Euro 2012

[Hobo]

It's an inevitablity of watching anything on television. You're not presented with a reality just a perception even of something broadcast live.

[Colly]

I don't see why that's inevitable though, for a director to see an early interesting shot and go 'ooh, I'll keep that for later'. It's completely unnecessary, your viewers are watching for the match, not the pointless surroundings.

Special exception made for the ladybird shot, which should be shown again and again forever.

[therockbox]

The great thing about football is that it doesn't need a script or a story, it's impulsive and unpredictable already as it is. It doesn't need doctored like reality TV to warp our conclusions and the such. That all said, it doesn't surprise me much.

You're already watching on television where someone chooses what you want to see even if it's cutting to live crowds, preredorded clips, showing the pitch from different angles or replays.

The reality is already doctored no matter what you do because you're watching on television.

Maybe its just me, but I feel there's a difference between replays of incidents and use of non live clips for commentators to talk about as live.

I can turn off the sound to avoid Lawro lying about the game I'm watching, but can't do much about the image doing the same.

Happens all the time, this isn't a one off. Clips of managers from one point in the match are often used as their 'reaction' to something else, for example. I was speaking to a cameraman once who worked on football matches and he said occasionally he'd asked people in the crowd to celebrate as if their team had just scored a goal, because he'd missed the reaction when it actually happened.

It's just funny it's seemingly UEFA that have been caught out doing this.

[Summers]

I don't see why that's inevitable though, for a director to see an early interesting shot and go 'ooh, I'll keep that for later'. It's completely unnecessary, your viewers are watching for the match, not the pointless surroundings.

Special exception made for the ladybird shot, which should be shown again and again forever.

As someone trained in the arts of tv.. as a director you'd totally do that. There is no pointless surroundings. There is just the production you're working on. And you want it to be fantastic and remembered.

[Colly]

That's it, I'm swearing off televised footie forever then. Newcastle at home, my two non league teams when not, hiding behind a hedge watching kids games while the Spanish games are on. Twats.

[Hobo]

You should probably just give up on all television and pretty much all forms of media then.

[Colly]

That wouldn't make much sense, given that I understand the point of direction and editing (past choosing which camera to view and replays) in non-sport tv. Like I said earlier, I'm not stunned by it but I do find it unnecessary as the sport speaks for itself. I also tend to find commentary unnecessary to be honest, I just live with it, I'd have gone 'no commentary' on the BBCs Euro coverage if it didn't switch the picture to standard definition.

[Steeb]

Muting yr TV makes the picture go down a def? Is that true?

Also, if you watch for the match, not the pointless surroundings, why do you care about the reorganisation of said pointless surroundings? They're not exactly moving a penalty from the 70th minute to the 20th on TV?

Either the crowd shots don't matter, so they can do what they want with them, or they do matter, so they should be made as effective and poignant as possible, using standard television techniques, surely?

[Matt]

That is ridiculous

Do you know how TV works? That's not even slightly ridiculous.

It's not how live sport should work. It's not the X Factor where you need to tag a daft story on the back of it, its a live sporting event where the game tells its own story. I'm not exactly disgusted, but its unnecessary and slightly deceitful.

If the press hadn't followed up on it, no-one would have even given it a moment's thought. It's no more unnecessary or deceitful than the cameramen who show the shots of the ridiculously attractive women that they just happen to randomly find amongst a crowd of 30,000 people because they've not been planted whatsoever.

Well yeah, that's why its deceitful, because your assumption is that what you're watching is what is actually happening which clearly isn't the case here.

My point wasn't that it isn't deceitful, my point is you only give a fuck because you're being told to be outraged. How many people that saw the clip actually thought anything of it at the time, I bet the answer is near enough none.

And yes, the women are planted, otherwise why wouldn't we see shots of really fit women at Premier League games? Or do these really hot women only go to Euros/World Cups?

[Hobo]

I like that this thread has become an eduation on simulacrum.

[MDK]

Something something propaganda something something Hitler

[Monkey D. Lars]

The dutch have a new coach, Van Gaal

[Adam]

Not sure van Maarwijk deserved the boot really. The nature of international football I suppose.

[Crybaby Bunting]

He wasn't sacked though, was he? I thought he quit?

[Adam]

To be honest until I heard this van Gaal story today I had no idea he had left at all.

[Colossus]

Not sure van Maarwijk deserved the boot really. The nature of international football I suppose.

Really? He didn't get a single point, they played absolute shit and every single player was whining. Of course he deserved the boot

[Dingle]

Not sure van Maarwijk deserved the boot really. The nature of international football I suppose.

Really? He didn't get a single point, they played absolute shit and every single player was whining. Of course he deserved the boot

Yeah I think he deserved to go too. But I hope the next manager is willing to drop Robben when he doesn't perform. He was awful at the tournament, bland and the philosophy of "could do something magic" doesn't work when he couldn't get his team anything out of the tournament. But Van Gaal's got some awesome players to work with, the LB has time to improve and I'm sure the Dutch will come back better than they showed this year.

[EddieG]

Yeeeeeeeeeeah, it's like the FA don't learn. He was our manager for 2 years, back when we failed to qualify for the World Cup in 2002, could've easily gotten someone better for the job, I hate being Dutch right now.

[IAceI]

You can't use "every player was whining" as a reason for getting rid of the Netherlands manager. It wouldn't be them if they weren't whining about something.

[GoN_]

Not sure van Maarwijk deserved the boot really. The nature of international football I suppose.

Really? He didn't get a single point, they played absolute shit and every single player was whining. Of course he deserved the boot

My portuguese mate has a point, of course. Even in the World Cup I was never really impressed by that team but they sure got an amazing result, but this Euro, with the players he had that team had to do more than they did even in the group they were. The game against us was just the icing on the cake. When you work two years for a tournament and you fail miserably you have to get the shaft.

Oh and by the way, I'm surprised that Low will get two more years with the german team. Yes they have gone to one final and two semis with him, but I can't avoid thinking that that team hasn't evolved at the same rate as new talents have developed. I'm not sure I'm being very wise with the words here but it's almost 3a.m. here, I'll probably do better when someone calls me out on these.