Good constructive stuff, BFG, as always, and that's what I mean about opinions being so different between us all!:cool:
I actually find Mark's commentary extremely flat!
As for your comments on Garry Richardson, I had better keep a low profile on this one as he and I, along with Ian Darke, have been close friends for over 30 years since we joined BBC Radio together!
You are wrong, though, about the players dreading his interviews, he gets on well with them, including Federer and, in particular, Murray, with whom he's enjoyed a close relationship for a number of years.
As for the Toy Story reference, it was a joke as I recall, something to do with someone reading Tolstoy I believe, but can't remember exactly what it was!:(
The only other thing I would say on Garry's contribution is that obviously your opinion, which you are, of course, as ever, perfectly entitled to, isn't shared by the BBC, as this is I believe at least his THIRTIETH year doing the interviews!
Cheers Peter.
I remeber there was some reason behind the Toy Story reference as you say and he did try to explain but it did sound a bit of a bizarre question - especially if people half heard it.
Indeed - BBC use him year after year so they obviously rate him.
Not quoted the post but as you say with commentators, presenters, pundits etc. we all watch for the game and if we don't like a particularly person we just bare it - or if it's really bad try and find the NBC/Arabic commentary.
Except for that Gazza poster on here who said he refused to watch matches if they were on ITV.
Except for that Gazza poster on here who said he refused to watch matches if they were on ITV.
There've been people in the past claiming the camera coverage of a match shown on both Channels was better on BBC than ITV ....even though it was obviously the same pictures!!
They may join soccer sat at 2.55 in practice. I'd guess if Irish games on sky sports one then handover with studio at half time and full time.
If efl finishes at 7.30 I presume they may show some goals early. I also presume at 8pm they will just rattle through all three divisions?
Mixed on New match choice as 20 mins action about double motd but a bit short. I'm guessing 2 min intro, 10 mins, 3 min break, 10 mins, 2 min int/ out, 3 min break. Quite good if you want one match then just goals at 2230.
The one thing that does annoy me on sky highlights is if they break during a half on repeats, I guess that from now on all Sun and Mon games will be in 20 min packs. For completeness it would be nice if bt games from Mon let's say could be on demand, but I suspect just goals.
On castle v petchey I'm in minority who prefers castle. I think petchey a bit like Bill leslie in a way. (Although leslie is more lively at times)
While i don't have Sky Sports and havent watched much of it when i have i always find that it is mainly made up of repeats and there isn't actually as much live coverage as i would expect. With Sky looking to cut costs due to the vast expenditure on the Premier League i would expect them to cut out a channel. The expenditure on the Premier League is ridiculous. Just to put it into perspective the US Open tennis, which Sky are vastly rumored to drop costs £6million per year in their present deal. £6million for the whole tournament really is nothing compared to £11million for 1 Premier League match.
- Think someone previously suggested the Sat 3pm Irish live PL games would go on SS5 in Ireland - if so this would fit with the above. There's no live sport on SS5 on Sat afternoon - just WWE Wrestling.
You're right here, the Irish-only games will be going on SS5. They'll be having a separate opt-out from 2.30pm - 5.30pm.
While i don't have Sky Sports and havent watched much of it when i have i always find that it is mainly made up of repeats and there isn't actually as much live coverage as i would expect. With Sky looking to cut costs due to the vast expenditure on the Premier League i would expect them to cut out a channel.
A huge amount of the schedules are made up of repeats - but that's just because the vast majority of live sport takes place at weekends or on Fri night.
The reason there are 5 channels is that on the vast majority of weekends there will be 5 live events on simultaneously for (usually) a reasonable amount of time.
Closing a channel would save almost nothing (because filler repeats cost peanuts) and just lead to live sport not being shown on a main channel - instead it would have to go behind the red button where it is less visible and will get a much smaller audience.
As it is, even with 5 channels, some events regularly have to go behind the red button.
