BT's Broadcasting visions

Picked this in the independent on Sunday today

English rugby will be asked to agree to a broadcasting revolution that would see coaches sharing tactics and gameplans with television commentators before matches.

The radical proposals are being put forward by BT Vision, who won the rights to cover the Premiership next season and are emerging as serious rivals to BSkyB as Britain's premium sports broadcasters. The company are paying close to £1 billion to become major players in football and rugby, and will pitch a series of innovations to the 12 Premiership coaches this month.

The taboo-busting ideas include teams revealing elements of their gameplan to TV commentators – who would be sworn to secrecy – and players being filmed in training practising their moves. These would be compared to match footage to show if they worked.

Other innovations to the English game include players being interviewed as they come off the field at half-time or go into the sin-bin, and a camera in the pitch to give a worm's-eye view of scrums.

Premiership coaches contacted by The Independent on Sunday said they were keeping an open mind ahead of face-to-face meetings with BT producers in the next fortnight. BT agreed a deal last September worth up to £152m to take over from Sky and ESPN as sole broadcasters of the Premiership for four years from August, and to show European games for three years from 2014.

Leicester Tigers' director of rugby, Richard Cockerill, whose team host Toulouse in the Heineken Cup today, said: "BT are going to canvass clubs as to what we think are acceptable boundaries. They want to be cutting-edge, as producers always do.

"I think clubs would be open to it. You have to build the game and build the brand and build support within the game.

"That's what BT are paying for and money will be a dictator, no doubt. If it's not going to affect anything intrinsically within your culture, you can have common sense between the two parties. The more appeal you get into the wider public, and the more educated they get about what goes on, is appealing."

The plans have been shared with clubs' backroom and management staff but Richard Hill, the Worcester coach and former England scrum-half, said he would reserve judgement until he met BT.

The London Irish coach, Brian Smith, said: "I'm all for innovation and I'll wait to see what is proposed. There would be an appetite for this from the real rugby devotees. Something like the NFL Hard Knocks programme that follows a team in pre-season could work well. But I'm pretty sure the coaches would guard their tactics jealously. I wouldn't be keen on sharing our thought process or detailed preparation. It's sport, it's not Big Brother."

Cricket crossed boundaries by mic-ing up players in T20 matches, with the likes of Shane Warne telling viewers how he would bowl his next delivery, and following through by taking the wicket as planned. If successful, the rugby experiment would put pressure on football managers to follow suit and open up training grounds to the cameras.

Cockerill said: "The French interview players as they come off at half-time. You'd suggest they pick the right sort of player, live on telly.

"The other stuff, from a Leicester point of view – and we had this discussion with ESPN – is that some things in rugby have to be sacrosanct. Hearing the coaches talk in the changing room or at the training ground – some of that is your IP [intellectual property].

"We don't want our scrum- training coach filmed because we want people to wonder, 'Why are they good at that, how do they do it?' It might just be that we bend over and push harder than the others, and there's no secret to it whatsoever.

"A lot of it comes from America, the NFL and basketball there," he added. "The coaches meet the presenters or commentators the day before the game and talk through their tactics, so the commentators have a better inside knowledge of what's going on during the game."

However, Cockerill warned: "I would be concerned if it wasn't a two-way street. Building a relationship with the clubs is fine, but not if as soon as a club is playing poorly it's: 'The coach should be sacked' or: 'That player should be cited'."

I think that pushing the boundaries can be a good thing. I would like to see some sort of camera over and under the scrum. Because it'd be really interested to see what going on in there sometimes. It's good that someone is trying to advance the coverage from its current format, which has been the same realistically for decades, with the introduction of a few pitch side cameras and in certain grounds the cam on a wire being the only real advances.

Taking cameras in to training is a no go area for me, unless you can control the content that is aired. As we all know from our time playing, things can happen on the training paddock that we'd rather keep in house. Halftimes/Sinbin interviews, you're going to get players at their worst and you'd have to be very selective of who you pick to interview as I don't think some players would enjoy having a mic in their face after being binned (Can you imagine trying to interview Bakkies?).

The money is very high, as a fan of the regions I do worry that we will be left behind financially if we don't move our game off of Free to Air TV soon. Even though i am a big supporter of the Beeb.

I'd be all for any innovations in broadcasting the game. As long as the clubs are happy with the changes. Obviously I can't imagine the coaches wanting to share their tactics and have their coaching filmed. Although a bi-product of filmed coaching sessions could be a reduction in planned gamesmanship which all teams (especially the really good ones) engage in. I've no doubt there are "tricks" taught to players.

