Blogger ejected from NCAA baseball game

[Randy Steinman]

Interesting potential ramifications from this....

RPS

===========

BC-BBL-Blogger-Ejected code:8 INDEX: Sports HL:Newspaper blogger ejected from Louisville NCAA baseball game

LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) -- A reporter was ejected from an NCAA baseball tournament game for submitting live Internet updates during play.

Brian Bennett, a writer for The (Louisville, Ky.) Courier-Journal, was approached Sunday by an NCAA representative in the bottom of the fifth inning and told that blogging from an NCAA championship event is against NCAA policies.

Bennett had done live blogging during Louisville's super regional games against Oklahoma State in the previous two games of the three-game series. The representative revoked Bennett's credential Sunday and asked him to leave the game.

"It's clearly a First Amendment issue," said Bennie Ivory, the newspaper's executive editor. "This is part of the evolution of how we present the news to our readers. It's what we did during the Orange Bowl. It's what we did during the NCAA basketball tournament. It's what we do."

The newspaper's lawyer, Jon L. Fleischaker, added: "I think there's the potential for some action. We're still talking about it."

Gene McArtor, a representative of the NCAA baseball committee, declined to comment to the newspaper at the game. The NCAA in Indianapolis did not immediately return a telephone message Monday from The Associated Press.

The newspaper said the university circulated a memo on the issue from Jeramy Michiaels, the NCAA's manager of broadcasting, before the first super regional game Friday. It said blogs are considered a "live representation of the game" and blogs containing action photos or game reports are prohibited until the game is over.

Bennett consulted with his editors and continued to blog, submitting the first report at 4:12 p.m. ET Sunday, the newspaper said.

"It's a real question that we're being deprived of our right to report within the First Amendment from a public facility," Fleischaker said. "Once a player hits a home run, that's a fact. It's on TV. Everybody sees it. (The NCAA) can't copyright that fact."

Louisville won the game 20-2 to advance to the College World Series in Omaha, Nebraska.

[ June 11, 2007, 02:18 PM: Message edited by: Randy Steinman ]

[SamG]

Here's the key point for me...
Originally posted by Randy Steinman:
The newspaper said the university circulated a memo on the issue from Jeramy Michiaels, the NCAA's manager of broadcasting, before the first super regional game Friday. It said blogs are considered a "live representation of the game" and blogs containing action photos or game reports are prohibited until the game is over.

Bennett consulted with his editors and continued to blog, submitting the first report at 4:12 p.m. ET Sunday, the newspaper said.
[/QB]The newspaper ADMITS knowing blogging wouldn't be allowed, but did it anyway. And NOW it's a First Amendment thing. Notice he didn't blog during the first two games.

I've been at various sporting events (including NCAA tournament & Bowl games), and (from what I remember) you can't show any game action or do any live reports that could infringe on the rights holder (in this case ESPN).

The paper is wrong.

[DoneThatToo]

Originally posted by SamG:
Here's the key point for me...

. . Notice he didn't blog during the first two games . . . Bennett had done live blogging during Louisville's super regional games against Oklahoma State in the previous two games of the three-game series.Seems that he did.

And how do you propose that they bring this out as a First Amendment issue without trying to exercise their rights? That's like telling Ms. Parks to not get on the bus but to take her complaint to the courthouse.

[Consider This]

"It's clearly a First Amendment issue," said Bennie Ivory, the newspaper's executive editor. "This is part of the evolution of how we present the news to our readers. It's what we did during the Orange Bowl. It's what we did during the NCAA basketball tournament. It's what we do."Wrong. Using the same logic, TV stations could set up live shots of the game and air them. It is, after all, what they do.

This is not a First Amendment issue. It's an NCAA event. The NCAA can make the rules for people for whom it issues credentials. Just because you wish to cover an event a certain way does not mean that the organization whose event it is has to go along.


