SANFL Recovery Session

Week 1 of the SANFL Recovery Session weekly highlights:




Week 2 Recovery Session:

Week 3 Recovery Session highlights

Can someone tell me which 2 seconds I need to find for the Norwood highlights?

Round 5:

I just watched some of the Recovery Session.

A few points:

Db is a nice bloke and a legend of SANFL callers with a long commitment to the game, but whether it's poor eyesight or not using binoculars, his player identification really needs work.  Players kicking to themselves, players giving to a 'teammate', constant 'not sure who that is' and constant corrections by the other commentators.

We love you, DB, but get some binoculars, mate.

2. Could I suggest that 'highlights' of a game aren't restricted to just the goals.  I understand that it takes time and often unrewarded effort, but the finished product could be so much better.  There's no need to take up valuable time with someone kicking the goal from a set shot from the goalsquare.  Show some of the good play that doesn't necessarily end in a goal.  Defenders might even get to see themselves do something good instead of a litany of their errors.

3.  Much of the commentary is very good and we're lucky to have passionate people who love their football calling for us.

4  Thanks to the SANFl for the Recovery Session, it's valuable, but my comments are only made hoping to make it even better.

Thanks for the different editing of the Recovery Session. Enjoyed it and the excellent commentary from most games,

Lee wrote:Thanks for the different editing of the Recovery Session...

In what way was it different to any other week, Lee?

I'm not sure if this is what Lee is referring to, but I was going to ask anyway Phil - There were two reports from he Crows game but neither incident was shown on The RS, whereas previously the RS has shown incidents of a potentially reportable nature, often in slo-mo. Any idea why different this time?

The Round 6 version being discussed

its great work nearly every week but there does seem a lot of john butcher's mistakes each week also. nearly nine minutes from that port game in a total of 28 minutes seems a lot also, especially in a round where there was a draw.

Scrunch wrote:I'm not sure if this is what Lee is referring to, but I was going to ask anyway Phil - There were two reports from he Crows game but neither incident was shown on The RS, whereas previously the RS has shown incidents of a potentially reportable nature, often in slo-mo. Any idea why different this time?

I can only assume that the guy doing the editing wasn't made aware of the incidents prior to the editing period...

The IRP look back over the whole games and go off of Referrals either made by Umpires Observers or umpires themselves...

If it wasn't an alleged incident that was right in the play and caught on camera (like the Tuck one) then it may not initially get picked up straight away...

I know that the guy doing the editing is only following instructions from the SANFL, and of course Champion Data coding and feedback, in regards to the specific highlights...

Thanks for that Phil. Just to clarify I wasn't having a go, I appreciate being able to see highlights when I haven't been able to attend, just thought it differed to what I'd seen previously. As an aside, the Crows could be a more formidable opponent in about a months time when they get some personnel back (and providing they don't lose more to injury)

My thanks were that the things I highlighted last week seemed to have been done, at least in part.

Such as showing clips that don't necessarily end in goals and not bothering to show a player going back, lining up and then kicking a goal from the top of the square.

I hadn't thought of the reportable incidents thing, Scrunch, so that's interesting.

Looks like your influence is starting to spread outside of Milner Road as well now, Lee

Just credit to the guy editing the highlights. I'm probably too often critical about some things, so nice to give some plaudits too.

As for commentary, Phil, you, CK, JN, DC and others should be proud of the standard of your calling and your passion for the game.

Thanks, Lee...

Round 8

Some really good highlights from the weekend of games...

Hate to be critical, because something is better than nothing and we don't get a lot when it comes to the SANFL, but who puts these together??

The Norwood v West game shows 2 of Norwood's 11 goals and 8 of Wests 10. Now it was a cracking game so no issue with showing the losing teams highlights, but why not show them for both? The game was a great advertisement for the competition and the highlights package as far as Im concerned, this week, has missed an opportunity that doesn't come around as often as we'd like.

If time constraints are an issue maybe we could cut out Corey Board missing a set shot from 15 metres when the game was all over as a contest anyway?

Just some thoughts.

The Round 9 edition

Round 10 Part 1. Appears to be no commentary in South v Glenelg

Admin wrote:Round 10 Part 1. Appears to be no commentary in South v Glenelg

Unfortunately there were a few technical difficulties, for both radio stations on the weekend, particularly LifeFM on Saturday...

The lack of audio from the South v Glenelg game was due to a gremlin in the feed from the commentary position to the camera...

Lee wrote:
As for commentary, Phil, you, CK, JN, DC and others should be proud of the standard of your calling and your passion for the game.

Agree with Lee here. Really enjoying it this year Phil

I think that, with the exception of John Nankivell and Chris Kendall, most commentators need to speed up a bit. Too often the commentary doesn't keep up with the movement of the ball - whether it's through uncertainty over the player's identity, a sponsor's name, or a tangential discussion. But there are far too many slabs of the game where you end up being told someone's marked it or kicked a goal but you have no idea of what transpired leading up to it.

Round 10 Part 2