I remember McLaughlin for Leinster illegally (and effectively) disrupting the Leicester lineout in 2011. And pundits have commented on how the All Blacks often simply have a different player committing the same offence at the breakdown each time, so if caught, he gets warned and not yellow carded for repeat offending. These things must be planned at training sessions.

Reading the article I can see the positives for innovation but the crux on relaying tactics to producers, pundits and commentators is an interesting development. Could work well, educating the viewers etc.

Though not keen on the reality tv style interviews full of players being asked challenging and inappropriate questions at the wrong time to get them emotional.

Often done in the states to which the players are often coached by their teams media reps to just tell the public that they love god, their parents the team and their family.

They already do this in Australia with rugby, league, cricket and other sports. In some rugby matches they've grabbed a player as he walks to the bench to be substituted. As some have said - there obviously has to be some discretion involved. If it's an injury - they'll most likely pass on the questions until they know more about the situation themselves. Otherwise, they will pay a bit of lip service for the TV audience.

In cricket (shorter formats) they will usually have a quick chat when a batsman gets out after making a big score but there has been the odd ocassion when they've 'collared' someone who has just made a low score and seems a bit grumpy. There must be some sort of signal to the person with the mike (whether they want to say something or be left alone)

In the football codes - it's usually a quick "what do you need to do next half?" / pre-emptive type of questions as a player walks off at the break. Cameras are already in the change rooms (mostly with the sound obscured) but you can read the tone of the situation as the players slump on chairs as the coach rips into them. It wouldn't surprise me at all to see the sound being enhanced in coming seasons. You can also see which player may have a groin niggle and is being worked on by the physio.

There was the famous televised pre-match 'psyche-up session' to the newly-formed GWS team by Kevin Sheedy (most successful AFL coach). It was a classic. He started slow and deliberate then worked things up to a hair-raising frenzy... a bit of finger pointing and "are you up for it!?" eye-to-eye questioning (I'm trying to find the video of it... I'll post it if I can find it)

There wasn't so much 'detailed tactics' discussed but generally 'who had to do what job'... in your face sort of stuff. But you could clearly see the writing on the white board in full vision - names, arrows... different coloured textas for whatever reason that may be. Opposition coaching staff may soon need to hire code-breakers or OTIs (opposition tactical interpreters)

In the All Stars v Indigenous pre-season RL match - they actually wire-up some of the players and chat to them at certain points of the game. Some hilarious comments are made as the player is struggling for a breath of air. Commentators need to be careful though. In the heat of the moment (depending on the question/ 'wind-up') a player might blurt something out which shouldn't be heard by the kiddies.

maybe at some point they will insert mini cameras in player's scrum caps !

They do that in cricket already. Some spectacular footage can be seen.
It gives you such a unique perspective on things. Umpire had to duck the other day as a ball was blasted at his head... but he swung around and it was like a 180° swivel-view as the ball went by him at a great rate of knots. (missed him by a few inches)

In rugby - that would be great.
Might have to wipe the camera occasionally to clear the mud and blood (for the forwards) but I'm sure there would be a very clear picture from the one of the backs if they are wearing head protection... or maybe just a headband type thing. (à la Berrick Barnes)
The view from fullback would be fantastic - especially if they made a run and carried the ball across the ad-line.

Linebreaker wrote:They do that in cricket already. Some spectacular footage can be seen.
It gives you such a unique perspective on things. Umpire had to duck the other day as a ball was blasted at his head... but he swung around and it was like a 180° swivel-view as the ball went by him at a great rate of knots. (missed him by a few inches)

In rugby - that would be great.
Might have to wipe the camera occasionally to clear the mud and blood (for the forwards) but I'm sure there would be a very clear picture from the one of the backs if they are wearing head protection... or maybe just a headband type thing. (à la Berrick Barnes)
The view from fullback would be fantastic - especially if they made a run and carried the ball across the ad-line.

I once opened batting for a game of beach cricket in Antigua against Curtley Ambrose's cousin. A head can might of caught the experience even better than the expression on my face, Jesus he was fast, even with a tennis ball.

Discussions to be had where the boundaries are. I think ESPN do a good job of it now. I've seen them go into Sarries to chat to Gustard about their defence. And been to Leicester to chat to Chuter and showed him leaning back and throwing the ball straight up and catching it over and over. Nothing particularly stunning but a little bit of an insight. Don't really see the point of half-time interview or subs, injuries, etc. They do the injuries thing with BBCW don't they? At least in a fashion. Steele goes up and chats to an injured player and ask how it is (or sometimes just stands next to them).