The expenditure on the Premier League is ridiculous. Just to put it into perspective the US Open tennis, which Sky are vastly rumored to drop costs £6million per year in their present deal. £6million for the whole tournament really is nothing compared to £11million for 1 Premier League match.
Sky will tomorrow announce annual (UK) revenues of over £8.2bn.
During the 3 years of their next PL contract their annual revenues will average about £9bn. Out of that they'll spend £1.4bn per year on PL rights - just over 15% of revenues. Is that ridiculous?
I'm not sure it is - indeed it seems very likely that it isn't. Suppose Sky didn't show any PL over that period and thus saved that £1.4bn per year. Would revenues still be higher than £7.6bn per year? We cannot possibly know for sure but given the absolutely overwhelming importance of its PL rights to Sky's entire business it seems very possible that they would not be.
I don't think it's very meaningful to compare the US Open to the PL because in contrast it will drive a trivial number of subscriptions. Of course it's still nice for Sky to show it and it provides value to subscribers but there is a long list of "middling rights" - costing between say £5m and £20m per year. Each on their own doesn't seem much of a cost - but they all add up to what is a very large sum.
The figure reported in the media that Sky declined to pay for US Open rights was £8m per year. Doesn't seem much but how about comparing it to, say, £18m for 300 La Liga games or £20m for a season of Super League?
It's questionable just how valuable the US Open rights are to Sky - especially given the very high proportion of big matches up to the QFs played in the night session (post midnight UK). It's basically a gamble on how far Murray goes - if he makes the Final it's very good value, but if he goes out in the QF or earlier it's very bad value.
Out of interest is the reunion lunch for all sports and other presenters from the shows? For instance would the some of the TMS team be then?
Yes, right across the board., although mainly presenters, commentators and producers rather than "experts".
Christopher Martin-Jenkins and ex-TMS producer Peter Baxter have been attendees in the past......for the last one, among those there were Simon Reed, rugby commentator Ian Robertson, Norman Cuddeford, who used to cover athletics, George Hamilton, Ron Jones from Wales, Tony Adamson, Mike Ingham, Derek Thompson from racing, Garry Richardson, Ian Carnaby, Alan Parry and Ian Darke.............. and quite a few other "names" have been there over the years from Des Lynam to Jim Rosenthal and Gerry Williams.
We have a nice lunch, tell a few stories we've probably all heard before, have a glass of wine or seven, and share a toast to those sadly no longer with us like the great Peter Jones, Peter Bromley and Bryon Butler.
A huge amount of the schedules are made up of repeats - but that's just because the vast majority of live sport takes place at weekends or on Fri night.
The reason there are 5 channels is that on the vast majority of weekends there will be 5 live events on simultaneously for (usually) a reasonable amount of time.
Closing a channel would save almost nothing (because filler repeats cost peanuts) and just lead to live sport not being shown on a main channel - instead it would have to go behind the red button where it is less visible and will get a much smaller audience.
As it is, even with 5 channels, some events regularly have to go behind the red button.
Sky will tomorrow announce annual (UK) revenues of over £8.2bn.
During the 3 years of their next PL contract their annual revenues will average about £9bn. Out of that they'll spend £1.4bn per year on PL rights - just over 15% of revenues. Is that ridiculous?
I'm not sure it is - indeed it seems very likely that it isn't. Suppose Sky didn't show any PL over that period and thus saved that £1.4bn per year. Would revenues still be higher than £7.6bn per year? We cannot possibly know for sure but given the absolutely overwhelming importance of its PL rights to Sky's entire business it seems very possible that they would not be.
I don't think it's very meaningful to compare the US Open to the PL because in contrast it will drive a trivial number of subscriptions. Of course it's still nice for Sky to show it and it provides value to subscribers but there is a long list of "middling rights" - costing between say £5m and £20m per year. Each on their own doesn't seem much of a cost - but they all add up to what is a very large sum.
The figure reported in the media that Sky declined to pay for US Open rights was £8m per year. Doesn't seem much but how about comparing it to, say, £18m for 300 La Liga games or £20m for a season of Super League?