"It's a real question that we're being deprived of our right to report within the First Amendment from a public facility," Fleischaker said. "Once a player hits a home run, that's a fact. It's on TV. Everybody sees it. (The NCAA) can't copyright that fact."
While the NCAA has the right to revoke a credential for not following its rules, it looks stupid and petty for doing so. It has no recourse if the reporter buys a ticket and calls the paper with updates and someone there writes the blog.

[Stack Away]

It constantly amazes me how many people don't understand the First Amendment.

Unless the NCAA has recently become a governmental body, they can put whatever restrictions they want on members of the media covering their event.

[and123]

"Live internet updates"? Isn't he just reporting what happened in the game? Doesn't the AP do that on a fairly regular basis? Will the NCAA next prohibit any descriptions and accounts of a game to be dissiminated before said game has concluded?

[ June 11, 2007, 04:17 PM: Message edited by: and123 ]

[SamG]

Originally posted by DoneThatToo:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by SamG:
Here's the key point for me...

. . Notice he didn't blog during the first two games . . . Bennett had done live blogging during Louisville's super regional games against Oklahoma State in the previous two games of the three-game series.Seems that he did.</font>[/QUOTE]Somebody doesn't have their facts straight...
submitting the first report at 4:12 p.m. ET Sunday . Sunday was the 3rd game.

[Consider This]

Originally posted by SamG:
Somebody doesn't have their facts straight...
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> submitting the first report at 4:12 p.m. ET Sunday . Sunday was the 3rd game.</font>[/QUOTE]Seemed clear to me, Sam. The 4:12 report was the first from that game. The article says he had also blogged during the first two.

[Spike]

So the NCAA has a rule that says they can't do it. If they refuse to abide by their host's rules, the host doesn't have to suffer their presence. I fail to see the problem here.

[Chicago Dog]

Originally posted by Randy Steinman:
"It's a real question that we're being deprived of our right to report within the First Amendment from a public facility," Fleischaker said. "Once a player hits a home run, that's a fact. It's on TV. Everybody sees it. (The NCAA) can't copyright that fact."Is this the same argument that would fail if an NBC station began shooting live video of a CBS-controlled sporting event?

[kgsl]

Originally posted by Spike:
So the NCAA has a rule that says they can't do it. If they refuse to abide by their host's rules, the host doesn't have to suffer their presence. I fail to see the problem here.Just so I have this straight.... a legitimate reporter.. staffing a live event.. working for a legitimate media outlet.. is not allowed to blog the results.

Yet Joe Blogger.. beer in hand.. sitting in his underwear.. watching the game on TV.. can safely post from the comfort of his house.

Makes sense to me. :rolleyes:

[kim jung il]

Rules?

This not the Point!
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2000/korea/story/leader/kim.dae.jung/link.kim.jong.il.jpg
...As long as any organization
benefit directly from Publically
Supported Funding and Protections
as an Educational Body of the United
States of America, That Body should be
fully compliant and accountable in the
Protection of the Publics Enjoyment of
their Constitutional Aspirations and Reward
By Association in the spending of those
Public Funds.

The Commercialization and Licensing of
Rights and Property that belong to a
Democratic Republic is the clearest signal
of its Corruption, and Ultimately? That Its
Path toward dissolution is at hand.

[ June 12, 2007, 12:16 AM: Message edited by: kim jung il ]

[WalMartNation]

Originally posted by and123:
"Live internet updates"? Isn't he just reporting what happened in the game? Doesn't the AP do that on a fairly regular basis? Will the NCAA next prohibit any descriptions and accounts of a game to be dissiminated before said game has concluded?So I guess the AP wire will not be allowed to send bulletin score updates of the NCAA men's basketball championship game now? Giving an updated score when a guy makes a basket and the halftime buzzer sounds would represent a live representation of the game.

This is just another example of how laws/rules that aren't specifically written are difficult to interpret and enforce. If they don't want the guy blogging at the game, put on the back of the credential that there is "no blogging during the game allowed", that will help solve the problem. When they use sh\t like "live representation" it's kind of broad... that's why it gets argued about. Whether or not this is a First Amendment issue, I'm not sure about that.

