09-19-2018, 12:06 PM
Troy, thank you for your announcing. I can only imagine how much preparation it takes, and how much concentration & moxie it takes to be on that stage for 2 hours no matter what comes up. I stand by what I said though, but obviously that's a personal opinion. I definitely do appreciate that you check in on what the fans (at least this set of fans) are talking about.
---
The issue about the live feed not following the action is not just with soccer. I find that the PAC-12 coverage of water polo has the same problem. Water polo, even more than soccer, is sometimes measured in seconds from a good play at one end to a score at the other. There is no time to show replays full screen. That's for leisurely games like baseball, football, golf, tennis, etc. (Even basketball has lots of non-playing time compared to water polo.) I sorta understand that the PAC-12 crew has little experience with water polo (and I'm very grateful that they are getting some more experience), but after a few years, I was hoping they'd be getting more comfortable with it. I like the idea of an inset (for either live or replay) if it is felt that a replay is really necessary.
Personally, I am very thankful for TiVo that lets me do replays when I want. What TiVo doesn't do is to show other camera angles. I appreciate it when the video provider can do replays from other camera angles.
Hmmm... I believe many live events are delayed about 5 seconds to allow blipping forbidden words. I wonder whether there's any real reason not to use a, say, 2-minute delay in "live" broadcasts to allow the production team time to overlay graphics or replays or even ads, knowing that if something important happens, the feed stays live (well, delayed) on the play. Yes, the announcers have to be with one or the other (or, split, if there are 2 announcers--one can be covering the live feed, while the other covers the inserted material). (Btw, I notice that on SF Giants games, the announcer's audio feed is apparently delayed about 0.25 seconds less than the video (and field audio), as you'll hear the announcers call a pitch or a play before they can possibly know it. I think I see it in football sometimes too.)
---
The issue about the live feed not following the action is not just with soccer. I find that the PAC-12 coverage of water polo has the same problem. Water polo, even more than soccer, is sometimes measured in seconds from a good play at one end to a score at the other. There is no time to show replays full screen. That's for leisurely games like baseball, football, golf, tennis, etc. (Even basketball has lots of non-playing time compared to water polo.) I sorta understand that the PAC-12 crew has little experience with water polo (and I'm very grateful that they are getting some more experience), but after a few years, I was hoping they'd be getting more comfortable with it. I like the idea of an inset (for either live or replay) if it is felt that a replay is really necessary.
Personally, I am very thankful for TiVo that lets me do replays when I want. What TiVo doesn't do is to show other camera angles. I appreciate it when the video provider can do replays from other camera angles.
Hmmm... I believe many live events are delayed about 5 seconds to allow blipping forbidden words. I wonder whether there's any real reason not to use a, say, 2-minute delay in "live" broadcasts to allow the production team time to overlay graphics or replays or even ads, knowing that if something important happens, the feed stays live (well, delayed) on the play. Yes, the announcers have to be with one or the other (or, split, if there are 2 announcers--one can be covering the live feed, while the other covers the inserted material). (Btw, I notice that on SF Giants games, the announcer's audio feed is apparently delayed about 0.25 seconds less than the video (and field audio), as you'll hear the announcers call a pitch or a play before they can possibly know it. I think I see it in football sometimes too.)