|
||||||||
Horse Racing on Terrestrial TV |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#51 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,792
|
Quote:
I'd agree with all of that with the exception of McCririck. I really can't stand the man and I don't believe he adds anything to the coverage. Just stick with Tanya Stevenson for the betting.
Don't mind the Beeb coverage of the National meeting apart from having John Parrott on and I think it's time to ditch Richard Pitman as well. I wish someone would find a place for Lydia Hislop on terrestial coverage. For what it's worth, I think there will be a major revamp of the C4 racing team if they get the whole shooting match and none of the current C4 team would be safe. For starters, the two female lead presenters, Alice Plunkett (jumps) and Emma Spencer (flat), would probably be reduced to reporting roles at best and they could bring in a couple of ex-jockeys like Mick Fitzgerald for the jumps and Jason Weaver for the flat. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#52 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Oldham
Posts: 2,072
|
Quote:
For what it's worth, I think there will be a major revamp of the C4 racing team if they get the whole shooting match and none of the current C4 team would be safe. For starters, the two female lead presenters, Alice Plunkett (jumps) and Emma Spencer (flat), would probably be reduced to reporting roles at best and they could bring in a couple of ex-jockeys like Mick Fitzgerald for the jumps and Jason Weaver for the flat.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#53 |
|
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,136
|
Quote:
less of that please, You made a statement, one that was ;patently wide of the mark when other BBC channels are considered. I corrected you. End of story. Either accept it or ignore it. No skin off my nose as they say.
You're wrong, as indicated by your need to qualify your statement. I wish the BBC wasn't going the way it is and I don't think it serves anyone that long-term supporters should blind themselves to the direction being taken. I see that Mark Thompson is now preparing the way for the sale of Worldwide before the end of his tenure and has now questioned the size and breadth of the BBC's news coverage, both online and otherwise; I wonder which commercial operator Thompson is planning to join ? |
|
|
|
|
|
#54 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 68,697
|
Quote:
Touched a nerve, did I ?
Quote:
You're wrong, as indicated by your need to qualify your statement.
So what was wrong then? Please detail exactly what was posted that was wrong when I said:You are aware that the BBC has such programming (in bold) on their other channels, notably BBC Four and BBC Two? (the bit in bold being "oh, and science, the arts, situation comedy, light entertainment, music"). And if I was clearly wrong, I will happily apologise. Quote:
I see that Mark Thompson is now preparing the way for the sale of Worldwide before the end of his tenure and has now questioned the size and breadth of the BBC's news coverage, both online and otherwise; I wonder which commercial operator Thompson is planning to join ?
See my reply in this thread which discusses that report:http://forums.digitalspy.co.uk/showthread.php?t=1640605 |
|
|
|
|
|
#55 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Suffolk
Posts: 4,153
|
I hope C4 take Jim McGrath. He is the best in my opinion and would be the biggest tragedy if we lost him. The BBC are true idiots.
Ken |
|
|
|
|
|
#56 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 68,697
|
Quote:
I see that Mark Thompson is now preparing the way for the sale of Worldwide before the end of his tenure
Quote:
Director general of the BBC Mark Thompson has been named as the new non-executive chairman of BBC Worldwide, the commercial arm of the broadcaster. http://www.journalism.co.uk/news/bbc...de/s2/a548296/According to a release from BBC Worldwide, Thompson, who has been director general of the BBC since 2004, has taken up the additional role with immediate effect. He has filled the role vacated by Robert Webb QC who joined the board in 2007 and became chairman in 2009. Six other members sat on the board at the time of BBC Worldwide's last annual report, including chief executive officer John Smith. In the release Thompson said: "Robert has played an invaluable role, providing guidance and counsel to BBC Worldwide through the past few years. "His tenure as chairman has coincided with BBC Worldwide’s strongest financial results, returning more money to the BBC than ever before. This in turn helps keep the licence fee as low as possible." According to a report on the move by BBC magazine Ariel, while Webb was paid £77,000 for carrying out the role in 2011, Thompson will not receive payment. and Quote:
Mark Thompson is to take on the responsibilities of non-executive Chairman of BBC Worldwide in his capacity as Director-General, it was announced today. http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/lat...worldwide.htmlThis appointment, which takes immediate effect, follows the departure of Robert Webb QC, who stepped down from the BBC Worldwide Board at the end of February to become General Counsel at Rolls Royce plc. So it's a short-term appointment (whilst MT remains as DG), and it saves paying someone to do the job during that time. |
|
|
|
|
|
#57 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 470
|
I agree with earlier posts about BBC racing coverage. Channel 4 is far superior.
The BBC seems to have the idea that anyone watching knows little or nothing about racing, That they have a duty to over-hype the whole experience by gushing interviews with owners and trainers, excitable presentation, and asking silly questions to winning jockeys just after they've passed the post. God forbid that Channel 4 feel an obligation to offer Claire Balding a job as presenter. She is patronising to viewers, gushing to interviewees, and at times bullying towards her fellow presenters, often cutting them off mid sentence. She wouldn't fit in. Channel 4 has a consistently good and knowledgeable team, especially in the commentary and preview box. They invariably have something interesting and informative to pass on without resorting to the sort of hype the BBC seems to think is necessary. The only BBC person who might be an asset to C4 is Jim McGrath. In my opinion. |
|
|
|
|
|
#58 |
|
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,136
|
Quote:
So what was wrong then? Pleas detail exactly what was posted that was wrong when I said: You are aware that the BBC has such programming (in bold) on their other channels, notably BBC Four and BBC Two? (the bit in bold being "oh, and science, the arts, situation comedy, light entertainment, music"). And if I was clearly wrong, I will happily apologise. It's a wholly different thing to go banging on about reach a la Thompson. Meanwhile, share declines inexorably, despite the BBC's appreciation scores for high profile programmes- being given a glass of water when in a desert comes to mind- and its prime position on the EPG; under Thompson, it's been the continual management of failure through spreading low expectations- making sure that the corporation survives just isn't good enough. |
|
|
|
|
|
#59 |
|
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,136
|
Quote:
I agree with earlier posts about BBC racing coverage. Channel 4 is far superior.
