- ITV's football punditry is far better at present than the BBC's stale and outdated offerings.
True since they took Lee Dixon. Lineker is far better than Chiles though and Clive Tyldesley is terrible. Throw in the adverts and I'd definitely prefer to watch football on the BBC.
just to also point out ITV don't have 'money to spend now they don't have to pay for rights' the income would have come from advertising etc so its a falsehood to suggest that ITV would immediately bid for 'PL' rights or FL rights - there are a few people who were closer to the last itv coverage highlights who found it to be [in the end] a bit of a white elephant.
Whilst advertising income and operating profit will vary, ITV programme budget usually remains pretty static, at around £1bn a year.
A portion of that will be assigned to sports rights, but with precious few rights available looks like drama / entertainment will be boosted.
Puts it into perspective though that the value of the BT Sport deal for Champs League alone is close to ITV's annual programme budget.
let go of the idea that ITV HAVE to show sport on their 'main' channel; it wouldn't suprise me if ITV sticj with what they have - the only contract they might have an issue with is the TDF one, the TDF has to be FTA in this country ASO seem happy but you never know if another channel offered it 'free' then it might move.
everyone here knows i don't watch ITV [except for itv4] but even I see the 'desperate' nature of showing the touring cars for 7 hours! less is more people!
also don't forget what a tv bod once told me 'the sooner people stop thinking "sport = football" the better'
The Tour de France is not a listed event in the UK the Tour de France is listed in France
IIRC the BBC only have secondary coverage of Queen's Tennis behind Eurosport
What do you mean by 'secondary coverage'? I did my first Queens last summer. The host truck was BBC, and the event was directed by BBC Prod. Eurosport was a Pres only operation taking the BBC Host feed and using their own commentators.
I know some people wonder if Sport is important to ITV. Thinking about it, Football in particular offers linear viewers.
I work shifts, and may see say Downton Abbey on Catch Up TV., which has no where as many ads as Broadcast.
Of its lesser sports, did Sir Bradley Wiggins winning Tour of Britain help the events profile? Did it deliver better viewing figures?
whoops just seen the BARB figures. Seems that the Tour did deliver better viewing for ITV4
everyone here knows i don't watch ITV [except for itv4] but even I see the 'desperate' nature of showing the touring cars for 7 hours! less is more people!
I disagree, it's nice to be able to dip in and out of the races you want to watch throughout the day, or just watch the lot depending on what you prefer. It sounds like a lot of broadcast hours, but it totally works.
The coverage flows really well and means they show loads of live racing throughout the day. ITV do a fantastic job with the BTCC and support races, they don't always get enough credit for it IMO.
also don't forget what a tv bod once told me 'the sooner people stop thinking "sport = football" the better'
Never understood the fascination with Sport especially football) on TV in the UK. If this now mans that ITV/STV spend more on proper programmes then that's good.
Much better for Sport to be on a dedicated channel, then those who want to watch it can, albeit they have to pay.
Then rest of us then don't have to put up with our regular viewing being spoilt by putting football on.
Maybe they could make ITV1 a dedicated sports channel and make viewers of drama/soaps/reality crap pay to watch that if they want to?
Yes, it's a cretinous idea. But no more so than saying that all sport should be on "dedicated channels". Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean that many others who pay the license fee/put up with the adverts don't.
Please elaborate? Crowds have been way above expectations, viewing figures for the England games have been Rugby Leagues strongest for years, and England have a credible chance of winning the tournament.
I think ITV should take a serious look at England Test and 20/20 Cricket. The ratings for the Ashes when it was shown on Channel 4 in 2005 were around 8 million. It would fill the summer schedules nicely and would bring some live cricket back to FTA. The audience must be ABC1 I assume. I think the rights are tied up until 2018 however they could begin preliminary discussions with the ECB and continue to cover cricket on ITV4. Their IPL coverage seems to be popular. I believe ICC rights to the World Cup are coming up for tender soon - perhaps they could test the water further with that. If all the main football contracts are firmed up, surely ITV have to turn to the other biggest sport in the UK and that's Cricket...
