Giants v Devils

[kettdevil1]

It is not bad, it is just frustrating as it could be so much better.

Yes........on a budget of £10,000+ and a crew of 14 = Sky production

Sorry, we're only £500 and a crew of 5 And errr um sometimes 4 .....

I think it's probably fairer to say we do the best with what we've got and if it was so easy there'd be more than 2 sometimes 3 clubs offering it.

We offer 30minutes free of charge - if you don't like it then don't buy it :?

Can't really say fairer than that.

Fair enough, although I wonder what the budgets are for the Blaze or the Caps webcasts are?

The problem for me is that I always go into the game thinking I will buy the second and third periods but get halfway through the freeview and realise that unfortunately I can't take any more of the commentary. I don't mind bias being present in the webcast (it often adds to the fun!) but it is a basic lack of research. The minimum expectation has got to be knowing the names of players and even, after a number of games between the teams mistakes are still being made.

This part is surely not a budgetary factor?

 

[TheStub]

Re: Re: Giants v Devils

It is not bad, it is just frustrating as it could be so much better.

Yes........on a budget of £10,000+ and a crew of 14 = Sky production

Sorry, we're only £500 and a crew of 5 And errr um sometimes 4 .....

I think it's probably fairer to say we do the best with what we've got and if it was so easy there'd be more than 2 sometimes 3 clubs offering it.

We offer 30minutes free of charge - if you don't like it then don't buy it :?

Can't really say fairer than that!

Hey matey... yes you do an admiral job with low tech and no budget.

But it is also fair to say content wise (aside from on ice recording and streaming) you rank third.

Total package Blaze are the best, for commentary and interval features Caps take the crown.

But, never fear, these are things that can be resolved for very little (if any) expenditure. Although you may want to put a bit of effort on the white balance, it often saturates.

Sorry, but your commentators suck. I've heard the same comment from lots of people, from all teams, including Giants fans. You can take the gate, or the a whole fence - but perhaps taking some constructive critique from the people who may (or may not) purchase your product could be a wise move.

Sort that out and many more people would probably buy the webcast.

 

[Chris]

Yes........on a budget of £10,000+ and a crew of 14 = Sky production

Sorry, we're only £500 and a crew of 5 And errr um sometimes 4 .....

I think it's probably fairer to say we do the best with what we've got and if it was so easy there'd be more than 2 sometimes 3 clubs offering it.

We offer 30minutes free of charge - if you don't like it then don't buy it :?

Can't really say fairer than that!

No one is saying it's easy, or that the product is terrible with the budget you have.

What people are saying, on more forums than this one or THF is that the commentary is so utterly rubbish it detracts from everything else.

It's the same excuse from the Belfast fans/you though, "at least we offer something" - great, you do, but the commentary is still terrible.

 

[HiDavidTv]

It is not bad, it is just frustrating as it could be so much better.

Yes........on a budget of £10,000+ and a crew of 14 = Sky production

Sorry, we're only £500 and a crew of 5 And errr um sometimes 4 .....

I think it's probably fairer to say we do the best with what we've got and if it was so easy there'd be more than 2 sometimes 3 clubs offering it.

We offer 30minutes free of charge - if you don't like it then don't buy it :?

Can't really say fairer than that.

Fair enough, although I wonder what the budgets are for the Blaze or the Caps webcasts are?


Commentators don't grow on tree's and so what we've got is what we've got. As I've said before if "nothing" is better- then pan your speakers as we only broadcast the commentary on 1 channel. If it's the difference between should I stay or should I go.....then pan your speakers .....enjoy the roar of the crowd......and be happy. Boo dle le doo doop :Banana

The problem for me is that I always go into the game thinking I will buy the second and third periods but get halfway through the freeview and realise that unfortunately I can't take any more of the commentary. I don't mind bias being present in the webcast (it often adds to the fun!) but it is a basic lack of research. The minimum expectation has got to be knowing the names of players and even, after a number of games between the teams mistakes are still being made.

This part is surely not a budgetary factor?

 

[Gazza272]

It is not bad, it is just frustrating as it could be so much better.

Yes........on a budget of £10,000+ and a crew of 14 = Sky production

Sorry, we're only £500 and a crew of 5 And errr um sometimes 4 .....

I think it's probably fairer to say we do the best with what we've got and if it was so easy there'd be more than 2 sometimes 3 clubs offering it.

