TFC struggles on TV

[Free kick]

Yes but soccer isn't big in Canada yet. I say that because out of the three main sports broadcastors for average viewers (CBC, TSN, Rogers Sportsnet) only Rogers airs foriegn games and those are seven a.m. on Saturdays, and CBC plays a few TFC games. using a common language is a good idea, until the casual viewers become a little more nerdy for soccer and start grasping the intricacies of it. Besides that, we aren't watching the Impact play AC Milan on a European station, we are watching them play an American team on a CBC station. It is up to you to teach the finer details to the casual fans until the day we have soccer night in Canada. I have been on here for a month about and honestly most of what I know about this sport has been learned from reading topics and replies that fly right over my head. Funny this reminds me of hockey. It is hard to get into triple a unless you played in triple a previously. Confused? It means unless you know all of this early it is very hard to break into. Maybe the CBC could make a soccer equivilant to Peter the Puck, but that would throw most of you into absolute hysterics!

Many of people who find the sport of soccer boring, feel that way becasue they dont see elements in it that make hockey exiting. But if we did play the sport that way, we would be playing soccer like the sides of the british iles used to play up until 10-20 years ago. A style that they have learned, has stunted their growth and set them back internationally. best example, look at how womans soccer has been dropping in Canada as far as world standing.

Here is another example, in hockey, speed is an important skill nowaday. Its important for puck pursuit because many goals are scored off of the forecheck and turn overs. But in soccer speed or pace is a secondary skill. its secondary to first touch or ball control because if you cant control the ball you cannot exploit space which is key to creating scoring chances in the modern game. So what would we be teaching if we were to vaunt the merits of a soccer players speed over other key elements.

This why women soccer is so screwed up in canada. I recall listing to CNT women soccer players in post game interviews all talking about the speed of the Brazilian women. Womens commentators could be heard saying the same. They totally missed the point.

[foreverthursday]

Many of people who find the sport of soccer boring, feel that way becasue they dont see elements in it that make hockey exiting. But if we did play the sport that way, we would be playing soccer like the sides of the british iles used to play up until 10-20 years ago. A style that they have learned, has stunted their growth and set them back internmationally. best example, look at how womans soccer has been dropping in Canada as far as world standing

First of all I never, ever said to play soccer like hockey. Ever. I said be patient with people who need your help in explaining the difficult as f*** elitist euro-snob language for those of us who haven't nerded out on it for years. So when they ask if a cross is a centering pass, you smile and explain it to them and hope that their interst grows. That was all I said, get it straight!

As far as playing aggressive soccer... FC Edmonton was able to entice fans out in HOLY HOCKEY CITY BATMAN by kicking a** and taking names. And because of that you ladies are stuck with me. Or do I stunt the growth of soccer?

EDIT: Now that Free kick edited his post above me. It makes a little more sense, but I am new to this and completely dumbfounded how brutal you all are about allowing anything outside "pure European football" to be acceptable. I am a Canadian and soccer is secondary to me. I am interested in soccer, but there are many nuances I don't see or get. Are you going to tell me to leave like our friendly little aussie d!ck? You all can get onto a Canadian soccer forum and whine about how stupid "everyone," not as crazy about soccer as you are, is, but that doesn't do anything to advance the sport.

You can be ambassadors of the sport you love or pretentious nerds.

[Gian-Luca]

John Collins' analysis was also pretty poor

I think you mean "pooooooorrrrrrr!!!!"

I agree with your sentiments - I have no problem at all with using British commentators to call the game as they usually are better than anything we have here (although at some point we need to start developing our own) but as analysts they should only be used if they are better than what we already have here. In the case of John Collins - and using Nigel Reed as an expert analyst in the World Cup - I felt quite strongly that was not the case.

[BearcatSA]

^I didn't get much out of the studio analyses early on so I just skipped through it on my PVR. I'm probably the only dinosaur here who still prefers only one person calling the soccer match without a "colour commentator."

[SthMelbRed]

Let's be clear here. We're not talking about commentators using Russian terms to describe the play. It's English. At the end of the day, if you are so easily confounded by slightly unfamiliar terminology, even when married to clear visual images of the game then perhaps you're not quite ready for any competitive exercise more complex than a game of 'Operation.'