I think the days of FTA test cricket are well and truly done. I know there was uproar at the time, but I think the FTA broadcasters were secretly pleased to be priced out of the picture. For every pulsating Ashes test you show, you are contractually obliged to show England decimate Bangladesh at Chester-Le-Street in May between the showers. Even games against South Africa are mostly a dead loss. Only really the Ashes, India tests and possibly Pakistan tests are money spinners and the ECB would never split them from the others because who would pay to show the dead loss tests?
I think ITV should take a serious look at England Test and 20/20 Cricket. The ratings for the Ashes when it was shown on Channel 4 in 2005 were around 8 million. It would fill the summer schedules nicely and would bring some live cricket back to FTA. The audience must be ABC1 I assume. I think the rights are tied up until 2018 however they could begin preliminary discussions with the ECB and continue to cover cricket on ITV4. Their IPL coverage seems to be popular. I believe ICC rights to the World Cup are coming up for tender soon - perhaps they could test the water further with that. If all the main football contracts are firmed up, surely ITV have to turn to the other biggest sport in the UK and that's Cricket...
Sky have signed up these rights until 2017 (with an option until 2019) so there is no point having discussions yet. ITV will not be able to outbid Sky for them anyway.
Sky will blow terrestrial channels out of the water when it comes to the bidding for the ICC World Cup rights. The Rugby World Cup final is on the A list, which is why Sky are not interested in the tournament, but the Cricket World Cup final is only on the B list (highlights on terrestrial TV).
Is ITV mandated to carry a certain amount of sport (as it is with news) or could it actually dispense with its sports coverage which is going to look pretty thin after 2015.
I think that ITV will look to focus on tennis and take the Australian Open when it comes available. BBC are rubbish at broadcasting it as they only choose to do the semi finals and finals. Can also see them going for Rugby but i highly doubt they will do Golf.
ITV won't exactly be shellshocked by today's announcement. Disappointed, perhaps, but it's not entirely unexpected.
What are their options?:
- The Football League contract is up for renewal for 2015/16, and this'll include the League Cup, but I suspect this isn't a priority.
- The Six Nations contract is up for renewal in 2017. This would provide them with affluent viewers on winter weekends, often in off-peak slots. They may well put in a bid for this.
- Forget stuff like Wimbledon, The Open golf, and Test cricket. They'd be a nightmare to schedule.
- My advice would be to 'beef up' ITV4's offerings. Sports like snooker are not 'niche', they consistently deliver healthy audiences for the BBC, especially on finals nights. ITV4 will be the host broadcaster of the upcoming Champion of Champions, and if it's anything like their PDC darts coverage, they'll do a great job.
I can't stand all this ITV bashing. Some people more-or-less worship the BBC, and believe everything ITV does is terrible. The truth is somewhere in between. For instance (and in my opinion):
- ITV's football punditry is far better at present than the BBC's stale and outdated offerings.
- ITV's PDC darts coverage is light years ahead of the BBC's coverage of the BDO World Championship.
- ITV's coverage of the French Open tennis is more comprehensive and accessible than the BBC's ever was.
- ITV's coverage of the World Open snooker was very good, and as I said above, I'm expecting them to deliver at the upcoming Champion of Champions.
I don't consider the BBC to be the 'natural home' of anything. If other broadcasters offer more money, accessibility, and a fresher approach, governing bodies should take it. BBC Sport is often lazy and complacent these days.
The FL contract is tied up for a lot longer than 2016 I think. The BBC are freshening their pundit lineup quite clearly with Hansen going and Lawro with a lower profile role & getting rid of Murray on MOTD2.
Is ITV mandated to carry a certain amount of sport (as it is with news) or could it actually dispense with its sports coverage which is going to look pretty thin after 2015.
No mandated sport quotas for ITV or any other PSB. Although Ofcom has acknowledged that sport could be considered PSB, presumably it is felt that the market can provide, and the listed-events legislation ensures wide availability (as long as some FTA broadcaster picks up the rights).
