Hawks Fined
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 763
- Joined: Tue 19 Jun 2007 7:18pm
Hawks Fined
Hawthorn fined $50000 for videoing the game between Saints and Dogs.
What a load of crap.
What a load of crap.
....so keep those mobiles in your pockets at training kids
Seriously ludicrous..what are Hawthorn gonna do...release the game on DVD????
However..now that they have been fined..I think that its only fair that we recieve half the money as compensation
Oh and which game was it, the first or second one? Bloody hell, you couldnt pay me $50,000 to watch that first game back again!
Seriously ludicrous..what are Hawthorn gonna do...release the game on DVD????
However..now that they have been fined..I think that its only fair that we recieve half the money as compensation
Oh and which game was it, the first or second one? Bloody hell, you couldnt pay me $50,000 to watch that first game back again!
THE BUBBLE HAS BURST
2011 player sponsor
they weren't videoing their own players......helsy3 wrote:This is getting to the ridiculous stage - when you can't even video your own players its getting a little too 'Big Brother-ish' for me.
.everybody still loves lenny....and we always will
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
- Snakeman66
- Club Player
- Posts: 993
- Joined: Fri 28 Jul 2006 7:50pm
- Been thanked: 2 times
Re: Hawks Fined
Wouldn't want to rely on the quality of Channels Sevens coverage would you.Behind Play wrote:Hawthorn fined $50000 for videoing the game between Saints and Dogs.
What a load of crap.
They are still using cameras from the 56 Olympics.
Don't dwell on the past.
Look to the future.
Look to the future.
Re: Hawks Fined
It is to protect the millions they get off the TV stations that pay the players and protect the 16 sides. Why is that wrong.Behind Play wrote:Hawthorn fined $50000 for videoing the game between Saints and Dogs.
What a load of crap.
- Armoooo
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 7281
- Joined: Sun 26 Nov 2006 2:28pm
- Location: The Great South East
- Contact:
Re: Hawks Fined
Are you serious?plugger66 wrote:It is to protect the millions they get off the TV stations that pay the players and protect the 16 sides. Why is that wrong.Behind Play wrote:Hawthorn fined $50000 for videoing the game between Saints and Dogs.
What a load of crap.
Or are you Dimwit himself??
ROBERT HARVEY A.K.A The Great Man, Banger, Harves, Ol' Man River...
384 games, 4 B&F's, 3 EJ Whitten Medals, St.Kilda Captain, 2 Time Brownlow Medalist, 8 Time All Australian, 2nd Highest Brownlow votes poller.... The greatest of ALL TIME!!
384 games, 4 B&F's, 3 EJ Whitten Medals, St.Kilda Captain, 2 Time Brownlow Medalist, 8 Time All Australian, 2nd Highest Brownlow votes poller.... The greatest of ALL TIME!!
Re: Hawks Fined
Tell me what I said that is wrong.Armoooo wrote:Are you serious?plugger66 wrote:It is to protect the millions they get off the TV stations that pay the players and protect the 16 sides. Why is that wrong.Behind Play wrote:Hawthorn fined $50000 for videoing the game between Saints and Dogs.
What a load of crap.
Or are you Dimwit himself??
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 763
- Joined: Tue 19 Jun 2007 7:18pm
Re: Hawks Fined
So you feel they were going to sell the copy at the local sunday market, which means the AFL don't get their commission.plugger66 wrote:Tell me what I said that is wrong.Armoooo wrote:Are you serious?plugger66 wrote:It is to protect the millions they get off the TV stations that pay the players and protect the 16 sides. Why is that wrong.Behind Play wrote:Hawthorn fined $50000 for videoing the game between Saints and Dogs.
What a load of crap.
Or are you Dimwit himself??
Really!!!!!!!!!!
Re: Hawks Fined
That is not the point. It is a condition of the TV agreement that the stations would have wanted so the AFL has to agree or they may have got less for the contract. It is copyright. the hawks would have known about as would any club.Behind Play wrote:So you feel they were going to sell the copy at the local sunday market, which means the AFL don't get their commission.plugger66 wrote:Tell me what I said that is wrong.Armoooo wrote:Are you serious?plugger66 wrote:It is to protect the millions they get off the TV stations that pay the players and protect the 16 sides. Why is that wrong.Behind Play wrote:Hawthorn fined $50000 for videoing the game between Saints and Dogs.
What a load of crap.
Or are you Dimwit himself??
Really!!!!!!!!!!
-
- SS Hall of Fame
- Posts: 2034
- Joined: Wed 03 May 2006 11:18pm
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: Hawks Fined
This is insanely ridiculous.
What a ridiculous rule. Why would the AFL even bother to follow this up? They could agree with the stations BUT THE HELL IS HAWTHORN GOING TO DO WITH THIS FOOTAGE?
We've already established the sheer laughability of them setting up their own rival TV station and showing recorded mobile phone games...err why am i even saying this.
What a laugh.
What a ridiculous rule. Why would the AFL even bother to follow this up? They could agree with the stations BUT THE HELL IS HAWTHORN GOING TO DO WITH THIS FOOTAGE?
We've already established the sheer laughability of them setting up their own rival TV station and showing recorded mobile phone games...err why am i even saying this.
What a laugh.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 87
- Joined: Sat 07 Jul 2007 8:02pm
- Location: Latrobe Valley
Does anyone have any more info about this or are we all just speculating?
The Hawks website just states they were fined for videotaping the match, and they have agreed to hand back all tapes. Nothing about using a mobile phone or even their own camera.
Even if they just taped it off the TV and were planning on showing it to players for training purposes that still sounds like a breach of copyright to me.
Rules is rules, the AFL has to take action when it is made aware of a breach.
To cop a fine of $50,000 without appeal makes me think there's a bit more to this than meets the eye.
The Hawks website just states they were fined for videotaping the match, and they have agreed to hand back all tapes. Nothing about using a mobile phone or even their own camera.
Even if they just taped it off the TV and were planning on showing it to players for training purposes that still sounds like a breach of copyright to me.
Rules is rules, the AFL has to take action when it is made aware of a breach.
To cop a fine of $50,000 without appeal makes me think there's a bit more to this than meets the eye.
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.
- Joffa Burns
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 7081
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 5:48pm
- Has thanked: 1871 times
- Been thanked: 1570 times
You would think that what Hawthorn has done has breached the TV Broadcast agreement and therefore the AFL needs to act strongly and quickly.
If you have a party/parties contributing 700+ million (or whatever it is) over 3-5 years there are obviously strict guidelines in place and each club will be well aware of them.
If they have breached the guidelines the penalty is warranted.
You can't have the benefit of the funds from the TV rights and breach the rules.
If you have a party/parties contributing 700+ million (or whatever it is) over 3-5 years there are obviously strict guidelines in place and each club will be well aware of them.
If they have breached the guidelines the penalty is warranted.
You can't have the benefit of the funds from the TV rights and breach the rules.
Proudly assuming the title of forum Oracle and serving as the inaugural Saintsational ‘weak as piss brigade’ President.
Not sure if that would really be a problem SSS - it probably contravenes a rule about using cameras at a game but if it were purely for internal purposes I suspect the AFL would grant permission if it were asked. Probably get upset to find out about it afterwards though.SENsaintsational wrote:Wonder what would happen if you secretly videotaped in the coaches box to report back to superiors about the coaches performance?
I'm also not sure how clubs legitmately go about using TV footage for training purposes. I imagine they should pay some sort of 'public performance' fee, the same as you would pay to show a DVD to a group of people. The fee is decided by the copyright holder based on the objective of the applicant, how much money they intend to make and how much money they can afford to pay.
I'm sure the channels exist for clubs to use the footage they want, obviously the Hawks went outside those channels and they are now paying the price.
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts.
No permission given. It could be a blight on the game, for sure.Brewer wrote:Not sure if that would really be a problem SSS - it probably contravenes a rule about using cameras at a game but if it were purely for internal purposes I suspect the AFL would grant permission if it were asked.SENsaintsational wrote:Wonder what would happen if you secretly videotaped in the coaches box to report back to superiors about the coaches performance?
Poster formerly known as SENsaintsational. More wisdom. More knowledge. Less name.
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1136
- Joined: Tue 02 Nov 2004 10:58am
- Location: in the outer
I reckon that the Hawks knew very well that permission would be refusedgolden hawk wrote:duffer's didn't realize i suppose that they had to ask , at least it is $25,ooo the rest suspended.
if they had of asked to be on the safe side then there would have been no problem
Id love to know how they were busted
THE BUBBLE HAS BURST
2011 player sponsor
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1136
- Joined: Tue 02 Nov 2004 10:58am
- Location: in the outer
AFLguy on sen said all they needed to do was ask reason being is so they know that if an incident occurs eg a reportable offense they can check all camera's and so tv net work knew too , permission would not have been refused they got in trouble cause they did not ask , they were from what i heard in an interview filming what players do behind the goals etc not necessarily the game it's self for training purposes etc your guys can do the same all clubs can as long as they ask first and get permission .saint66au wrote:I reckon that the Hawks knew very well that permission would be refusedgolden hawk wrote:duffer's didn't realize i suppose that they had to ask , at least it is $25,ooo the rest suspended.
if they had of asked to be on the safe side then there would have been no problem
Id love to know how they were busted
the security camera's caught footage of them and of course afl know all who work at all clubs so they knew who it was and that is how they got caught