It's questionable just how valuable the US Open rights are to Sky - especially given the very high proportion of big matches up to the QFs played in the night session (post midnight UK). It's basically a gamble on how far Murray goes - if he makes the Final it's very good value, but if he goes out in the QF or earlier it's very bad value.
I am beginning to suspect you are either Barney Francis or Sky's chief accountant!:)
That's fine, as long as you're not Sir Philip Flaming Green!:o>:(
Yes, right across the board., although mainly presenters, commentators and producers rather than "experts".
Christopher Martin-Jenkins and ex-TMS producer Peter Baxter have been attendees in the past......for the last one, among those there were Simon Reed, rugby commentator Ian Robertson, Norman Cuddeford, who used to cover athletics, George Hamilton, Ron Jones from Wales, Tony Adamson, Mike Ingham, Derek Thompson from racing, Garry Richardson, Ian Carnaby, Alan Parry and Ian Darke.............. and quite a few other "names" have been there over the years from Des Lynam to Jim Rosenthal and Gerry Williams.
We have a nice lunch, tell a few stories we've probably all heard before, have a glass of wine or seven, and share a toast to those sadly no longer with us like the great Peter Jones, Peter Bromley and Bryon Butler.
A wonderful day........:cool:
A great shame that Christopher Martin-Jenkins will not be with you any more - don't forget to include him in your toast.
A great shame that Christopher Martin-Jenkins will not be with you any more - don't forget to include him in your toast.
We will, I remember sitting next to CMJ one year and he was terrific company......we all miss his dulcet tones, even when he had to read out the lower divisions football results on Sports Report.....which he hated doing!:)
Yes, right across the board., although mainly presenters, commentators and producers rather than "experts".
Christopher Martin-Jenkins and ex-TMS producer Peter Baxter have been attendees in the past......for the last one, among those there were Simon Reed, rugby commentator Ian Robertson, Norman Cuddeford, who used to cover athletics, George Hamilton, Ron Jones from Wales, Tony Adamson, Mike Ingham, Derek Thompson from racing, Garry Richardson, Ian Carnaby, Alan Parry and Ian Darke.............. and quite a few other "names" have been there over the years from Des Lynam to Jim Rosenthal and Gerry Williams.
We have a nice lunch, tell a few stories we've probably all heard before, have a glass of wine or seven, and share a toast to those sadly no longer with us like the great Peter Jones, Peter Bromley and Bryon Butler.
A huge amount of the schedules are made up of repeats - but that's just because the vast majority of live sport takes place at weekends or on Fri night.
The reason there are 5 channels is that on the vast majority of weekends there will be 5 live events on simultaneously for (usually) a reasonable amount of time.
Closing a channel would save almost nothing (because filler repeats cost peanuts) and just lead to live sport not being shown on a main channel - instead it would have to go behind the red button where it is less visible and will get a much smaller audience.
As it is, even with 5 channels, some events regularly have to go behind the red button.
Sky will tomorrow announce annual (UK) revenues of over £8.2bn.
During the 3 years of their next PL contract their annual revenues will average about £9bn. Out of that they'll spend £1.4bn per year on PL rights - just over 15% of revenues. Is that ridiculous?
I'm not sure it is - indeed it seems very likely that it isn't. Suppose Sky didn't show any PL over that period and thus saved that £1.4bn per year. Would revenues still be higher than £7.6bn per year? We cannot possibly know for sure but given the absolutely overwhelming importance of its PL rights to Sky's entire business it seems very possible that they would not be.
I don't think it's very meaningful to compare the US Open to the PL because in contrast it will drive a trivial number of subscriptions. Of course it's still nice for Sky to show it and it provides value to subscribers but there is a long list of "middling rights" - costing between say £5m and £20m per year. Each on their own doesn't seem much of a cost - but they all add up to what is a very large sum.
The figure reported in the media that Sky declined to pay for US Open rights was £8m per year. Doesn't seem much but how about comparing it to, say, £18m for 300 La Liga games or £20m for a season of Super League?