We offer 30minutes free of charge - if you don't like it then don't buy it :?

Can't really say fairer than that!

None of the criticisms I have of the webcast are money related.

It does not cost anything to get a camera man to learn to follow the puck a bit more easily or simply give a wider shot.

it does not cost anything to employ a commentator who can read someones name correctly. In fact I would say that is the basic of commentary. When I did it i would check before the game of any names I was unsure of and ask around to get the correct pronounciation. Not only was it so I didnt look like an idiot it was also respectful to the people who would ever listen to it and for the players themselves.


The commentary thing is something I have never seen addressed by yourselves and I can only imagine its because its so blatantly terrible.

I cant imagine anyone knocking the effort put in by yourselves, but that cannot excuse such long standing problems that will have a knock on your profit margins. I used to get the Belfast webcast regularly, until such time it became too much of a waste of money for what I was getting, if the things i mentioned changed I would get it again. And dare I say so would many more people.

 

[TheStub]

Re: Re: Giants v Devils

Commentators don't grow on tree's and so what we've got is what we've got. As I've said before if "nothing" is better- then pan your speakers as we only broadcast the commentary on 1 channel. If it's the difference between should I stay or should I go.....then pan your speakers .....enjoy the roar of the crowd......and be happy. Boo dle le doo doop :Banana

Walk into the crowd and grab two random fans. It'll be an improvement.

It is currently so bad I'd actually suggest not broadcasting channel 1.

 

[Gazza272]

Re: Re: Giants v Devils

Commentators don't grow on tree's and so what we've got is what we've got. As I've said before if "nothing" is better- then pan your speakers as we only broadcast the commentary on 1 channel. If it's the difference between should I stay or should I go.....then pan your speakers .....enjoy the roar of the crowd......and be happy. Boo dle le doo doop :Banana

Walk into the crowd and grab two random fans. It'll be an improvement.

It is currently so bad I'd actually suggest not broadcasting channel 1.

There will be a plethora of Media Students in Belfast begging for a chance to have a go. These excuses of 'we have what we have' is endemic in British ice hockey. There are lots of people out there, you just have to look in the right places.

 

[TheStub]

Re: Re: Giants v Devils

It is not bad, it is just frustrating as it could be so much better.

Yes........on a budget of £10,000+ and a crew of 14 = Sky production

Sorry, we're only £500 and a crew of 5 And errr um sometimes 4 .....

I think it's probably fairer to say we do the best with what we've got and if it was so easy there'd be more than 2 sometimes 3 clubs offering it.

We offer 30minutes free of charge - if you don't like it then don't buy it :?

Can't really say fairer than that!

None of the criticisms I have of the webcast are money related.

It does not cost anything to get a camera man to learn to follow the puck a bit more easily or simply give a wider shot.

it does not cost anything to employ a commentator who can read someones name correctly. In fact I would say that is the basic of commentary. When I did it i would check before the game of any names I was unsure of and ask around to get the correct pronounciation. Not only was it so I didnt look like an idiot it was also respectful to the people who would ever listen to it and for the players themselves.


The commentary thing is something I have never seen addressed by yourselves and I can only imagine its because its so blatantly terrible.

I cant imagine anyone knocking the effort put in by yourselves, but that cannot excuse such long standing problems that will have a knock on your profit margins. I used to get the Belfast webcast regularly, until such time it became too much of a waste of money for what I was getting, if the things i mentioned changed I would get it again. And dare I say so would many more people.

If only we had a "like" feature.

 

[TheStub]

Re: Re: Re: Giants v Devils

There will be a plethora of Media Students in Belfast begging for a chance to have a go. These excuses of 'we have what we have' is endemic in British ice hockey. There are lots of people out there, you just have to look in the right places.

Exactly.

A lot of people in the sport need to realise we aren't professional. Sure the players are paid, but everything else is thin pickings, as proved by the "we have a budget of £500".

What we do have is a huge community of people willing to step up and make these things happen for free. Want more guys, get media students to pitch in. The Giants fan base, you'd have a crew to rival Sky. Better still, get a relationship with the colleges. They'd probably relish the chance to get their students into real situations.

The "it's all we can afford" attitude leads to "this webcast isn't worth running because no-one watches it". Which is, quite frankly, nonsense.

Giants especially - it's so far to travel that it is something most fans would be willing to invest in... just not with the current match crew.