I think that ITV will look to focus on tennis and take the Australian Open when it comes available. BBC are rubbish at broadcasting it as they only choose to do the semi finals and finals. Can also see them going for Rugby but i highly doubt they will do Golf.
Eurosport are the primary rights holder. BBC buy limited secondary rights (A bit like eurosport/sky & the US open tennis)
Most commercial & pay broadcasters arn't interested as there is very little audience in the uk available through the night & early morning. So advertisers won't pay and only real tennis nuts will subscribe.
Hence why eurosport picked up the rights for what is belived to be very little money.
I wouldn't say hate it, but outside of some areas in the North, they're probably indifferent to it. I live in an area where it's popular, don't mind it, but wouldn't go out of my way to watch every minute of it. RL is a bit tarnished where I live by the behaviour of some of the amateur players who love getting into fights and acting hard.
No mandated sport quotas for ITV or any other PSB. Although Ofcom has acknowledged that sport could be considered PSB, presumably it is felt that the market can provide, and the listed-events legislation ensures wide availability (as long as some FTA broadcaster picks up the rights).
Let's hope they don't go for the Boat Race again after making such a mess of it.
ITV won't exactly be shellshocked by today's announcement. Disappointed, perhaps, but it's not entirely unexpected.
What are their options?:
- The Football League contract is up for renewal for 2015/16, and this'll include the League Cup, but I suspect this isn't a priority.
- The Six Nations contract is up for renewal in 2017. This would provide them with affluent viewers on winter weekends, often in off-peak slots. They may well put in a bid for this.
- Forget stuff like Wimbledon, The Open golf, and Test cricket. They'd be a nightmare to schedule.
- My advice would be to 'beef up' ITV4's offerings. Sports like snooker are not 'niche', they consistently deliver healthy audiences for the BBC, especially on finals nights. ITV4 will be the host broadcaster of the upcoming Champion of Champions, and if it's anything like their PDC darts coverage, they'll do a great job.
I can't stand all this ITV bashing. Some people more-or-less worship the BBC, and believe everything ITV does is terrible. The truth is somewhere in between. For instance (and in my opinion):
- ITV's football punditry is far better at present than the BBC's stale and outdated offerings.
- ITV's PDC darts coverage is light years ahead of the BBC's coverage of the BDO World Championship.
- ITV's coverage of the French Open tennis is more comprehensive and accessible than the BBC's ever was.
- ITV's coverage of the World Open snooker was very good, and as I said above, I'm expecting them to deliver at the upcoming Champion of Champions.
I don't consider the BBC to be the 'natural home' of anything. If other broadcasters offer more money, accessibility, and a fresher approach, governing bodies should take it. BBC Sport is often lazy and complacent these days.
Yes it was but there was very little audience appetite for it when it was given blanket weekend coverage on ITV1. The audience figures were very poor iirc. Perhaps that's why the BBC only showed what they did.
I think the days of FTA test cricket are well and truly done. I know there was uproar at the time, but I think the FTA broadcasters were secretly pleased to be priced out of the picture. For every pulsating Ashes test you show, you are contractually obliged to show England decimate Bangladesh at Chester-Le-Street in May between the showers. Even games against South Africa are mostly a dead loss. Only really the Ashes, India tests and possibly Pakistan tests are money spinners and the ECB would never split them from the others because who would pay to show the dead loss tests?
I agree, the only time there is any great interest in cricket is The Ashes and I very much doubt ITV would sacrifice ten hours a day for a tedious last test between England and Sri Lanka. The BBC and Channel 4, who last held the rights, have shown no interest in getting cricket back as it clogs up the schedule and only delivers decent ratings if its The Ashes or the World Cup.
Yes it was but there was very little audience appetite for it when it was given blanket weekend coverage on ITV1. The audience figures were very poor iirc. Perhaps that's why the BBC only showed what they did.
Andy Murray is highly unlikely to ever do well there either which would be the one thing to get audiences up.