It's questionable just how valuable the US Open rights are to Sky - especially given the very high proportion of big matches up to the QFs played in the night session (post midnight UK). It's basically a gamble on how far Murray goes - if he makes the Final it's very good value, but if he goes out in the QF or earlier it's very bad value.
Added to all that is the question "if Sky doesn't pay £8m for the US Open, how many Sky Sports customers don't get to see the US Open?"
...the answer being none, as they all get Eurosport and Eurosport 2.
To be honest, Adam, by the time the lunch is over, they could play a combination of Sports Report, The Dam Busters, Star Wars, Nessum Dorma and The Great Escape in our ears and I doubt we'd even notice!;-)
Added to all that is the question "if Sky doesn't pay £8m for the US Open, how many Sky Sports customers don't get to see the US Open?"
...the answer being none, as they all get Eurosport and Eurosport 2.
Not true. Eurosport is part of the variety bundle not the original bundle. So if you just have the original + sky sports then no, you won't still get to watch the US Open.
Not true. Eurosport is part of the variety bundle not the original bundle. So if you just have the original + sky sports then no, you won't still get to watch the US Open.
Life was so much simpler when we just had one BBC channel, the Racing Post and the ladies at the telephone exchange who gave us the Brighton result when we rang the operator number........:cool:
Comments
Cheers Peter.
I remeber there was some reason behind the Toy Story reference as you say and he did try to explain but it did sound a bit of a bizarre question - especially if people half heard it.
Indeed - BBC use him year after year so they obviously rate him.
Not quoted the post but as you say with commentators, presenters, pundits etc. we all watch for the game and if we don't like a particularly person we just bare it - or if it's really bad try and find the NBC/Arabic commentary.
Except for that Gazza poster on here who said he refused to watch matches if they were on ITV.
There've been people in the past claiming the camera coverage of a match shown on both Channels was better on BBC than ITV ....even though it was obviously the same pictures!!
If efl finishes at 7.30 I presume they may show some goals early. I also presume at 8pm they will just rattle through all three divisions?
Mixed on New match choice as 20 mins action about double motd but a bit short. I'm guessing 2 min intro, 10 mins, 3 min break, 10 mins, 2 min int/ out, 3 min break. Quite good if you want one match then just goals at 2230.
The one thing that does annoy me on sky highlights is if they break during a half on repeats, I guess that from now on all Sun and Mon games will be in 20 min packs. For completeness it would be nice if bt games from Mon let's say could be on demand, but I suspect just goals.
On castle v petchey I'm in minority who prefers castle. I think petchey a bit like Bill leslie in a way. (Although leslie is more lively at times)
Petchey vs Castle for me is a no brainer that Petchey is better. But Simon Reed is for me the best tennis commentator out there.
On castle v petchey I'm in minority who prefers castle. [/QUOTE]
Plus the BBC!;-)
Agree Simon Reed is excellent, by the way, another ex BBC Radio man from the 70's and 80's!.........
We have a BBC Radio reunion lunch from that era every year and it's quite a gathering!: cool:
You're right here, the Irish-only games will be going on SS5. They'll be having a separate opt-out from 2.30pm - 5.30pm.
Again I'm totally wrong. Whether it be presenters, fixtures or channels the exact opposite of what I think will happen
Lottery numbers definitely won't be 8,23,27,34,36 and 45 next time
Agree with Simon reed as no 1 for tennis
Out of interest is the reunion lunch for all sports and other presenters from the shows? For instance would the some of the TMS team be then?
A huge amount of the schedules are made up of repeats - but that's just because the vast majority of live sport takes place at weekends or on Fri night.
The reason there are 5 channels is that on the vast majority of weekends there will be 5 live events on simultaneously for (usually) a reasonable amount of time.
Closing a channel would save almost nothing (because filler repeats cost peanuts) and just lead to live sport not being shown on a main channel - instead it would have to go behind the red button where it is less visible and will get a much smaller audience.