Similarly, why is every team re-inventing the Webcast wheel? I would hope that all the teams running them would talk, and best practice, setups and platforms shared.

 

[HiDavidTv]

Re: Re: Re: Giants v Devils

What we do have is a huge community of people willing to step up and make these things happen for free. Want more guys, get media students to pitch in. The Giants fan base, you'd have a crew to rival Sky. Better still, get a relationship with the colleges. They'd probably relish the chance to get their students into real situations.

That would be nice..... in an ideal world - and yes I thought so too. But 2 years on and countless meetings with the 3&4 media colleges and they have yet to capitalise on the potential that we all see in it. So, no it unfortunately isn't that simple

 

[TheStub]

What normally works for me is going to the college or Uni with well defined projects and limited pressure on delivery.

I've had some decent projects delivered that way.

It is always worth bundling in a lot of work experience. Projects are the bonus, the work experience the big driver for them.

As long as you don't expect the college to do much to set it up.

 

[Imagine]

It's a shame that they've not taken you up on the offer, but as El Stub says, it does depend on what's offered.

Minimal setup / expectation, and more a sort of experience / shoot a live event is a win for them and you might get some extra kit to use.

Most people's problem lie with the commentary duo though. I don't know how much you personally hear during the broadcast, but as has already been mentioned, all it takes is a tiny bit of preparation with the names and it'd be a vast improvement.

As it is they come across as incompetent & incoherent as if they just stumbled in front of the mic :/

 

[Diafol]

In fairness the "colour" guy isn't that bad, it's the main commentator who seems to be the weak link.

 

[cupcake]

I've never heard the commentary and only going by what others have said but since the issue was highlighted on kotg a few weeks back there were comments to say the commentary has got better - still not perfect but improved.

The addition of our array of injured players on commentary has helped as well .

On a related note - while Wayne isn't the most skilled commentator his hockey blogs are quite good which shows that he does have a genuine interest in the game.

http://waynehardman.com/

 

[Clare]

If he has a genuine interest in the game, I don't think its too much to at the very least, learn to read.

I'm pretty sure he will have a list of both teams' players names and numbers right under his nose but no, all we hear over and over is "Gerry Adams... he likes to be known as Gerry" (what?!) or "Stuart Matzka" or the recent gonger "Jamie Van... van der... van der.... number 44 for the Devils".

Seriously?! As has already been said, the colour guy is fine, but its just damn rude to not make the effort to learn players names.

It doesn't take much to improve the current product. Just a bit of courteousy and common sense, and the ability to announce when you've got it wrong and correct yourself instead of repeating the mistakes throughout the game.

I give up watching after the first period and we aren't buying it tonight because MNL coverage will be much better.

 

[HiDavidTv]

Most people's problem lie with the commentary duo though. I don't know how much you personally hear during the broadcast, but as has already been mentioned, all it takes is a tiny bit of preparation with the names and it'd be a vast improvement.

As it is they come across as incompetent & incoherent as if they just stumbled in front of the mic :/

I've seen the preparation and I can assure you that every step has been taken but let's be fair and accept this is the fastest game in the world with pucks changing sticks every couple of seconds, often numbers are hard to read and eh.....it helps a lot when shirts aren't printed backwards :!:

 

[BBW]

[it helps a lot when shirts aren't printed backwards :!:

Fair point

 

[cf38]

sorry can't really use that excuse, it was only 1 game, and it was only the front of the shirts, not the players names. Sums it up actually, they didn't even notice until someone texted it to them :lol: Whats the excuse for the giants players then....

 

[Clare]

The backs were fine. Numbers were the right way around.

I know plenty of people who can manage pretty good play by plays. If he's too slow to keep up, it may be worthwhile finding someone who can.

Play by play requires the ability to see forward and almost predict what's going to happen next. It requires an ability to not only see the player on the puck but also those around him who may be likely to gain the puck. It's about foresight and good hockey sense. This guy doesn't even know the damn rules and it winds me up when he jumps on a bandwagon and is quite clearly wrong about his accusations!

 

[Chris]

I've seen the preparation and I can assure you that every step has been taken but let's be fair and accept this is the fastest game in the world with pucks changing sticks every couple of seconds, often numbers are hard to read and eh.....it helps a lot when shirts aren't printed backwards :!:

So that's tonight excuse lined up...

What's the excuse for all the other games?