London Tv Station denied access by Maroons

[flyers2011]

http://www.cksn.ca/2015/03/london-telev ... oons-game/

Not sure why the Chatham organization would do this, I agree with something I just read from someone wise, If I was London I would deny Chatham radio access to the game.

[Blades]

This smacks of pettiness ... not something I would expect from the organization in Chatham.

[Marcie]

According to the regulations below, it sounds like Chatham is fully within their rights to deny access, as well as London tonight. I hope not. I want to listen to the game.

SECTION R
Television Regulations
R1 A team may not enter into a long term contract with a cable television company based on
the inability of cable television companies to secure advertising revenue under C.R.T.C.
Regulations.
C.R.T.C. Regulations could however be amended to provide for changes in this area which
would allow the OHA membership to review this policy.
R2 Provided permission has been granted by the OHA and the arena management, and both
competing teams have previously agreed, a game may be taped for future broadcast and/or
televised live on cable television.
R3 Copies of the standard OHA cable television agreement must be executed and filed with
the OHA office prior to any OHA game being shown on cable television.
R4 Where an OHA Game has been televised by cable TV station, without the permission of
the parties as outlined in (R2) above, such violation of the OHA Television Agreement will be
reported to the C.R.T.C.
R5 Permission for live or delayed broadcasts of any OHA game on privately owned or National
networks must be secured from the OHA Board of Directors.
Delayed partial broadcasts of game highlights for the use of Sports News are exempted from
this regulation.
Radio Regulations
R6 A team may have its home games broadcast by radio providing the radio station has secured
permission from both competing teams.
It is recommended that permission be secured from management of the arena from which the
broadcasts will emanate.

[shady]

Cogeco in Chatham use to televise the Maroons games and haven't done that in years now .

[Port hockey1]

London will probably deny Chatham radio now...Nice one Chatham, why were they denied???

[Marcie]

Well according to the rules outlined above if London does deny Chatham their radio broadcast (and they are entitled to if they wish), Chatham can deny London their TV broadcast. That would be some pretty nasty tit for tat.

[Blades]

Well according to the rules outlined above if London does deny Chatham their radio broadcast (and they are entitled to if they wish), Chatham can deny London their TV broadcast. That would be some pretty nasty tit for tat.

Chatham is the one who first did the denying of any broadcasting. Should London wish to repay such in kind, that would be tit for tat. However, I am hoping that London won't bother to stoop to such a low level and show Chatham where they can do their broadcast.

It's things like this that makes me gobsmacked. I realize that not all arenas are set up for the visiting team to have a special booth to use but most are OK with setting some sort of space aside for visiting media. I seem to recall one year Sarnia was playing an away game and the men doing the radio broadcast for the Sarnia radio station found themselves standing under the main booth of the rink, surrounded by the home team fans. I'm thinking it was either Strathroy or Chatham. They kind of poked fun about their "location" and made a few comments about the comments that were being picked up by the broadcast. They simply shrugged it off as being part of covering junior B hockey.

Final thing ... why be petty? or playing tit for tat? How about being the "bigger" person/organization and doing what you can to promote the league. Ticking off the media by denying them access to a game makes the organization look Mickey Mouse and the league boorish. Not quite what we are supposed to be trying to accomplish, I think.

[Legionofdoom]

Delayed partial broadcasts of game highlights for the use of Sports News are exempted from
this regulation.

I applaud your research...but the line I quoted is the only one that applies. Rogers was NOT doing a broadcast, they were there simply for highlights...Chatham had NO right to deny access. Of course...not the first time Chatham "forgets" rules.

[Marcie]

Yes, quite right. I didn't pick that up. In that case Chatham had no right of refusing Rogers. London though could have refused to allow Chatham radio from broadcasting a game in their own rink. I always considered it a great compliment when Rogers came to our rink.

[Port hockey1]

Full credit to London for doing the classy thing tonight.

[Port hockey1]

Well according to the rules outlined above if London does deny Chatham their radio broadcast (and they are entitled to if they wish), Chatham can deny London their TV broadcast. That would be some pretty nasty tit for tat.

Final thing ... why be petty? or playing tit for tat? How about being the "bigger" person/organization and doing what you can to promote the league. Ticking off the media by denying them access to a game makes the organization look Mickey Mouse and the league boorish. Not quite what we are supposed to be trying to accomplish, I think.

Agree 100%

[insanity]

pretty sad Junior B hockey has sunk to this sort of stuff. Jeezuz!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Where are you Dave Torrie when we need you?????????????

[Legionofdoom]

pretty sad Junior B hockey has sunk to this sort of stuff. Jeezuz!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Where are you Dave Torrie when we need you?????????????

I'd hope the GOJHL comes down hard on them, considering this league wants Jr A status...this is a Jr Z move. Chatham is an absolute embarrassment to the league. As for London allowing the radio broadcast, I knew they would. The folks in London respect the game and are intelligent enough to know it's played on the ice, and any media attention is sorely needed.