I think this is massively unfair to both the club and the media team.Gloucester man wrote: ↑Tue Jul 19, 2022 7:59 pmOh yes and bugger anyone who doesn't live locally or has to work? If Leamington, Blyth and Banbury can do it it says alot about how the club views its supporters.PortDan1121 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 19, 2022 3:12 pm Everything at this surrounding the social media and match coverage is done by volunteers. It will never be good as a full-time club like York which has a whole media team on their books that all get paid a good wage.
So my question is if you think the coverage is that "shocking" and you want a radio live stream, why not come forward and offer to lend a hand? Personally, I agree with the initiative of 0 radio coverage, I do believe fewer people will go to the games. For away games it can be quite difficult to set up a radio stream, you can have no signal and without a internet connection. Also for the best radio streams, you have to spend a fair bit of money on microphones and a decent mixer. The money can used better imo.
It's always too much trouble ,Always an excuse not to do it.
Commentary is a difficult logistical challenge, particularly for a media team of volunteers. It carries significant cost. You've cited three clubs who do it; now list those who don't. There's a reason, and it's not because they're all saying "sod our exiled supporters" as you suggest.
On an away day the team has to cover Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, write a match report, update the website, keep stats, (all while trying to watch the game...), take photos, interview the manager and upload it. Often from a cramped press bench with no wifi and spotty phone signal. To add commentary to that is a massive ask.
Though, I'm not against club-run commentary at all. I don't believe commentary harms a gate to a noticeable extent, and coverage *is* a valuable resource for exiles. But I don't agree that not offering commentary is indicative of a lack of effort or ability or care.