It all comes down to common sense and how that translates into contracts. If BT can just grab anyone they want at any time or can demand a full rundown of tactics etc, then it's bad. But then the clubs wouldn't agree to that...would they?

HammerofThunor wrote:Discussions to be had where the boundaries are. I think ESPN do a good job of it now. I've seen them go into Sarries to chat to Gustard about their defence. And been to Leicester to chat to Chuter and showed him leaning back and throwing the ball straight up and catching it over and over. Nothing particularly stunning but a little bit of an insight. Don't really see the point of half-time interview or subs, injuries, etc. They do the injuries thing with BBCW don't they? At least in a fashion. Steele goes up and chats to an injured player and ask how it is (or sometimes just stands next to them).

It all comes down to common sense and how that translates into contracts. If BT can just grab anyone they want at any time or can demand a full rundown of tactics etc, then it's bad. But then the clubs wouldn't agree to that...would they?

No one know what the deal is. and for the amount of money it is worth, maybe the PRL have sold everything?

maestegmafia wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:Discussions to be had where the boundaries are. I think ESPN do a good job of it now. I've seen them go into Sarries to chat to Gustard about their defence. And been to Leicester to chat to Chuter and showed him leaning back and throwing the ball straight up and catching it over and over. Nothing particularly stunning but a little bit of an insight. Don't really see the point of half-time interview or subs, injuries, etc. They do the injuries thing with BBCW don't they? At least in a fashion. Steele goes up and chats to an injured player and ask how it is (or sometimes just stands next to them).

It all comes down to common sense and how that translates into contracts. If BT can just grab anyone they want at any time or can demand a full rundown of tactics etc, then it's bad. But then the clubs wouldn't agree to that...would they?

No one know what the deal is. and for the amount of money it is worth, maybe the PRL have sold everything?

That's their choice. It hasn't happened yet but the deal is done (money wise) so I don't think that's the case. It just sounds like discussions over format of the new coverage

HammerofThunor wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:Discussions to be had where the boundaries are. I think ESPN do a good job of it now. I've seen them go into Sarries to chat to Gustard about their defence. And been to Leicester to chat to Chuter and showed him leaning back and throwing the ball straight up and catching it over and over. Nothing particularly stunning but a little bit of an insight. Don't really see the point of half-time interview or subs, injuries, etc. They do the injuries thing with BBCW don't they? At least in a fashion. Steele goes up and chats to an injured player and ask how it is (or sometimes just stands next to them).

It all comes down to common sense and how that translates into contracts. If BT can just grab anyone they want at any time or can demand a full rundown of tactics etc, then it's bad. But then the clubs wouldn't agree to that...would they?

No one know what the deal is. and for the amount of money it is worth, maybe the PRL have sold everything?

That's their choice. It hasn't happened yet but the deal is done (money wise) so I don't think that's the case. It just sounds like discussions over format of the new coverage

Is it officially done?

I thought there were still quieries, and I cant imagine even BT would pay £152m if they don't get European coverage too, which looks unlikely to be honest...

Why is this deal and the future plans still so under wraps?

The deal was worth up to £152Mfor premiership and European games. If no European games happen they won't get that part. The initial reports said the deal was signed.

The RFU still need to sign off on the European deal and the premiership deal post 2015. I don't know what extra information you're expecting. We know exactly as much details as we did when ESPN bought some games. We know they'll be showing about 3 games per week. That's it. The only thing up in the air is the European stuff which is obvious not ready yet. The premiership TV format will be sorted out in the next few months before the start of next season.

I'm really looking forward to it but really hope they go for the sky team.

I see so until the RFU actually sign off on the deal then it isn't official, therefor BT can't put real plans in place.

Well up until 2016 it's official. No reason to think the RFU would pull out (they may sign up to the deal now or not), I don't know how they usually do it but no doubt it happens regularly due to out of sync 4 year rotations (RFU/PRL deal is 8 years and TV deal is 4 years and 2 years out of sync. Also I don't know if the RFU have to give notice to the PRL that they're going to pull the domestic tights (like the ERC notice). They certainly haven't mentioned any issues around around.

Again the Europe thing is different but we'll see.

