in-game interviews

They tried to do one at speed several years ago at Indy - I forgot which driver it was, but as they tried tyo aske him a question he cut them off with "I'm kinda busy right now."

As for the coaches -- Phil Jackson has the contract he has because of the TV money. Unless he wants to give back a couple of million a year, he can smile an do a quick interview.

 

I do want to point out that, at least in hockey, the interviews are always done in a commercial break and then played back as if they were live.

Is it disruptive? Not to the coach. Why isn't it disruptive? Because the questions are pretty bland to begin with. It's an ego stroke for the TV networks and everyone involved recognizes that.

Never felt it was worth getting miffed over.

 

The other part to this is it's the TV crew's job to present the story as it unfolds. Their coverage ends shortly after the final whistle/out.

The print people tell the story after it has occurred (and I realize that with the Internet and blogs, this isn't so steadfast), so an in-game interview is pointless for the print media.

 

What do you think a coach would rather be doing during a TV timeout ...... talking with his players and assistant coaches or talking to a TV reporter doing a lame ass "we just gotta get a few bounces" interview?

 

We all know the answer to that. The question is whether the coach wants to take a cut in salary over his timeout preferences.

 

TV interviews are so pointless. So unnecessary and, more often than not, horribly executed. They add absolutely nothing.