Better exposure for the league to have 3 games a week even if on delay. If people are interested they will watch it regardless or tape it and watch it at a more suitable time for them.

I would have though that one live game on a Sunday afternoon would have been a much better idea. It would allow for people to almost stumble across it when channel surfing. IMO this could help get the sport to more than just the die-hards.

Die-hards are going to watch no matter what so the 10:30pm time-slot will get those viewers but I doubt it will get any casual viewers.

Yeah, probably happier with three. But, to me, the true goal is to get as many live games on tv as possible (yes, I know they don't rate, etc etc etc).

Pretty hard to make a case for more live games when you don't have any.
By that I mean if Bogut vs Mills on a live game AND IT DOES RATE really well, then the NBL has the OPPORTUNITY to put forward an argument. The station also has an argument/numbers to put to their advertisers...etc.

If you DON'T build, how CAN they come?

build it

Screw you Channel 10! /rant

If the 'three hour delay' clause in the contract is real, wouldn't that mean the Sunday afternoon delayed game would need to be shown during prime time ;-)

Unless there would be an option to watch other games online, I would prefer the 3 games delayed.

I think the NBL need to hold their ground here.

I'm pretty sure the 5 year deal with Network ten saw the coverage increasing to 5 games a week by the fifth year.

Surely if the NBL are standing firm with the contract in place, Ten is going to have to co-operate sooner or later otherwise the production costs will start to outweigh the lack of revenue they recieve by showing it late.

The NBL still hasn't released the game times for the season so who knows, they may yet to that trick of playing games about 4pm so they get on TV during prime time (although there might be detail behind that clause that says they can't do such a trick!)

Avv - Most teams are now selling single tickets which all have the game times on them.

That might just be on games they know they won't move like Friday night games for example?

If the live game was friday, not sunday, maybe. especially on Ten rather than One.

That would surely increase interest in NBL.
Then they might start showing some more games?

Friday live on 10, Saturday 1 hour delay on ONE, Sunday arvo live on ONE. That sounds nice to me.. wont happen though.

Something else to consider. If its a Perth home game 1030 would be live in eastern states?

3 hour delay would be good for us over here anyway, as long as it wasnt 3 hour delay plus time difference. Which is probably the case.

I'm sure theres alot more happening behind the scenes at Ten/One and the NBL than we are made aware off. Good to see NBL not backing down!

Was interesting that Luc Longley completely avoided the question on what he thought about the lack of live NBL on TV this year this morning on SEN radio...

His links to BA probably made him keep his mouth shut but he obviously doesn't think it's good.

Why doesn't NBL show games on iiNet (sponser) and sell subscriptions like the NBA does with NBA TV.

I'd pay $50 to watch all the games on the net, and stuff Channel Ten. As long as Carfino isn't the commentator it"s worth the spend.

Won't it be ok for us Wildcats fans in Perth?

Because of the three hour time delay, games should be shown at prime times, e.g. 7.30 instead of 10.30.

Not a bad thing for home games, I personally as a fan, love watching the game after on TV when I get home.

Yep good decision by the NBL. One game a week would mean nothing but Sydney and Melbourne games all season.

I also like the fact that Ten will spend more money covering three games and get less revenue from ads because of their determination to use a later timeslot! No less than they deserve really.

Let's hope that people get behind these games and ratings prove to be reasonable enough to encourage "1" to show live games next season

Ace, further to anon's response, because someone then has to stump up for local tv production costs. I've heard figures touted of up to 15k per game to produce a game to broadcast quality.

Even if it was 2k per game you have just added 20k or so to every team's bottom line, and you are not going to recover that through subscriptions.

Ace, not that many people would pay up, and a total of $50pp wouldn't go very far.

Matt, depends if the issue for you is convenience (actual time of day) or the sensation of watching something live, not having the result spoiled online, etc. For me, 10:30 isn't too bad. If it were 11:30 (like those Boomers games) it'd be more frustrating.

3 over 1 for sure.
Sunday afternoon during summer? Most people would rather be at the beach or other outdoor activities. Unless you're in Townsville or Cairns

Its not a bad deal and if three delayed games per week is the best we get then great, better chance of seeing the 36ers play, home or away. Better than only one game per week where you can almost bet your bottom dollar that Melbourne and Sydney would end up being on the majority of telecasts as they have the bigger markets (just going on Ten's track record with the NBL back in the 90s. The Tigers, Magic, Giants & Kings seemed to get a bigger share of nationally televised games compared to the rest of the league IMO whereas teams like Hobart, Newcastle and the old Gold Coast were lucky to be televised anywhere except locally or back to their opponents home town).

3 replays instead of 1 live game works for me,the more the better.

mehhh

either way 1 game or 3
its piss poor

no wonder the sport doesnt attract fans