This weekend there was a certain high profile pointy-car race in Indianapolis on the same day as the Coca-Cola 600. Watching tapes of both races makes the difference in television coverage very clear.
What does the vast majority of the Fox coverage consist of? It's largely a close-up of one car while they talk about that driver or his team. Then we get a speed shot, a lap of in-car or some random fluff and then another close-up of one car while they talk about him. What's missing are the long shots where you can actually see the racing.
Watch a tape of this year's Indy 500 or any old NASCAR race on ESPN Classic and you'll see many long shots showing four or more drivers at a time. This helps give the fan some perspective as to who's around whom and whether the battle is heating up or somebody is pulling away.
Speed shots are cool, two or three times per race, but please use them sparingly. They don't add to the fans knowledge. In-car cameras are a little better, but still only allow fans to see a very small portion of the action.
We need more two-shots of the key battles, long shots showing entire packs of cars for more than two seconds so we can see battles develop and more passing.
Fox has spent a lot of money for the rights to televise the race. I sure wish that they would. The poor camera angles and constant close-ups make it impossible to tell what is going on and very frustrating to sit down for a Sunday afternoon of NASCAR. They could learn a lot from ABC/ESPN about how to put motorsports on television.
