Indoor Sports on Television

[Mac the Knife]

I've been watching a lot of indoor sports (Arena Football and hockey, actually) on television lately, and was wondering if there would be better ways to telecast games of sports that play their games in arenas. Hockey in particular comes to mind due to the plexiglas and nets, which tend to hurt potential camera positions, for instance.

Me? I think a few things would be advantageous, such as:

• Having an XFL-style (sorry, but the XFL invented it and the NFL's ripped it off since) "zip-line" camera that goes along a wire running the length of the ice/field, providing an overhead, Madden-style view of the action, either live or for instant replays. I'm not sure if this isn't already done in hockey for instance, but in the games I've seen recently it hasn't been shown.
  
• Placing cameras, as unobtrusively as possible, directly above the plexiglas in 4 to 6 positions around a hockey rink, each covering a fairly tight area of the ice, but from more of an overhead vantage point.
  
• Mic'ing up every coach, for every game, with the caveat that nothing they say/do gets broadcast live (so as not to interfere with game strategy as it happens).
  

Anyway, does anyone out there have any ideas as far as how they think television broadcasting of hockey, Arena Football, etc. could be improved upon, both on the field and off? What don't you see on telecasts of these sports that you'd like to, and why?

[MDC]

Well, I love the ESPN 'AXIS' camera, where they cut to the zipline camera above the field, I wish they used it more often, and fulltime on kickoff and punt returns, it looks absolutely sick from that angle. It helps you see the lanes 10X better.

Other than that, I think NBA coverage is pretty much perfect, camera angle-wise. Whenever they show live footage from other angles, I find myself begging them to cut back to the side view. For replays, I like other angles, but the live coverage needs to come from the sides

[TopCat]

Bring this back.

But seriously, I don't mind hockey broadcasts. In HD it's really not too bad. Like MDC said, the NBA is pretty much perfect.

[HedleyLamarr]

Don't forget...in most arenas, there's also a large Jumbotron sitting above the ice/court/field. Having a zipline-camera becomes more of a visual eyesore than it's been in outdoor venues, simply because the outdoor venues don't have a Jumbotron hanging above the playing area.

A lot of NHL venues (or broadcasting networks that use them, that is) do indeed have cameras placed above the plexiglass. There's usually one above each goal, there's often one at center ice right above the penalty boxes and scorer's area. A couple networks have placed a rotating camera on the underside of the Jumbotron.

[MadmanLA]

Don't forget...in most arenas, there's also a large Jumbotron sitting above the ice/court/field. Having a zipline-camera becomes more of a visual eyesore than it's been in outdoor venues, simply because the outdoor venues don't have a Jumbotron hanging above the playing area.

A lot of NHL venues (or broadcasting networks that use them, that is) do indeed have cameras placed above the plexiglass. There's usually one above each goal, there's often one at center ice right above the penalty boxes and scorer's area. A couple networks have placed a rotating camera on the underside of the Jumbotron.

I know a number of arenas (MSG comes to mind immediately) had/have a camera high above the middle of the floor, situated directly below the jumbrotron. I remember when ABC/ESPN re-launched their NBA coverage and introduced the "zipline" cameras, they (the networks) gradually did away with the high-above cameras.

[slapshot]

I've watched a few NHL games where most of the coverage was from lower camera angles positioned in the corners and above the nets. It was awkward. You really don't get to see the plays develop because of the close-up view. And since the players skate very fast, there was too much cutting between cameras and it made you dizzy.

Even attending games in person, I prefer to be a little higher up so I can watch the entire play progress, rather than down by ice level, where my head is on a swivel to catch all the action.

[Eye]

Well, I love the ESPN 'AXIS' camera, where they cut to the zipline camera above the field, I wish they used it more often, and fulltime on kickoff and punt returns, it looks absolutely sick from that angle. It helps you see the lanes 10X better.

This is exactly why hockey games are better from the upper deck, even though you were speaking about football.

[Mac the Knife]

Okay guys... most of you have posted saying what you LIKE about current broadcasts, which is fine, but I really want to know your thoughts on how TV could innovate in terms of its telecasts. What isn't it doing, but could?

[NJTank]

I am not sure what more can be done, they done got a camera damn near everywhere.

[Gothamite]

Having an XFL-style (sorry, but the XFL invented it and the NFL's ripped it off since) "zip-line" camera that goes along a wire running the length of the ice/field, providing an overhead, Madden-style view of the action, either live or for instant replays.

I'm sorry, I can't let that pass. The XFL didn't "invent" the Skycam. It had been around for almost a decade, and used in both the Olympics and college football for years. The NFL itself had experimented with it in the mid-1980s, but the technology wasn't yet ready.

[BBTV]

Not sure if this is something for the networks to do, but something that might make it better would be improving the lighting inside of the venues. There is just a certain dullness that comes across on TV during NBA and indoor MLB / NFL games that makes them seem... well, dull to me. Not so much NHL, maybe because of the white ice, I don't know. But if they could find a way to make the lighting seem more natural, it would go a long way toward making the sports come across better on TV.

[njmeadowlanders]

I didn't watch it but I heard ESPN had some sort of radar system that could give the distance of any hit ball at the home run derby this year. That'd be a cool idea to know how far a ball was hit almost instantaneously, without estimates.

How much could advertising on the near-side boards (that you can't see on tv) really be worth? I mean yeah you could see it on reverse-angle replays and stuff, but how about trying to make the boards clear on that side of the ice somehow? That way you don't lose as much of the ice. I mean yeah you'd still never be able to see through around center ice with the scorers/penalty boxes and you'd still have people in the way, but if they could make those near-side boards clear especially in the corners perhaps you'd be able to see just a smidge more?

They have to have a way to make something that's as strong/rigid and still be clear right?

[Mac the Knife]

Having an XFL-style (sorry, but the XFL invented it and the NFL's ripped it off since) "zip-line" camera that goes along a wire running the length of the ice/field, providing an overhead, Madden-style view of the action, either live or for instant replays.

I'm sorry, I can't let that pass. The XFL didn't "invent" the Skycam. It had been around for almost a decade, and used in both the Olympics and college football for years. The NFL itself had experimented with it in the mid-1980s, but the technology wasn't yet ready.

I see. Well, the XFL was the first to utilize it on a permanent basis then. I'd honestly not seen it used in football prior to that.

[ElwoodCuse]

I seem to remember in Vancouver's old building they had a static camera that showed the entire offensive zone up to the blue line, from directly overhead. This was a totally awesome view for power plays. You might see examples if you look up the 94 finals on Youtube.

[Gothamite]

Having an XFL-style (sorry, but the XFL invented it and the NFL's ripped it off since) "zip-line" camera that goes along a wire running the length of the ice/field, providing an overhead, Madden-style view of the action, either live or for instant replays.

I'm sorry, I can't let that pass. The XFL didn't "invent" the Skycam. It had been around for almost a decade, and used in both the Olympics and college football for years. The NFL itself had experimented with it in the mid-1980s, but the technology wasn't yet ready.

I see. Well, the XFL was the first to utilize it on a permanent basis then. I'd honestly not seen it used in football prior to that.

That's NBC's influence. They had been using it for their various sporting events since its introduction.

[ClutchIsEverything]

I agree, I'd like to see Arena Football broadcast with a cable cam like camera. Just like a video game, place it behind the quarterback looking down field. Yes, the overhead camera could be an issue, but the AFL is a perfect league to innovate with.

Do one game, if it sucks, don't do it again.