Football has it's own terminology, as does every sport. You don't call a full-back a defenseman, as you would in hockey, in the same way that you don't refer to a basketball point guard as a defenseman. They are different sports and the different positions have their own subtleties and nuances. If your reason for not watching a football match is because the British guy used the term 'pace' rather than 'speed', than you have issues that not many of us here are qualified to deal with.

The problem I have with this whole argument is that in order to 'grow the game' we are expected to pander to people that somehow believe that being deliberately obtuse about football is some form of intelligent analysis of the sport's perceived weaknesses. I've spent far too much time over the last 35 years (realistically probably only the last fifteen years) trying to explain simple concepts to people who deep-down didn't want to know. I'm at the point now where I will only watch football with people who truly want to watch for the enjoyment of it. If they start with the usual anti-football BS, I let them know that they are not welcome and they can leave the room. I'd do the same if somebody started slagging hockey while I was trying to enjoy a Canucks' or Habs' game. If you truly want to learn and enjoy the game, you won't let some artificial argument over terminology stand in your way.

[foreverthursday]

Let's be clear here. We're not talking about commentators using Russian terms to describe the play. It's English. At the end of the day, if you are so easily confounded by slightly unfamiliar terminology, even when married to clear visual images of the game then perhaps you're not quite ready for any competitive exercise more complex than a game of 'Operation.' If they start with the usual anti-football BS, I let them know that they are not welcome and they can leave the room. I'd do the same if somebody started slagging hockey while I was trying to enjoy a Canucks' or Habs' game. If you truly want to learn and enjoy the game, you won't let some artificial argument over terminology stand in your way.

So you keep new folks from learning what you love and you are complete d!ck about it. You can suck it.

Not only do you insult people who don't know much about it, but you call them anti-football and you condescend the position they are in. Your pathetic arrogence truly is remarkable, to say that they have a small intelligence because they are not fully aware of soccer, would be like calling a nine year old child stupid for taking grade three math. But at least you can surround yourself with people just like you.

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

So you keep new folks from learning what you love and you are complete d!ck about it.

The thing to bear in mind maybe is that there are vast numbers of hardcore soccer fans in Canada (bear in mind about 50% of Toronto's population was born overseas) and that nothing is guaranteed to turn many of these people off faster than attempts to modify the game they love in order to appeal to the "mainstream sports fan". It's a bit like the angst that was felt by many hockey fans over the Foxtrax hockey puck.

[argh1]

What would the average English speaking Canadian understand better.

That was a cynical tackle or that was a cheap shot. That was a quality ball or that was some pass or even that pass was something!

Remember who the target audience is, Canadians.

Again I have no problem with International soccer or even rebroadcast EPL games. But we're talking about domestic soccer.

EDIT:

It's a matter of Canadians feeling a game is thier own.

Why does Friday Night CFL out draw Sunday NFL, why is NCAA March Madness a ratings bust in Canada, why were CBC's switchboards jammed when Championship curling was moved to a digital channel forcing the Curling Ass'n to pull from CBC to TSN. I ain't going anywhere near hockey.

How can a broadcaster make Canadian soccer Canadian.

[paul-collins]

No one is asking for the game itself to be changed. Then again, we're all apparently incensed by the "simulation" (diving for the unwashed in this thread) in Panama, whereas of the aforementioned 50% who are born from away, how many have the "upstanding sportsmanship" view of the game as derided by John Doyle? And how many think that simulation is just part of the game, so get over it?

The purists here seem to be attached to English football, not the world game.

Oh, and soccer could learn something from hockey. Two refs.

Soccer, as Free Kick mentions, has tactical differences from hockey that mean taking a hockey approach (dump and chase aka long ball, forecheck, etc) will kill you. Soccer is an endurance sport. Hockey is entirely anaerobic (40 second shifts being the norm). But there are elements of both that are similar, and newcomers to watching the sport will understand the differences better if they understand the similarities as well.

Of course, I've already been asked to leave the room by now. Off to play Operation!

[BringBackTheBlizzard]

What would the average English speaking Canadian understand better.

In urban Canada there are vast numbers of people who have always loved soccer (and did so even back when the sport was being deliberately marginalized and routinely ridiculed by the mainstream media), know all the language traditionally associated with it and who from what I've read actually do represent the main target audience where TFC broadcasts are concerned because CBC management have become concerned about the demographics of their audience being heavily skewed towards an older more rural Canada. TFC ratings would be much higher and a lot more like what is attracted during the World Cup finals if MLS were similar to the Premiership or serie A in quality as an entertainment product. That's the key issue that really needs to be addressed but that isn't going to suddenly be sorted out overnight. It takes decades to build a strong pro soccer culture.

