Can't say I watch that much on BBC1 so not too bothered but I can see the point of those who aren't sports fans that BBC1 will be wall to wall coverage.
Easy to answer, there's a vote in Scotland coming up.
Was there a vote in Manchester in 2002?
Besides, I seriously doubt that blanket coverage anchored by a former England football captain will have the positive effect on the 'no' campaign that you seem to be implying.
(For the record, I personally have no objections to Gary Lineker; he's the BBC's top sports presenter and so it's right he's anchoring the coverage).
Can't say I watch that much on BBC1 so not too bothered but I can see the point of those who aren't sports fans that BBC1 will be wall to wall coverage.
It's an interesting one. I'm a big sports fan, and have no interest in the Commonwealth Games. But can see why the Beeb is giving the event as much coverage as it is, mainly because it's original programming, much of it will be on during the day when the BBC1 schedule isn't exactly compelling, many of the competitors, and of course all the organisers, are British.
But in the evenings, I'd move the coverage to e.g. BBC3. FWIW.
Depends how one measures it. Just about every sport's world cups have the best international teams in that sport participating. The Commonwealth games doesn't, it's just a selection of teams which in 2014 is almost arbitrary, and even those teams don't have many of their best competitors entering. No one in continental Europe cares, no one in the US, Japan, China, Russia, S. America, etc.
From a global sporting persective, it's borderline meaningless.
Does it matter if no one in the US, Japan, China ....... cares?
I could not care less who wins a medal in the events in the neighbouring towns (or even here) but that does not mean they should not have the events.
The athlete on The One Show said he values his Commonwealth Games Gold more than his Olympic medal because he was competing for Wales.
Some events do have very strong entries - many of the leading sprinters are from Commonwealth countries, the East African Commonwealth countries are strong in longer distance events, UK and Australia in swimming.
Some Commonwealth athletes do not compete because they are professionals and there is no payment for competing, they are not paid to compete in the Olympics but it raises their profile more so means they get higher appearance fees and sponsorship deals. Wins at the Commonwealth Games will do so also but not as much.
It would be a very boring world if the only sports events were the Olympics and a handful of world cups for just the leading athletes in each sport. Athletes are also going to find it difficult to get experience of competing especially those from smaller countries.
From a global sporting persective, it's borderline meaningless.
You could say that about the World Snooker or Darts championships which take up many hours of TV every week.
The point is that the Commonwealths (and snooker and darts) is a significant competition for the UK and therefore it is quite right that the UK's public broadcaster shows extensive coverage. Who care is people in the US or China have no interest in the result?
Does it matter if no one in the US, Japan, China ....... cares?
I could not care less who wins a medal in the events in the neighbouring towns (or even here) but that does not mean they should not have the events.
The athlete on The One Show said he values his Commonwealth Games Gold more than his Olympic medal because he was competing for Wales.
Some events do have very strong entries - many of the leading sprinters are from Commonwealth countries, the East African Commonwealth countries are strong in longer distance events, UK and Australia in swimming.
Some Commonwealth athletes do not compete because they are professionals and there is no payment for competing, they are not paid to compete in the Olympics but it raises their profile more so means they get higher appearance fees and sponsorship deals. Wins at the Commonwealth Games will do so also but not as much.
It would be a very boring world if the only sports events were the Olympics and a handful of world cups for just the leading athletes in each sport. Athletes are also going to find it difficult to get experience of competing especially those from smaller countries.
If one is looking to evaluate how significant a sporting event it is, then global interest is one factor. For me, there are just too many leading sportsmen and women who don't compete, for whatever reason, at the Commonwealth Games, in virtually every event, that it just doesn't interest me. It's about as relevant as the Boat Race, which probably gets a larger average UK viewing audience.
that's the thing though, there will already be coverage on BBC Three in the evenings (up to around 10pm I think).
Thanks, I didn't realise it will also be on BBC3. That is a lot of coverage. Did they do the same with the Olympics (ie not the red button options, was it on two of the main BBC channels at the same time?)
Thanks, I didn't realise it will also be on BBC3. That is a lot of coverage. Did they do the same with the Olympics (ie not the red button options, was it on two of the main BBC channels at the same time?)