[Pro]

Originally posted by kgsl:
Yet Joe Blogger.. beer in hand.. sitting in his underwear.. watching the game on TV.. can safely post from the comfort of his house.He can't do that legally. That's copyright infringment. Now the chances he'll be caught are fairly slim. But it still not legal.

BTW, the AP does NOT provide running game accounts, just inning-by-inning scores (or in other sports, periodic score updates). Both CBS Sportsline and ESPN.com provide play-by-play of many events on their web site, but I'm almost certain this involves some kind of fee paid to the league or organizing body.

[SamG]

Originally posted by WalMartNation:
If they don't want the guy blogging at the game, put on the back of the credential that there is "no blogging during the game allowed", that will help solve the problem. Read the article...

The newspaper said the university circulated a memo on the issue from Jeramy Michiaels, the NCAA's manager of broadcasting, before the first super regional game Friday. It said blogs are considered a "live representation of the game" and blogs containing action photos or game reports are prohibited until the game is over.

[Diplomat]

Essentially, he was typing play by play and that's where the problem arose.

[SpxGrunt]

Actually, if you look at the blog, it was hardly "play-by-play" He would comment every inning or so about the action. You know, either way, if this was the Final Four or even a BCS game, I could understand it. But a Super Regional College Baseball game? The NCAA should be happy someone's actually paying attention!

[ June 12, 2007, 09:44 AM: Message edited by: SpxGrunt ]

[One thought, one sentence]

Let's just call it like it is. The NCAA are a bunch of Nazi-like thugs who love to pull credentials. The NCAA wants all media to pay them money to cover their events in some way. You can bet ESPN didn't raise a stink over an internet blog.

Yes, TV journalists should be able to do Live Shots from an NCAA game as long as they don't show the action. Yes, Radio journalists should be able to do a Live Report from the game as long as they don't do play-by-play. And yes internet journalists should be able to give updates from a game as long as they don't do play-by-play or show game video.

It's not a First Amendment Issue, it's a good business relationship issue. If the Louisville newspaper had any guts they would tell the University and the NCAA to stick it and not cover the team in Omaha. The University could have told the NCAA "NO" and not pulled the credential but they knuckeled under.

[WalMartNation]

Originally posted by SamG:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by WalMartNation:
If they don't want the guy blogging at the game, put on the back of the credential that there is "no blogging during the game allowed", that will help solve the problem. Read the article...

The newspaper said the university circulated a memo on the issue from Jeramy Michiaels, the NCAA's manager of broadcasting, before the first super regional game Friday. It said blogs are considered a "live representation of the game" and blogs containing action photos or game reports are prohibited until the game is over. </font>[/QUOTE]writing comments that a pitcher looks fatigued or the bullpen is worn out from yesterday is hardly a live representation. Yes, photos and detailed reports would be bad, but still blogs can be soooooo many things. It's lame the NCAA considers it live representation... like many things, what happens outside their offices and cubicles is usually not understood.

And as far as reporting live from NCAA events, you can do it... just not from inside the arena. I've done live shots from outside with just postgame sound of the ncaa hoops tourny since our team played in the first part of the CBS night broadcast block... but we couldn't show highlights, just postgame sound from the podium and sound from the locker room. Heck, I've even seen guys sneak standups on tape while standing in the tunnel while a game was in progress but the action behind them was not clear to see. Thin ice there...

This guy could have blogged from behind the fence or in the seats if he had a ticket and the "N-C-Double-Assh#les" couldn't have done much.

[Pro]

Originally posted by One thought, one sentence:
Let's just call it like it is. The NCAA are a bunch of Nazi-like thugs who love to pull credentials. That may very well be true. But they have every right to be that way.

Not too many years ago, one of our local college basketball teams was going to the NCAA tournament. Our sports guy was going to cover the game (note the lack of a plural...the team wasn't that good! ;) ) and along with his creditials, the NCAA sent him a pretty involved booklet of what he could and could not do in covering the game. I got a look at it, and it seemed rather draconian. But, I thought, what the hell, it's THEIR event, they can impose any rule they want.