As it is, even with 5 channels, some events regularly have to go behind the red button.
Sky will tomorrow announce annual (UK) revenues of over £8.2bn.
During the 3 years of their next PL contract their annual revenues will average about £9bn. Out of that they'll spend £1.4bn per year on PL rights - just over 15% of revenues. Is that ridiculous?
I'm not sure it is - indeed it seems very likely that it isn't. Suppose Sky didn't show any PL over that period and thus saved that £1.4bn per year. Would revenues still be higher than £7.6bn per year? We cannot possibly know for sure but given the absolutely overwhelming importance of its PL rights to Sky's entire business it seems very possible that they would not be.
I don't think it's very meaningful to compare the US Open to the PL because in contrast it will drive a trivial number of subscriptions. Of course it's still nice for Sky to show it and it provides value to subscribers but there is a long list of "middling rights" - costing between say £5m and £20m per year. Each on their own doesn't seem much of a cost - but they all add up to what is a very large sum.
The figure reported in the media that Sky declined to pay for US Open rights was £8m per year. Doesn't seem much but how about comparing it to, say, £18m for 300 La Liga games or £20m for a season of Super League?
It's questionable just how valuable the US Open rights are to Sky - especially given the very high proportion of big matches up to the QFs played in the night session (post midnight UK). It's basically a gamble on how far Murray goes - if he makes the Final it's very good value, but if he goes out in the QF or earlier it's very bad value.
Yes, right across the board., although mainly presenters, commentators and producers rather than "experts".
Christopher Martin-Jenkins and ex-TMS producer Peter Baxter have been attendees in the past......for the last one, among those there were Simon Reed, rugby commentator Ian Robertson, Norman Cuddeford, who used to cover athletics, George Hamilton, Ron Jones from Wales, Tony Adamson, Mike Ingham, Derek Thompson from racing, Garry Richardson, Ian Carnaby, Alan Parry and Ian Darke.............. and quite a few other "names" have been there over the years from Des Lynam to Jim Rosenthal and Gerry Williams.
We have a nice lunch, tell a few stories we've probably all heard before, have a glass of wine or seven, and share a toast to those sadly no longer with us like the great Peter Jones, Peter Bromley and Bryon Butler.
A wonderful day........:cool:
I am beginning to suspect you are either Barney Francis or Sky's chief accountant!:)
That's fine, as long as you're not Sir Philip Flaming Green!:o>:(
I'm none of them I'm afraid - would be a bit richer if I was.
And unlike any of them I sometimes have too much spare time on my hands to waste reading and posting on here!
A great shame that Christopher Martin-Jenkins will not be with you any more - don't forget to include him in your toast.
Well, all I can say is that, unlike Sir Philip, you are obviously very well-informed!:)
We will, I remember sitting next to CMJ one year and he was terrific company......we all miss his dulcet tones, even when he had to read out the lower divisions football results on Sports Report.....which he hated doing!:)
China v South Africa- Olly Hogben for Olympic Broadcasting Services
It could be a chance to hear some "interesting" voices on the Beeb!
I hope when you meet up you all hum the theme tune to Sports Report! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gv_idtcK1-E
Comms: Kevin Keatings and Alan Curbishley
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/21036403
Added to all that is the question "if Sky doesn't pay £8m for the US Open, how many Sky Sports customers don't get to see the US Open?"
...the answer being none, as they all get Eurosport and Eurosport 2.
To be honest, Adam, by the time the lunch is over, they could play a combination of Sports Report, The Dam Busters, Star Wars, Nessum Dorma and The Great Escape in our ears and I doubt we'd even notice!;-)
Not true. Eurosport is part of the variety bundle not the original bundle. So if you just have the original + sky sports then no, you won't still get to watch the US Open.
Life was so much simpler when we just had one BBC channel, the Racing Post and the ladies at the telephone exchange who gave us the Brighton result when we rang the operator number........:cool: