It's not lack of of experience, it's lack of interest. If you don't give a shit about hockey then you're going to post in this thread about what a horrible sport it is on TV. There aren't many sports more exciting than rugby, live or on TV, yet I could give a shit about the any sort of Tri-Nations or whatever so end up turning the channel after 10 minutes.Terry in Crapchester wrote:
They've been televising hockey at least since I was a kid (albeit somewhat sporadically), so I don't think it's necessarily lack of experience that accounts for the poor quality of televised hockey as opposed to watching it live. I think many others have hit on some of the factors. Also, the hockey puck is much more difficult to track visually than the ball used in other sports, and TV only exacerbates that difference. There are ways to make the puck more easily visible, of course, but those would translate into even less scoring than you see now, so they would hurt ratings in that respect.
And what's so hard about following a black puck on white ice? No different than watching a tiny ass golf ball other than you're used to one sport and not the other. And even if you don't see the puck it's quite obvious where the action is focused.
If you don't give a shit about a sport by the time you've graduated high school then you're probably never going to come around on it.