[One thought, one sentence]

Pro...of course they have the right to do it. That doesn't mean they should do it or that we should allow them to get away with it.

Sports reporters (and I did it for 10 years) are the biggest pushovers in the biz. Where the hell would NCAA minor sports be without Newspaper, TV and Radio? We need to wake up to the fact that the NCAA is claiming turf of the internet just like the NFL and others.

This is just a long line of incidences that show the NCAA doesn't get it. They claim to care about the student athletes but really only care about money that will protect their cushy little low paying jobs. I've worked on both sides of many NCAA events and can attest to the fact that these people are nerdy little pocket-protector wearing punks who don't like the media.

Sorry for the rant...but I feel better.

[kneedinthegroin]

Originally posted by One thought, one sentence:
Pro...of course they have the right to do it. That doesn't mean they should do it or that we should allow them to get away with it.

Sports reporters (and I did it for 10 years) are the biggest pushovers in the biz. Where the hell would NCAA minor sports be without Newspaper, TV and Radio? We need to wake up to the fact that the NCAA is claiming turf of the internet just like the NFL and others.

This is just a long line of incidences that show the NCAA doesn't get it. They claim to care about the student athletes but really only care about money that will protect their cushy little low paying jobs. I've worked on both sides of many NCAA events and can attest to the fact that these people are nerdy little pocket-protector wearing punks who don't like the media.

Sorry for the rant...but I feel better.Funny I never saw any sports guys at my "minor NCAA sporting events" heck our school paper wouldn't cover us. We had to take the pictures and write the copy in hopes of getting some kind of mention on the back page. For the most part you cover the big sports. For years that was football and basketball. Now baseball is growing on the college level and you're finally covering it. I still very rarely see more then a full screen with the final score of a men's or women's soccer match. And I never see any mentions of the mens and womens fencing results. So please don't take credit for covering "minor" sports.

[Kace]

Maybe the sports guys just suck where you were at.

[kneedinthegroin]

Originally posted by Kace:
Maybe the sports guys just suck where you were at.Perhaps. Chapel Hill is not known for much so I could see why nobody wanted to cover the other sports.

[Kace]

Ah, see...ya shoulda went to UNCW instead. A sports report on the news there once consisted of High School Baseball & Softball, UNCW Baseball & Softball, the local minor league soccer team's struggles, some NASCAR and a quick run through major sports scores.

[John M.]

Originally posted by kneedinthegroin:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Kace:
Maybe the sports guys just suck where you were at.Perhaps. Chapel Hill is not known for much so I could see why nobody wanted to cover the other sports.</font>[/QUOTE]You're saying the Daily Tar Heel wouldn't cover your games? It did when I was there. So did the student television station, which I know first hand because I shot and reported countless field hockey, women's soccer, women's basketball and lacrosse games.

Of course, that was a long time ago.

[kneedinthegroin]

Originally posted by John M.:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by kneedinthegroin:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Kace:
Maybe the sports guys just suck where you were at.Perhaps. Chapel Hill is not known for much so I could see why nobody wanted to cover the other sports.</font>[/QUOTE]You're saying the Daily Tar Heel wouldn't cover your games? It did when I was there. So did the student television station, which I know first hand because I shot and reported countless field hockey, women's soccer, women's basketball and lacrosse games.

Of course, that was a long time ago.</font>[/QUOTE]Granted things might have changed in the years that have passed but we got no coverage. If we wanted a mention we had to send the information to them. Even when we had home meets, the coverage depended on us.

[John M.]

Originally posted by kneedinthegroin:

Granted things might have changed in the years that have passed but we got no coverage. If we wanted a mention we had to send the information to them. Even when we had home meets, the coverage depended on us.Maybe that's the way it was when I was there, too. It has been a while. The first UNC swim meet I covered was in the old pool attached to Woolen Gym. Koury Natatorium hadn't opened yet.

[kneedinthegroin]

Originally posted by John M.:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by kneedinthegroin:

Granted things might have changed in the years that have passed but we got no coverage. If we wanted a mention we had to send the information to them. Even when we had home meets, the coverage depended on us.Maybe that's the way it was when I was there, too. It has been a while. The first UNC swim meet I covered was in the old pool attached to Woolen Gym. Koury Natatorium hadn't opened yet.</font>[/QUOTE]We were not that far apart. You graduated in 88, I enrolled in 88. Man I miss the days of making the trek from South Campus to class.

[Pro]

Originally posted by One thought, one sentence:
Pro...of course they have the right to do it. That doesn't mean they should do it or that we should allow them to get away with it.What other choice is there? We're in a competitive environment. You don't want to play by their rules, the "guy down the street" will. Who do you think a viewer who cares about college sports will watch/read?

[kneedinthegroin]

Originally posted by Pro:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by One thought, one sentence:
Pro...of course they have the right to do it. That doesn't mean they should do it or that we should allow them to get away with it.What other choice is there? We're in a competitive environment. You don't want to play by their rules, the "guy down the street" will. Who do you think a viewer who cares about college sports will watch/read?</font>[/QUOTE]Do you really think anybody was reading the blog? Seriously...if somebody wanted live updates they could have gone to espn.com.

[Pro]

Originally posted by kneedinthegroin:
Do you really think anybody was reading the blog? Seriously...if somebody wanted live updates they could have gone to espn.com.Some University of Louisville fans probably were. This was the Louisville paper's web site.

[One thought, one sentence]

What other choice is there? We're in a competitive environment. You don't want to play by their rules, the "guy down the street" will. Who do you think a viewer who cares about college sports will watch/read? You probably do sports for a local television station. If everybody showed up and blogged what are they going to do? If everybody showed up with a camera "inside the areana" during NCAA games, what are they going to do.

Some of the ships have already sailed. The internet turf is still up for grabs. The NCAA and some big colleges are already in the internet business for themselves. They are YOUR competitor.

But nevermind...be more worried about your "traditional" competition down the street. The station that's down to drawing a 2 in the demo and none of it can be attributed to sports.

Next!

[Pro]

Originally posted by One thought, one sentence:
Some of the ships have already sailed. The internet turf is still up for grabs. The NCAA and some big colleges are already in the internet business for themselves. They are YOUR competitor.With a product they legally own. Their games. You don't own them. They do. You can't compete against that.

[One thought, one sentence]

Originally posted by One thought, one sentence:
Some of the ships have already sailed. The internet turf is still up for grabs. The NCAA and some big colleges are already in the internet business for themselves. They are YOUR competitor.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

With a product they legally own. Their games. You don't own them. They do. You can't compete against that. Then roll over and be their beeatch. Take their free meals before games and say thanks.

Or....wake up and realize that TV and Newspapers have a very powerful medium the NCAA only wishes they had.

All I'm saying is that local media must not go quietly into the night. The NCAA wants to be a tough businessman in the equation...local media must respond the same.

You can have the last word on this one Pro...thanks for the back and forth.

[The Mockingbird]

Originally posted by Consider This:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />"It's clearly a First Amendment issue," said Bennie Ivory, the newspaper's executive editor. "This is part of the evolution of how we present the news to our readers. It's what we did during the Orange Bowl. It's what we did during the NCAA basketball tournament. It's what we do."Wrong. Using the same logic, TV stations could set up live shots of the game and air them. It is, after all, what they do.

This is not a First Amendment issue. It's an NCAA event. The NCAA can make the rules for people for whom it issues credentials. Just because you wish to cover an event a certain way does not mean that the organization whose event it is has to go along.


"It's a real question that we're being deprived of our right to report within the First Amendment from a public facility," Fleischaker said. "Once a player hits a home run, that's a fact. It's on TV. Everybody sees it. (The NCAA) can't copyright that fact."
While the NCAA has the right to revoke a credential for not following its rules, it looks stupid and petty for doing so. It has no recourse if the reporter buys a ticket and calls the paper with updates and someone there writes the blog.</font>[/QUOTE]Ummm, no, that's still against the law.