Yes, and to be fair there were more online streams as well (plus a few more RB streams on satellite I think)
For the Olympics, there were 24 channels (not simply red button streams) on satellite. This was the minimum required to show every single event, when overlaps were taken into consideration.
I dont know if the BBC are doing this but one thing that grated on me was the commentary at the olympics particularly the swimming. It would have been good if the BBC had offered a commentary free option of all sports of the commonwealth games.
In the era of On Demand, box set TV and a general fragmentation of the TV audience live sport is now the one thing that unites the nation around the TV set, the only category of programme that can muster audiences of 15m+. At the same time, there is a decline in the amount of sport available FTA. Given these two factors, it is right, moreso than ever, that a public service broadcaster should devote the maximum coverage to the events that remain available to them. I always hope that the viewing figures generated will encourage sports governing bodies to stick with the FTA channels, and it appears a few do think this way. The R&A and All-England Club could make more money by selling the Open and Wimbledon to Sky but choose to stay with the BBC because this raises the profile of the sports. Long may this continue.
I don't remember the Manchester event having such wide coverage. The again I don't remember it, so maybe it did.
But I do think in my opinion the UK government is trying to buy votes and have been doing so for a long time. Eg. they've just announced they might site a new space port in Scotland, bit of a coincidence, and what about prescriptions, people in Scotland and Wales get them free whilst English residents have to pay £8 per item. Someone gives Scotland and Wales the funding.....
Looks like BBC1 is showing nothing but the commonwealth games when it starts next week. Looks like a rerun of the olympics two years ago basically with blanket coverage morning, noon and night. Then after 15 hours of it we have Today At The Games at 10.35. Is this really necessary? I dont remember previous commonwealth games getting this much coverage. Even the Manchester one in 2002. Im sure that wasnt on all day and all evening. Personally I will not be watching a single minute of it. This is too much. Not everyone wants sport all day and all night.
Because these athletes and sports need all the exposure and support we can give them. Anything that encourages young people to take up a new sport is only a good thing. If you don't like sport you could always watch another channel, a DVD or just do something else.
Looks like BBC1 is showing nothing but the commonwealth games when it starts next week. Looks like a rerun of the olympics two years ago basically with blanket coverage morning, noon and night. Then after 15 hours of it we have Today At The Games at 10.35. Is this really necessary? I dont remember previous commonwealth games getting this much coverage. Even the Manchester one in 2002. Im sure that wasnt on all day and all evening. Personally I will not be watching a single minute of it. This is too much. Not everyone wants sport all day and all night.
Because these athletes and sports need all the exposure and support we can give them. Anything that encourages young people to take up a new sport is only a good thing. If you don't like sport you could always watch another channel, a DVD or just do something else.
I quoted a day's schedule earlier, only takes a few minutes to check. It is a myth that there was not much coverage and no late evening highlight programme.
Day chosen at random
27 July 2002
BBC1
0900 - 1725 Commonwealth Games Grandstand (with short break for news)
1835 - 2055 Commonwealth Games Grandstand
2310 - 0105 The Games Tonight
BBC2
1540 - 1835 Commonwealth Games Grandstand
2055 - 2215 Commonwealth Games Grandstand
3rd August
BBC1
0900 -1910 Commonwealth Games Grandstand with short break for news
2245 - 0105 The Games Tonight
BBC2
1400 - 2215 Commonwealth Games Grandstand
Commonwealth Games Grandstand included some other sports at the weekend during the afternoon.
I haven't checked other year's Commonwealth Games but easy to check.
From funding from Westminster via subsidies from the English. The Welsh would not be able to afford them without Westminster grants. It's easier to give the smaller nations freebies for votes because there are less people.
As has been mentioned earlier, the Commonwealth Games is a bit of a poor mans Olympics and therefore doesn't warrant blanket coverage on the BBCs main Channel. But then that's just an observation. It doesn't bother me because I'm not scared of changing TV channels.
From funding from Westminster via subsidies from the English. The Welsh would not be able to afford them without Westminster grants. It's easier to give the smaller nations freebies for votes because there are less people.
As has been mentioned earlier, the Commonwealth Games is a bit of a poor mans Olympics and therefore doesn't warrant blanket coverage on the BBCs main Channel. But then that's just an observation. It doesn't bother me because I'm not scared of changing TV channels.
