[fischerw]

Watching the excellent DC-SEA Open Cup Final tonight, I couldn't help but think that the viewing experience would have been improved by one simple change--simply mount the camera much higher. Instead of an angle that basically looks ACROSS the field from a low vantage point, use an angle that looks DOWN on the field from above (as is done with most European broadcasts).

Now, the quality of play in MLS is certainly inferior to that in Europe. However, I think perhaps that it is NOT AS INFERIOR as the TV broadcasts make it seem. When viewing from a low angle, as MLS games are broadcast now, much of the movement that takes place on the field is disguised. Cross-field passes don't really seem to move very much, nor do cross-field runs by players. This is because of the point of view of the camera. Much of the dynamism of the match isn't really seen by people watching from home. Passes that are in truth 35-40 yard zingers between two players look, on the TV, like a lazy 10 yard poke. A viewer new to soccer, when seeing plays build up in the midfield, might just conclude "Gee, there's not much going on out there, and it's slow, too." If the camera was mounted higher, though, he would have a better appreciation for the length and speed of the passes.

[Yoshou]

Part of the issue with the USOC final is in the high angle shots you could see the football lines on the field. Couldn't see them very well on the low angle shots, but the high angles they were clear as day. Check out minute 3:09 in the recap.

YouTube - US Open Cup Final - Seatle Sounders FC at DC United - Game Highlights - 09/02/09

YouTube - US Open Cup Final - Seatle Sounders FC at DC United - Game Highlights - 09/02/09

[speck]

It's bothered me for a few years as well. I even remember Garber answering a similar complaint a while back. His response was that the camera position was a conscious decision by the league and that some clubs in Europe would even be placing their cameras at a similar position in the future.

In addition to the EPL, I also like the camera angles used in most of the J-League matches (slightly higher than MLS but farther back). You can see both touchlines and a wider area of the pitch.

[RichardL]

Originally Posted by Yoshou

Part of the issue with the USOC final is in the high angle shots you could see the football lines on the field. Couldn't see them very well on the low angle shots, but the high angles they were clear as day. Check out minute 3:09 in the recap.

If that clip's camera angle is typical then I don't see a problem. Clearly I'm used to coverage from Europe, and that looks completely normal to me.

[Prester John]

Originally Posted by Yoshou

Part of the issue with the USOC final is in the high angle shots you could see the football lines on the field. Couldn't see them very well on the low angle shots, but the high angles they were clear as day. Check out minute 3:09 in the recap.

YouTube - US Open Cup Final - Seatle Sounders FC at DC United - Game Highlights - 09/02/09

Why were there football lines at RFK?

[tab5g]

Originally Posted by Prester John

Why were there football lines at RFK?

The short answer is that it is a mutli-use facility.

The long answer is that I believe those gridiron lines are still (amazingly) remnants from the DCSEC hosting a college football bowl game at RFK in Dec 2008.

http://www.eaglebankbowl.org/

YouTube - 2008 Inaugural Eagle Bank Bowl

YouTube - 2008 Inaugural Eagle Bank Bowl

And the same bowl will be played at RFK in Dec 2009. Wonder if they'll lay on the gridiron lines as thick (and/or fail to remove them completely) again this year. Grounds crew work and field maintenance at RFK are not a top priority or budget item for the DCSEC, it would seem.

[blockski]

Those football lines must have had something in the chalk that slightly killed the grass or something. You really can't see them much in person at the stadium, they only appear on TV or at just the right viewing angle...

Regarding mounting the camera higher - you also have to remember that you can't just put the cameras anywhere - the stadium has to have a place for them.

[CHthirteen]

I agree the angle is too shallow. like matches form highbury used to be, and that always annoyed me.

[fischerw]

Originally Posted by blockski

Regarding mounting the camera higher - you also have to remember that you can't just put the cameras anywhere - the stadium has to have a place for them.

Good point. I would guess that it's hard to mount the camera higher up in grounds like RFK, where the bottom row of seats stretches back a ways from the field and the upper deck's first row probably isn't close to the field. But I would think at many of the SSS it would be a different case. Take Dick's Sporting Goods Park and Toyota Park (two that I've been to)--if you mounted a camera man on top of the roof (is it possible?) you would have a much sweeter "top-down" perspective for TV broadcasts.

[CBusCrew12]

Another camera angle I like is then it is real low to the ground in or around the corners. It really highlights the skills of the attacking players as they try to beat defender or win a corner as well as the defenders trying to win the ball. I think I've only seen this done in Ligue 1, though, which could have the best camera work there is.