Comments
True since they took Lee Dixon. Lineker is far better than Chiles though and Clive Tyldesley is terrible. Throw in the adverts and I'd definitely prefer to watch football on the BBC.
Whilst advertising income and operating profit will vary, ITV programme budget usually remains pretty static, at around £1bn a year.
A portion of that will be assigned to sports rights, but with precious few rights available looks like drama / entertainment will be boosted.
Puts it into perspective though that the value of the BT Sport deal for Champs League alone is close to ITV's annual programme budget.
The Tour de France is not a listed event in the UK the Tour de France is listed in France
What do you mean by 'secondary coverage'? I did my first Queens last summer. The host truck was BBC, and the event was directed by BBC Prod. Eurosport was a Pres only operation taking the BBC Host feed and using their own commentators.
I know some people wonder if Sport is important to ITV. Thinking about it, Football in particular offers linear viewers.
I work shifts, and may see say Downton Abbey on Catch Up TV., which has no where as many ads as Broadcast.
Of its lesser sports, did Sir Bradley Wiggins winning Tour of Britain help the events profile? Did it deliver better viewing figures?
whoops just seen the BARB figures. Seems that the Tour did deliver better viewing for ITV4
Though the Tour De France smashes those figures.
Is it? Everyone seems to hate it.
I disagree, it's nice to be able to dip in and out of the races you want to watch throughout the day, or just watch the lot depending on what you prefer. It sounds like a lot of broadcast hours, but it totally works.
The coverage flows really well and means they show loads of live racing throughout the day. ITV do a fantastic job with the BTCC and support races, they don't always get enough credit for it IMO.
Completely agree :cool:
Yes, it's a cretinous idea. But no more so than saying that all sport should be on "dedicated channels". Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean that many others who pay the license fee/put up with the adverts don't.
Please elaborate? Crowds have been way above expectations, viewing figures for the England games have been Rugby Leagues strongest for years, and England have a credible chance of winning the tournament.
Sky have signed up these rights until 2017 (with an option until 2019) so there is no point having discussions yet. ITV will not be able to outbid Sky for them anyway.
Sky will blow terrestrial channels out of the water when it comes to the bidding for the ICC World Cup rights. The Rugby World Cup final is on the A list, which is why Sky are not interested in the tournament, but the Cricket World Cup final is only on the B list (highlights on terrestrial TV).
The FL contract is tied up for a lot longer than 2016 I think. The BBC are freshening their pundit lineup quite clearly with Hansen going and Lawro with a lower profile role & getting rid of Murray on MOTD2.
No mandated sport quotas for ITV or any other PSB. Although Ofcom has acknowledged that sport could be considered PSB, presumably it is felt that the market can provide, and the listed-events legislation ensures wide availability (as long as some FTA broadcaster picks up the rights).
Eurosport are the primary rights holder. BBC buy limited secondary rights (A bit like eurosport/sky & the US open tennis)
Most commercial & pay broadcasters arn't interested as there is very little audience in the uk available through the night & early morning. So advertisers won't pay and only real tennis nuts will subscribe.
Hence why eurosport picked up the rights for what is belived to be very little money.
I wouldn't say hate it, but outside of some areas in the North, they're probably indifferent to it. I live in an area where it's popular, don't mind it, but wouldn't go out of my way to watch every minute of it. RL is a bit tarnished where I live by the behaviour of some of the amateur players who love getting into fights and acting hard.
Let's hope they don't go for the Boat Race again after making such a mess of it.
Yes it was but there was very little audience appetite for it when it was given blanket weekend coverage on ITV1. The audience figures were very poor iirc. Perhaps that's why the BBC only showed what they did.
I agree, the only time there is any great interest in cricket is The Ashes and I very much doubt ITV would sacrifice ten hours a day for a tedious last test between England and Sri Lanka. The BBC and Channel 4, who last held the rights, have shown no interest in getting cricket back as it clogs up the schedule and only delivers decent ratings if its The Ashes or the World Cup.
Andy Murray is highly unlikely to ever do well there either which would be the one thing to get audiences up.