[BearcatSA]

TFC ratings would be much higher and a lot more like what is attracted during the World Cup finals if MLS were similar to the Premiership or serie A in quality as an entertainment product. That's the key issue that really needs to be addressed but that isn't going to suddenly be sorted out overnight. It takes decades to build a strong pro soccer culture.

Another +1. I feel like Tony Reali hosting Around the Horn on ESPN.

[Free kick]

The problem I have with this whole argument is that in order to 'grow the game' we are expected to pander to people that somehow believe that being deliberately obtuse about football is some form of intelligent analysis of the sport's perceived weaknesses.

Exactly, there are enough people who are interested and follow the game so the only challenge is getting them out to the games and supporting it with their wallets. So you dont have to pander to those that are obtuse about soccer. This is what the old NASL did and it didn't work.

[Free kick]

So you keep new folks from learning what you love and you are complete d!ck about it. You can suck it.

Not only do you insult people who don't know much about it, but you call them anti-football and you condescend the position they are in. Your pathetic arrogence truly is remarkable, to say that they have a small intelligence because they are not fully aware of soccer, would be like calling a nine year old child stupid for taking grade three math. But at least you can surround yourself with people just like you.

Maybe you should read a little more carefully what people are saying. I have noticed on a number of occasions in this thread that you have taken out of context some comments.

[paul-collins]

Exactly, there are enough people who are interested and follow the game so the only challenge is getting them out to the games and supporting it with their wallets. So you dont have to pander to those that are abtuse about soccer. This is waht the old NASL did and it didn't work.

Speaking of taking things out of context, let's put to bed the notion that anyone is asking for pandering to the LCD, okay? There's a difference between educating and pandering.

I don't think current broadcasts show the game to its fullest, and that is the educational part. Newcomers will have a hard time interpreting things if the camerawork is off mark, the direction misses the relevant action, the analysis is poor (or puuuuuuuur) and the commentary unclear. All these things are the parts under CBC's control; they can't influence the base product (ie the game). So its up to them to balance off the needs of the existing viewership and the interests of the uncaptured audience.

We've pretty much beat to death the discussion on commentary, with the hick hockey loving ignorami on one side and the Monarchists and "English Pub" dilettantes on the other.

Let's try to get back to the question in the OP, shall we? What can CBC do to improve their audience?

[tmcmurph]

Let's try to get back to the question in the OP, shall we? What can CBC do to improve their audience?

I think it would help a lot (especially those new to soccer) to show the offsides with the graphic lines on the screen during replays. Watching Serie A on FSWC and otner broadcasts I find it fun and useful.

Another item in the same vein would be more graphics on replays and during halftime highlights. Showing things with lines where a player goes after he passes to get the return (ala Grapes and hockey) then rolling the file to show it would help a lot of new fans understand the game and learn the subtleties.

[ag futbol]

^ Yeah i agree. However, I get the feeling there's no budget yet for that type of production.

But bottom line is really that the quality of the product needs to go up to have more TV appeal. No quick fix for that, but we shouldn't flip out either.

[bgnewf]

I hear complaints about CBC here regarding their production values for their TFC broadcasts. Frankly, with due respect, their broadcasts are light years ahead of what Sportsnet and GOL TV have been able to pull off.

[argh1]

Well as a hick and not a sophisticated urbanite.

My last question is...............

Would CBC recruit a BBC anchor to host THE NATIONAL? Then why for CBC domestic soccer?

I'll leave this alone now..........honest.

I just wanna take soccer outta the Euro-snob elitest world into the everyday Canadian sports world.

But I will say that if TFC hadn't started up this whole discussion wouldn't be taking place as CBC wouldn't be covering any domestic soccer.

[Macksam]

What would the average English speaking Canadian understand better.

That was a cynical tackle or that was a cheap shot. That was a quality ball or that was some pass or even that pass was something!

Remember who the target audience is, Canadians.

Again I have no problem with International soccer or even rebroadcast EPL games. But we're talking about domestic soccer.

EDIT:

It's a matter of Canadians feeling a game is thier own.

Why does Friday Night CFL out draw Sunday NFL, why is NCAA March Madness a ratings bust in Canada, why were CBC's switchboards jammed when Championship curling was moved to a digital channel forcing the Curling Ass'n to pull from CBC to TSN. I ain't going anywhere near hockey.

