV networks (Tim Watson please stand) to try and conduct mid game interviews with players. I have only seen it happen in a few of our games (because we are rarely on Free to Air) but, I cannot stand the mid game interviewing of players.

I thought that the mid game coaching interview was bad enough, but recently we have followed the American style broadasters and allowed 'boundary-riders' to interview players as they are exiting the field. In a nutshell, I dont like it. There are two specific reasons why i don't like it;

1) The players are focussed on the game. Having to answer stupid questions from journalists only plants seeds in the mind that a player may not otherwise have sewn. For a moment please follow. Tim Watson walks up to Beamer at half time during the Collingwood game and points out the negatives of Melbourne's play. He states that we are being smashed in the tackles and contested footy. He (Beamer) is surely going to be made aware of this by DB. He will be informed of this by DB at half time. However, he now heads down the race with a negative mindset Watson then asks, "do you think you can fix it?" (all hypothetical) What a stupid bloody question. Not only has it made Beamer question himself and the team but he (Watson) unlike a coach has provided no positive reinforcement or encouragement (as a coach would) and has focussed too often on the negatives. The flipside of this is that he (Watson) asks a player whose side is in front, "Must be happy with that?". This then creates a mindset of complacency in the player interviewed.

2) The second point is that the player being interviewed is not going to give anything away during that interview. He will not tell you anything about the 'plan' or where tehy feel they have 'gone wong' or what they can 'work on' that the analysists upstairs won't discuss. It is a pointless series of questions which provides players with unnessary distraction and provides viewers with no greater insight.

Imagine for a moment a commentator asking questions of a marathon runner mid race. "How are you feelin", "the Moroccan bloke is only 30 seconds off you, do you think you can go the distance?". AFL footballers, and professional sportsman are finally tuned athletes who work as much on the mental part of the game as they do the physical parts. What's is that old saying "Football is 90% above the shoulders". Something like that. Anyway, I hope you see my point. I don't believe that AFL players should have to give interviews mid game. There psyche does not need some 2 bit journo intruding at a crucial time of a match.

Stick to interviewing coaches (or assistants), but leave the players alone. AFL players are pretty good with the media in comparison to other sports. The will answer questions during the week, or ater games, but surely in the 120 minutes they are out on the field we don't need to hear from them.

Just my thoughts. Interested in those of others. I sure hope we don't end up like the NFL of NBA where players are fully approachable during a match for comment.

Edited June 18, 2010 by Redleg_24

[dazzledavey36 54,983]

i agree, but thats channel 7 for ya..

[H_T 3,049]

Imagine for a moment a commentator asking questions of a marathon runner mid race. "How are you feelin", "the Moroccan bloke is only 30 seconds off you, do you think you can go the distance?".

As if the marathon runner would be able to respond. He/she might communicate with "the bird" , but seriously...

I agree with you in leaving the players alone throughout the duration of the match, I'm waiting for a player or coach to crack. Every TV rights holder is always looking for an edge, they pay for the broadcast rights, so they get what they want in return. Ch9 had that Birdeye view cam, where has that gone btw, I thought it was pretty good for TV.

PS. talking about players cracking it, Andy Maher almost went into unchartered waters with his questions for Jamar after the QB match. I think that confirmed just as much as how annoying Maher is, than how crapped off Jamar was with the result.

[Steamin Demon 392]

Agree, Keep it to the assistant coaches if this hoopla needs to go on.

[Guest Redleg_24]

As if the marathon runner would be able to respond. He/she might communicate with "the bird" , but seriously...

I was being a touch facetious HT, as I am sarcastic now.

Edited June 18, 2010 by Redleg_24

[H_T 3,049]

I was being a touch facetious HT, as I am sarcastic now.

I know.

[MadAsHell 4,212]

PS. talking about players cracking it, Andy Maher almost went into unchartered waters with his questions for Jamar after the QB match. I think that confirmed just as much as how annoying Maher is, than how crapped off Jamar was with the result.

I was at the game and missed the on air interview. What was said HT?

[Vagg 2,439]

They also interviewed Dean Bailey in the coach's box DURING the game on several occasions. Great of Dean to be willing to do it. But, really gotta question the point of it. The coach isn't going to say anything meaningful about his gameplan or anything, so it's really just another meaningless sound bite, and it diverts the coach's attention away from the job at hand.

To me, it's just a pointless exercise that the TV powers-at-be seem to think will add to the interest of their rivetting presentation of the game.

I'm not a fan of it!

[Guest Rojik of the Arctic]

They also interviewed Dean Bailey in the coach's box DURING the game on several occasions. Great of Dean to be willing to do it. But, really gotta question the point of it. The coach isn't going to say anything meaningful about his gameplan or anything, so it's really just another meaningless sound bite, and it diverts the coach's attention away from the job at hand.

To me, it's just a pointless exercise that the TV powers-at-be seem to think will add to the interest of their rivetting presentation of the game.

I'm not a fan of it!

I would hope that when we are a top four team we don't do it but I can see why it is needed at the moment to get "Brand Melbourne" out there. It's just some of the trades we have to make if we ever again want to be a powerhouse off and on the field.

[Adzman 2,154]

Maybe they could interview the special commentary "experts" instead of the players. They seem to be a dime a dozen.

[Lil_red_fire_engine 11,201]

They also interviewed Dean Bailey in the coach's box DURING the game on several occasions. Great of Dean to be willing to do it. But, really gotta question the point of it. The coach isn't going to say anything meaningful about his gameplan or anything, so it's really just another meaningless sound bite, and it diverts the coach's attention away from the job at hand.

To me, it's just a pointless exercise that the TV powers-at-be seem to think will add to the interest of their rivetting presentation of the game.

I'm not a fan of it!

I am pretty sure such things are done to raise interest (good or bad) and promote their coverage. Not much different to having Underwood call on 10. By the looks of this thread it seems to work.

[Bleasey as that 99]

I couldnt stand DB being interviewed during the game...

surely a win is better than promoting the 'melbourne brand'...