I would be very surprised if the BT deal didn't go ahead and include the European element. Money talks and I don't hear any complaints about the French set-up with Canal+ televising the euro competition fixtures in France.
As far as format goes, a new broadcaster will always try new things as part of the justification for a new set-up. Some things will be appreciated and others will be dropped. Either way, the coverage is due for a change, to potentially attract new viewers.

IIRC the production company that has won the contract is the one that ESPN use

How long have Cannal + been covering the HEC...?

I thought they always had.

They do a great job.

broadlandboy wrote:IIRC the production company that has won the contract is the one that ESPN use

That's the best news I've heard on this matter.

HammerofThunor wrote:

broadlandboy wrote:IIRC the production company that has won the contract is the one that ESPN use

That's the best news I've heard on this matter.

Yes it is the same company, Austin Healy to do the new one then?

Oh and does any one know if the new deal will include coverage of the Championship at all?

yappysnap wrote:

HammerofThunor wrote:

broadlandboy wrote:IIRC the production company that has won the contract is the one that ESPN use

That's the best news I've heard on this matter.

Yes it is the same company, Austin Healy to do the new one then?

I like him on ESPN. Much better than Barnes et al.

The RFU sell the championship TV rights so I doubt it very much. Especially is seemed the RFU weren't aware of the deal.

yappysnap wrote:Oh and does any one know if the new deal will include coverage of the Championship at all?

no it wouldn't but i read in the Rugby Paper that Sky are thinking about covering it.

maestegmafia wrote:I see so until the RFU actually sign off on the deal then it isn't official, therefor BT can't put real plans in place.

Unsure on what is or isn't signed, but BT are putting a few idea's out there and getting feedback. There Visions as you put it in the title, so there not looking to nail everything down.

nathan wrote:

maestegmafia wrote:I see so until the RFU actually sign off on the deal then it isn't official, therefor BT can't put real plans in place.

Unsure on what is or isn't signed, but BT are putting a few idea's out there and getting feedback. There Visions as you put it in the title, so there not looking to nail everything down.

According to HT although the "Deal" was announced it's still not sure this deal will happen? The RFU haven't signed off agreeing it and the ERC haven't said that BT can televise their competition.

It would be interesting to know more.

The ERC have nothing to do with it. The ERC competition ends in 2014, before this deal goes on. What I said was that the current RFU deal with the PRL gives them power to sell the broadcaster rights for their domestic competition. The current deal runs out in 2015 after the World Cup. I've no idea if the RFU have to give notice if they're stopping that (probably) or what, but it hasn't even been mentioned as a possibility that it would go ahead. The only reasonably questionable thing is that the RFU say they still have control over any non-league broadcasting rights involving the clubs. I also said that since the broadcasting deals and RFU/PRL are out of sync this sort of thing will have happened before and isn't an issue.

As far as I can tell the above mentioned discussions are around the premiership highlights. Regarding all the other details of the deal (done or not), we have the same details we've ever had for these sort of things. The only unsure thing is the European bit (if there is one) and no-one really cares about that at the moment as it's the premiership that is being BTed next season (and it's sounding good from what I've heard)

What a stupid idea,the expression "you don't sell bullets to your enemy" springs to mind.

In no way would coaches reveal tactics or confidential methods, all you can realistically expect is some dumb down footage of a switch pass or catch and drive on the training pitch, the armchair chair fans will lap it up.

People who have a clue will just say yep obviously!

Getting on your high horse there View?

yappysnap wrote:Getting on your high horse there View?

He's right. And the coaches quoted pretty said the same. However I think it's good they're looking at pushing boundaries

Also who gives a !!!! what some player has to say whilst being subbed etc?

I watch rugby to well erm watch rugby! not listen to some excuses from the touchline.
I imagine the media/fame hungry players will love it.

viewtothegym wrote:Also who gives a !!!! what some player has to say whilst being subbed etc?

I watch rugby to well erm watch rugby! not listen to some excuses from the touchline.
I imagine the media/fame hungry players will love it.

yes View we get it, your some form of an Underground Elite Armchair Fan who will have a snipe at any form of commercialisation in Rugby that will effect your viewing pleasure.

nathan wrote:

viewtothegym wrote:Also who gives a !!!! what some player has to say whilst being subbed etc?

I watch rugby to well erm watch rugby! not listen to some excuses from the touchline.
I imagine the media/fame hungry players will love it.

yes View we get it, your some form of an Underground Elite Armchair Fan who will have a snipe at any form of commercialisation in Rugby that will effect your viewing pleasure.

Indeed