How can a broadcaster make Canadian soccer Canadian.

I agree. I consider myself very knowledgeable about the sport and probably know a lot more than any analyst on Setanta, but I don't see what's so bad in calling people defensemen or using the term cover instead of mark. Using bad instead of cynical, pass instead of ball, shot instead of effort, game instead of match, over time instead of extra time, cover instead of mark would all be a step in the right direction. However, using hockey terms like "forecheck" doesn't accurately describe a similar situation in soccer and should be left out.

[red card]

For the above average footy supporter in Canada, we have now a lot of choices that is superior to watch than MLS. On a typical Saturday, you can watch at least 3 EPL, a couple of Bundesliga, a couple of Serie A, a couple of Ligue 1 and a match from La Liga matches on TV. So, the quality isn't there with the MLS yet to change the viewing habits.

For matches outside of BMO Field, the whole set up is largely minor league with half empty stadiums and playing in baseball and pointy ball parks. CBC coverage is solid but probably due to lower budgets, they don't have enough cameras to cover the action as EPL does and they're missing some of fancy graphics seen at the WC. You really notice the difference when ESPN covers the match at BMO - they put their money down and also know what to do with it as they are the best at showing the real life atmosphere at BMO while CBC broadcasts are largely sterile in comparison. I noticed Sportsnet has its upped its match coverage recently.

[brettinhalifax]

...For matches outside of BMO Field, the whole set up is largely minor league with half empty stadiums and playing in baseball and pointy ball parks...

Actually, the majority of MLS teams play in SSS's. And the only stadiums half empty are the NFL stadiums (QWest the exception of course)

[RS]

Actually, the majority of MLS teams play in SSS's. And the only stadiums half empty are the NFL stadiums (QWest the exception of course)

Technically, Qwest is always half empty for Seattle Sounders matches.

[kj52]

For me the biggest issue is with camera placement and choice of camera shots. I don't care about the play-by-play because I usually turn it off for any North American Soccer match, particularly games from the U.S. which I find generally even more annoying than TFC commentary. Does the countdown clock in NCAA games bother anyone here as much as it does me?

[red card]

Actually, the majority of MLS teams play in SSS's. And the only stadiums half empty are the NFL stadiums (QWest the exception of course

Without being literal about it, I consider these MLS teams largely playing before sub-par crowd levels: DC, Columbus, NE, Dallas & Colorado (only NE plays in a NFL stadium). KC stadium is a joke even if it is temprorary. San Jose is also minor league. Matches in LA & NY should always be 90%+ full if you want people thinking it's a mainstream sport. I'm also usually disappointed with the crowds in Chicago & Salt Lake. Houston's stadium also looks minor league (no surprise as it is a college football park).

I'm only really happy with atmosphere and attendance in TO & Seattle. And Phildalephia is so far okay.

Combine it with a less aesthetic play, it is actually difficult to watch the majority of MLS matches.

[nolando]

I don't recall hearing many people complain about the British accent/terminology used by the commentators on the World Cup feed broadcast by the CBC, most viewers seemed to have no difficulty understanding what was being said. Oh wait, maybe that's because the commentary quality was high and the majority of folks watching/listening know that football is the world's game. If people are really avoiding the TFC broadcasts with Nigel Reed doing the commentary because of Nigel's English, I suggest they have only a very passing interest in the game itself or are highly prejudiced.

I'm on this side of the fence, too. Premiership broadcasts, too, are wildly popular throughout Canada and the rest of the world. The British vocabulary for the game is the standard, as it should be. Look, there was a time what North American leagues/clubs thought that "we" would never "get" the idea of European style supporting at clubs, with the fan-lead singing and all the good that comes from the supporters group. Look how dead wrong they have been despite all their efforts to dumb down and feed us a North Americanized version of what it means to follow the beautiful game. Look at TFC. Look at Seattle. Look at which direction Vancouver has been heading, this is the future of the game IMHO. I don't care if they are British or not, but get proper commentators who speak "proper football" language and are above all knowledgeable.

I agree with those who suggest that we should really be talking more about utilising what we have been successful with in broadcasting North American sports, especially the wide variety of camera angles and stat-driven, knowledgeable (and yet digestible) commentary. Inform the general public. Bring them in slowly but give them the authentic product, vocabulary and all. It's all that most serious fans have been using forever in this country and it has diddly squad to do with Eurocentrism.