More Ads in the NRL?

Darren Lockyer is a legend of the game but unfortunately he has started his career on the sidelines in the wrong way.  On the sidelines for the Eels vs Broncos game Lockyer acquitted himself well and was a nice change from the idiotic ramblings of Fittler and Johns that we are usually subjected to.  Although having Rabs and Gould is still something that needs to be addressed, maybe a rant for another day.

But when I read that Lockyer had stated:

"It's in the interest of players, spectators, coaches and everyone interested in the game to be open to making small concessions in the way our game is played.  The game's integrity would not be affected if the next TV rights deal caters for ads when there are line drop-outs or even scrums. Teams are already permitted 40 seconds to restart play with a line drop-out. That's ample time for a 30-second ad to be shown."

Maybe this is the perfect example of how out of touch the game is with the spectators.  As it is Channel 9 bombards us with ads as much as they can and continually self promotes it's programs via the commentators and as part of it's coverage gives blanket coverage for betting organisations throughout the coverage.  Almost every game there will be parts of a game missed due to an ad running over or some fool in the control box deciding to show a replay while the play continues.

To give open licence for ads to be shown at every stoppage will make for poor viewing.  Take for example a drop-out, the team has forty seconds to take the kick. If you allow for an ad to be run in this space then no replay will be shown of how the drop-out came about.  And what if a team decides it only wants to take 10 seconds, or will the Ref be forcing the team to wait until they get the all clear from the broadcaster. If a replay is shown, how much of the game will be missed?  It is the same situation with a scrum.  Any time an incident happens that causes a stoppage in play the spectators wants to see a replay of what happened.  Take away this opportunity and that only leaves half and full-time.  As it is this period is overloaded with ads and most contentious points are not discussed or shown.

Further to the point, if you allow a policy where an allotted amount of time is to be made for stoppages in play, watch how many teams start using this as a deliberate tactic to waste time.  If a station wants to show an event live then the consequence of that is less ads during game play.  The game cannot have it both ways.  Yes the game needs it's sponsors and ads are part of that, but it should never be at a cost of the game.

NRL director of football operations, Nathan McGuirk has stated:

"We have completed a statistical analysis of the current breaks in play and how they could be adapted to ensure broadcasters have the ability to show ads in-game. We are conscious of the need to not disrupt the flow of the game or spoil the experience for fans watching the game live."

It seems clear that the NRL really doesn't understand the fans that watch the game live on TV.  Any fan will tell you that an ad during play disrupts the flow and on most occasions the first tackle or kick off is missed by the time coverage returns.  If the NRL was in touch with the spectator they would be enforcing to the broadcasters that if any live play is missed due to an ad break then it comes at a penalty.  Any money from the ad that infringes should be forward to grassroots football or charity.  This is the forward thinking that the NRL should be looking at. Instead the NRL wants to give more licence to a broadcaster that already has too much control over game schedules and times.