Latest Hockey News has a piece on rinkside reporters and access

I just picked up the new Hockey News and it has a great Mike Brophy piece on rinkside reporters talking about how they are bringing the viewer closer to the game.

A sampling:

I understand TV is a visual and auditory medium, so having a rinkside reporter is a good idea. I do wonder, though, if it would be a good idea for print reporters to have better access to the benches/sidelines; to bring the readers closer to the story. Any thoughts--other than the lame "Who cares? It's hockey," cliche--?

 

I like the idea of being closer to the field. I used to walk the sidelines while covering high school football and I always felt I had a much better idea about the flow of the game and the intricacies because I was up close.
I stopped doing it because it was too hard to keep stats. I don't know how it would translate to professional beat writers, but it wouldn't be the worst thing to try out.

 

I know the biggest problem is that the individual teams don't want to give up the prime seats for meager reporters. But bringing the reporters closer to the game can lead to better coverage for the newspaper(s) and most importantly, the readers.

Darren Pang's anecdote about Avery and Kovalchuk is the perfect example. That's a lede to a great story if print reporters are closer to the benches. Instead it's a quick TV soundbite, quickly forgotten about.

 

THIS is why reporters should be closer to the ice:

It's the only chance hockey has to attract and hold a US audience.

 

Ah, that clip always reminds me that Slap Shot did not write itself.

 

I'll have to pick up the Hockey News. Good stuff. I'm all for TV finding a way to bring the audience into the game more. I prefer to attend NHL games rather than watch them on TV, but to have access like these guys have is awesome and the quotes from these guys, especially Pang's, is what fans would crave.

 

These anecdotes make for a great stories. They grab the reader.

I know that, for instance, at Madison Square Garden, there are two press levels; one at Gate 64, behind one of the goals. The other is between the 300 and 400 sections, at center ice, well above the benches. Both provide great sightlines; you can see the play develop. But there is a disconnect from seeing the play and observing the emotion, the interaction between players and coaches.

 

I covered the NHL for quite a while. I understand about all the flavor we miss from the press box, but if you've ever watched a game from ice level, unless you have a TV monitor right there, you really can't tell what's going on on the ice. You literally can't see the puck in most situations.
No question, though, in the wave of rinks built in the '90s, the press box is usually way up in the rafters, you're watching ants skate, you're hearing nothing. I don't know that there' s a good solution. That corner box at MSG is the best vantage point I know of, but we aren't about to get that anywhere else, in a sport that's scrabbling for every penny of revenue.

 

You're right, although being close gives you some colour, and good photos if you're shooting it ,the best way to watch hockey and appreciate what is happening is to have that view of the whole ice from a bit higher up in the stands.

 

Greatest. Sports. Clip. EVER