Comments
The fact that you simply keep repeating that doesn't suddenly make it true.
Besides, I seriously doubt that blanket coverage anchored by a former England football captain will have the positive effect on the 'no' campaign that you seem to be implying.
(For the record, I personally have no objections to Gary Lineker; he's the BBC's top sports presenter and so it's right he's anchoring the coverage).
It's an interesting one. I'm a big sports fan, and have no interest in the Commonwealth Games. But can see why the Beeb is giving the event as much coverage as it is, mainly because it's original programming, much of it will be on during the day when the BBC1 schedule isn't exactly compelling, many of the competitors, and of course all the organisers, are British.
But in the evenings, I'd move the coverage to e.g. BBC3. FWIW.
Does it matter if no one in the US, Japan, China ....... cares?
I could not care less who wins a medal in the events in the neighbouring towns (or even here) but that does not mean they should not have the events.
The athlete on The One Show said he values his Commonwealth Games Gold more than his Olympic medal because he was competing for Wales.
Some events do have very strong entries - many of the leading sprinters are from Commonwealth countries, the East African Commonwealth countries are strong in longer distance events, UK and Australia in swimming.
Some Commonwealth athletes do not compete because they are professionals and there is no payment for competing, they are not paid to compete in the Olympics but it raises their profile more so means they get higher appearance fees and sponsorship deals. Wins at the Commonwealth Games will do so also but not as much.
It would be a very boring world if the only sports events were the Olympics and a handful of world cups for just the leading athletes in each sport. Athletes are also going to find it difficult to get experience of competing especially those from smaller countries.
You could say that about the World Snooker or Darts championships which take up many hours of TV every week.
The point is that the Commonwealths (and snooker and darts) is a significant competition for the UK and therefore it is quite right that the UK's public broadcaster shows extensive coverage. Who care is people in the US or China have no interest in the result?
If one is looking to evaluate how significant a sporting event it is, then global interest is one factor. For me, there are just too many leading sportsmen and women who don't compete, for whatever reason, at the Commonwealth Games, in virtually every event, that it just doesn't interest me. It's about as relevant as the Boat Race, which probably gets a larger average UK viewing audience.
Thanks, I didn't realise it will also be on BBC3. That is a lot of coverage. Did they do the same with the Olympics (ie not the red button options, was it on two of the main BBC channels at the same time?)
Yes, and to be fair there were more online streams as well (plus a few more RB streams on satellite I think)
I don't remember the Manchester event having such wide coverage. The again I don't remember it, so maybe it did.
But I do think in my opinion the UK government is trying to buy votes and have been doing so for a long time. Eg. they've just announced they might site a new space port in Scotland, bit of a coincidence, and what about prescriptions, people in Scotland and Wales get them free whilst English residents have to pay £8 per item. Someone gives Scotland and Wales the funding.....
Because these athletes and sports need all the exposure and support we can give them. Anything that encourages young people to take up a new sport is only a good thing. If you don't like sport you could always watch another channel, a DVD or just do something else.
I quoted a day's schedule earlier, only takes a few minutes to check. It is a myth that there was not much coverage and no late evening highlight programme.
Day chosen at random
27 July 2002
BBC1
0900 - 1725 Commonwealth Games Grandstand (with short break for news)
1835 - 2055 Commonwealth Games Grandstand
2310 - 0105 The Games Tonight
BBC2
1540 - 1835 Commonwealth Games Grandstand
2055 - 2215 Commonwealth Games Grandstand
3rd August
BBC1
0900 -1910 Commonwealth Games Grandstand with short break for news
2245 - 0105 The Games Tonight
BBC2
1400 - 2215 Commonwealth Games Grandstand
Commonwealth Games Grandstand included some other sports at the weekend during the afternoon.
I haven't checked other year's Commonwealth Games but easy to check.
I have just posted a message showing that there just as much coverage in 2002 and only two channels to use.
Yes. The Scots and the Welsh.
From funding from Westminster via subsidies from the English. The Welsh would not be able to afford them without Westminster grants. It's easier to give the smaller nations freebies for votes because there are less people.
Ignorant nonsense.
er no, it is your opinion,