[Consider This]

Originally posted by The Mockingbird:

Ummm, no, that's still against the law.Ummm, no, it's not.

The facts of the game are not something you can copyright, first of all. That part the newspaper has right. Second, even blogging from the press box is not "against the law," merely counter to NCAA rules. Or did I miss the part where the NCAA pressed charges against the Louisville Courier-Journal blogger?

[SCB]

Originally posted by kneedinthegroin:
[QUOTE] Do you really think anybody was reading the blog? Seriously...if somebody wanted live updates they could have gone to espn.com.Wrong. ESPN.com's live updates were 2-3 innings behind, and ncaasports.com had nothing of worth. What Brian put on the CJ's website was by far the fastest and best way if you weren't near a TV or didn't have whatever ESPN family channel the game was on (game 1 vs. OSU was ESPN 2, game 2 on ESPN U, game 3 on ESPN).

What you have to understand is Louisville is one of the nation's bigger cities without a pro team, so whatever UofL does is treated like a pro squad. When game two vs. Oklahoma State was on ESPN U (something not offered on basic cable here) the CJ.com got tons of hits for the blog.

This wasn't play-by-play, just updates and some commentary. The NCAA can only look bad by pushing this issue.

[Pro]

Originally posted by One thought, one sentence:
All I'm saying is that local media must not go quietly into the night. The NCAA wants to be a tough businessman in the equation...local media must respond the same.The only other option...that I see anyway...is a "nuclear" option: non-coverage. Ignoring them. You can do that. But is it worth it?

Each GM will have to answer that. And, yes, it will be a decision made by a GM....or even at the corporate level.

If you know of any alternate ways to "fight back", please, let us know.

[Pro]

Originally posted by SCB:
What you have to understand is Louisville is one of the nation's bigger cities without a pro team.I believe that Louisville does have a Triple-A baseball team, and the players on that team do get paid. So that makes them a "pro" team.

I'm just sayin'.... ;)

[Kace]

Back when I stayed there for a brief time in 1989, they were called the Louisville Redbirds, an affiliate of the St. Louis Cardinals...but their home stadium was called Cardinal Stadium, which was also the home of the Louisville Cardinals football team.

L'ville's also where I learned the term, "Kentuckiana."

[Pro]

Originally posted by Consider This:
Second, even blogging from the press box is not "against the law," merely counter to NCAA rules. Or did I miss the part where the NCAA pressed charges against the Louisville Courier-Journal blogger?Not criminal law. Civil law - copyright infringment. Maybe. A jury would have to determine that, if the NCAA wanted to go that far.

[Pro]

Originally posted by Kace:
Back when I stayed there for a brief time in 1989, they were called the Louisville Redbirds, an affiliate of the St. Louis Cardinals...but their home stadium was called Cardinal Stadium, which was also the home of the Louisville Cardinals football team.The team is now called the Louisville Bats, they are affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds and play in a fairly new ballpark on the riverfront called Louisville Slugger Field - yes, the baseball bat company paid for naming rights!

The University of Louisville football team now plays in an on-campus stadium called "Papa John's Cardinal Stadium". From what I've seen on TV, it is really nice - no bleachers!

[Consider This]

Originally posted by Pro:
copyright infringment. Maybe. Copyright of what?

[Pro]

The game, itself. Or THAT game, being played.

Don't you pay attention to the "warning" read during the telecast of almost all sporting events? It is supposed to cover not only the telecast, but the game being played, itself.

The NCAA owns the event. They control all rights to what people can or cannot do with it, while in progress.

[Consider This]

Originally posted by Pro:

The NCAA owns the event. They control all rights to what people can or cannot do with it, while in progress.This is where we disagree.

You can copyright the images or audio that your selected broadcaster creates but you cannot copyright the actual happenings of the game. If a guy hits a home run, the NCAA cannot prevent you from reporting that fact.

That disclaimer to which you refer mentions "descriptions, pictures and accounts" of the game. That's how you could claim copyright violation if a guy watching the game on TV publishes details about it on a blog. It's not the reporting of the details that the NCAA can go after, only getting them off its copyrighted broadcast.

