Quote:
Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist
Not a single viewer will be gained by having chips in pucks. I don't disagree that it would aid in the cases where inconclusive goals are scored, but where the hell is the ROI on any R&D here?
|
For the sake of argument let's agree that no new viewers will be gained (I don't think this is the case, but let's assume it is correct.)
How many viewers will remain with a more accurate system for determining goals? How many Flames fans were gained in 2004 and then subsequently lost over the "Gelinas goal"?
Every team has goals disallowed, when you add error in objectivity (goal) to subjectivity (penalties) it calls against become frustrating for fans and will drive them away, especially when you see other sports with more accuracy (soccer, tennis). It doesn't even matter if they are watching those, it's that they know the tech exists (even if it's a misunderstanding of the technology).
Secondly, why does the ROI have to come from fans?
AHL, ECHL, KHL, QMJHL, OHL, WHL, NCAA. There's lots of teams in those leagues to sell the technology to. NHL develops the technology and can sell the concept to the leagues, have the leagues impose the requirement and then sell the product to the teams.
Depending on how the technology is developed, perhaps it'd be transferable to other sports (baseball, football) and new markets open up.
Thirdly, as a professional (in any field) why wouldn't you want to get things right? As a professional you should constantly be striving to be the best, not good enough or falling to the lowest common denominator.
Lastly, with the play as quick as it is, referees will tend to waive off anything that's boarder line in the heat of the moment. Then the replay needs to be conclusive beyond all reasonable doubt (a standard which I'd argue is far too high). Which would mean good goals are being waived off because a referee didn't get the split second view to see it cross the line, and then the cameras aren't picking it up perfectly. By having this technology, it would override the referee's human error, leading to an increase in goals. If goals are what's exciting, wouldn't it lead to more fans? But I suppose I'm getting back to the premise of arguing the technology won't bring more fans, which I said I wouldn't do.