[oldandintheway]

How is this any different from radio shows that you hear on college football game days or NFL game days where the host does a round robin with live phone reports updating the games from each site? Do you think the NCAA or the NFL is charging those free lance reporters a fee for the right to provide these services to the radio stations. I doubt that the station or networks are paying a rights fee to do it.

Maybe I'm probably wrong about this, can one of you explain this to me.

[adam &amp; doctor drew]

Originally posted by oldandintheway:
Do you think the NCAA or the NFL is charging those free lance reporters a fee for the right to provide these services to the radio stations. yes, I do.

[s'news]

Originally posted by oldandintheway:
How is this any different from radio shows that you hear on college football game days or NFL game days where the host does a round robin with live phone reports updating the games from each site? Do you think the NCAA or the NFL is charging those free lance reporters a fee for the right to provide these services to the radio stations. I doubt that the station or networks are paying a rights fee to do it.

Maybe I'm probably wrong about this, can one of you explain this to me.Does anyone know more about this? I'm familiar with a Sunday football show where they do this with pro games. They go around, game to game, getting updates. Announcers are sometimes watching a monitor and say how a field goal was just tried and missed, or a big runback came after an interception.

[Pro]

I would agree, some formal, written arraignment has been made. Whether money changed hands, I don't know. But the broadcaster has to have a piece of paper where the organizing body authorized them to monitor and report on the game.

[One thought, one sentence]

Sorry guys...No Money is handed out...No agreement made. I had a job calling in updates of NCAA football FROM THE PRESSBOX. These radio shows barely have the $75 to pay me. I know for a fact they didn't pay anybody to provide updates of the game. The SID office at the university was glad to help find stringers for these guys. Guess what? They liked the exposure of having their games on national radio.

It's the NCAA Nazis who like to kick people out of press boxes. They are in charge of these postseason events.

If you really believe they can keep people from "blogging" about a home run, you are nuts. While they shouldn't, the NCAA can kick people out of a press box for blogging but they can't bottle up facts...it's silly.

[Pro]

Originally posted by One thought, one sentence:
Sorry guys...No Money is handed out...No agreement made. I had a job calling in updates of NCAA football FROM THE PRESSBOX. These radio shows barely have the $75 to pay me. I know for a fact they didn't pay anybody to provide updates of the game. The SID office at the university was glad to help find stringers for these guys. Guess what? They liked the exposure of having their games on national radio.

It's the NCAA Nazis who like to kick people out of press boxes. They are in charge of these postseason events.

If you really believe they can keep people from "blogging" about a home run, you are nuts. While they shouldn't, the NCAA can kick people out of a press box for blogging but they can't bottle up facts...it's silly.Yes, the NCAA IS in charge of the post season events. But not the regular season. The schools, themselves, run those. If a school wants to provide free play-by-play to any and all of their sporting events (played at THEIR venues) during the regular season, that's their perogative.

What I was referring to was the organization in charge, whether it is major league baseball, the NFL, NBA, etc. College sports are controlled by the colleges, EXCEPT the post-season, when the NCAA takes over.

[One thought, one sentence]

Yes, the NCAA IS in charge of the post season events. But not the regular season. The schools, themselves, run those. If a school wants to provide free play-by-play to any and all of their sporting events (played at THEIR venues) during the regular season, that's their perogative.

What I was referring to was the organization in charge, whether it is major league baseball, the NFL, NBA, etc. College sports are controlled by the colleges, EXCEPT the post-season, when the NCAA takes over. Don't forget the power of the individual conferences..their rules supercede those of the College where the game is being played.

Bottom line for me: Take on the NCAA! Don't roll over and accept their draconian rules. Sure they have the right to make ridiculous rules. Media has the right to fight back and should.

I'm out...(for real this time)

[Pro]

Originally posted by One thought, one sentence:
Take on the NCAA! Don't roll over and accept their draconian rules. Sure they have the right to make ridiculous rules. Media has the right to fight back and should.How, specifically?