The BBC seems to have the idea that anyone watching knows little or nothing about racing, That they have a duty to over-hype the whole experience by gushing interviews with owners and trainers, excitable presentation, and asking silly questions to winning jockeys just after they've passed the post. God forbid that Channel 4 feel an obligation to offer Claire Balding a job as presenter. She is patronising to viewers, gushing to interviewees, and at times bullying towards her fellow presenters, often cutting them off mid sentence. She wouldn't fit in. Channel 4 has a consistently good and knowledgeable team, especially in the commentary and preview box. They invariably have something interesting and informative to pass on without resorting to the sort of hype the BBC seems to think is necessary. The only BBC person who might be an asset to C4 is Jim McGrath. In my opinion. |
|
|
|
|
|
#60 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 68,697
|
Quote:
I've already dealt with this issue in my first two posts in the thread.
You are aware that the BBC has such programming (in bold) on their other channels, notably BBC Four and BBC Two? (the bit in bold being "oh, and science, the arts, situation comedy, light entertainment, music"). But never mind ...... onwards and upwards as they say........ Quote:
It's a wholly different thing to go banging on about reach a la Thompson. Meanwhile, share declines inexorably, despite the BBC's appreciation scores for high profile programmes
That might have something to do with the proliferation of other channels in this increasingly multi-channel age, allied to the desire to consume programming in many more ways (ways which traditional statistical recording means simply do not catch).Quote:
being given a glass of water when in a desert comes to mind- and its prime position on the EPG; under Thompson, it's been the continual management of failure through spreading low expectations- making sure that the corporation survives just isn't good enough.
We can but hope that the new realism that has come with DQF will start to focus minds a little more on higher expectations and higher quality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#61 |
|
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,136
|
Quote:
I might have totally missed it, but neither post seems to go any way in explaining what was supposedly wrong with:
You are aware that the BBC has such programming (in bold) on their other channels, notably BBC Four and BBC Two? (the bit in bold being "oh, and science, the arts, situation comedy, light entertainment, music"). But never mind ...... onwards and upwards as they say........ That might have something to do with the proliferation of other channels in this increasingly multi-channel age, allied to the desire to consume programming in many more ways (ways which traditional statistical recording means simply do not catch). We can but hope that the new realism that has come with DQF will start to focus minds a little more on higher expectations and higher quality. On the second point, no- it's because the BBC has followed ITV's lead in pre-watershed primetime, in terms of the types of programme offered and then there's the infamous 'event' policy- here's a worthwhile programme surrounded by not so worthwhile schedule filling programmes; the message being look elsewhere once you've had the 'event'. (To be honest, with the economic downturn and with total television viewing being higher than at any point since the recession of the early 90s, viewing share has solidified for the main broadcasters. In fact, many have seen their viewing share increase, but it is Sky, with a very sizeable 30% increase last year- its first significant increase in more than a decade, though admittedly from a low base- that has been the main beneficiary, which signals long-term problems for the BBC in oh so many ways.) On the last point, creative ambition and vision is what has long been required, but I'd have to look back to the mid eighties or earlier to find a corporation that wasn't accountant and news and current affairs focused, with everything else being treated as secondary. Mind you, as I've put elsewhere, Thompson has even been questioning the size and breadth of the BBC's news coverage, given the economic pressures on commercial organisations; as someone else put on The Guardian site, it's an argument to make overall news coverage worse and that's been Thompson/the BBC's general approach to 'popular' programme provision in recent times- with ITV playing safe, due to a huge drop in income, with soaps, 'event' light entertainment, short run 'event' drama and cheap fillers, the BBC has simply responded by matching them. |
|
|
|
|
|
#62 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,780
|
Prefer C4, always have done, I used to prefer the ITV 7 to the BBC's coverage. Julian Wilson seemed so snooty at times whereas John Rickman was like your old Grandad!
As regards callers, I think J A McGrath is good, but Holt is the best in the business, John Hunt is good too |
|
|
|
|
|
#63 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Cumbria
Posts: 16,967
|
Quote:
Prefer C4, always have done, I used to prefer the ITV 7 to the BBC's coverage. Julian Wilson seemed so snooty at times whereas John Rickman was like your old Grandad!
As regards callers, I think J A McGrath is good, but Holt is the best in the business, John Hunt is good too |
|
|
|
|
|
#64 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,779
|
Quote:
As regards callers, I think J A McGrath is good, but Holt is the best in the business, John Hunt is good too
I know he loves jumping more, but I rather miss Alastair Down presenting at least the big events on the Flat - somehow, he'd have made Frankel's Guineas seem more like proper history, beyond the scope of normal sports coverage. |
|
|
|
|
|
#65 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,429
|
Quote:
McGrath has seemed a pale shadow of his former self in recent BBC transmissions - it's been hard to believe that he effectively reinvented racecalling in the UK. Maybe he's been out of practice, at least when it comes to the big events.
I know he loves jumping more, but I rather miss Alastair Down presenting at least the big events on the Flat - somehow, he'd have made Frankel's Guineas seem more like proper history, beyond the scope of normal sports coverage. In comparison Balding has started to over emphasise the magnificence of everything and the BBC coverage has become more about the celebrity/famous/royal connections than the racing itself |
|
|
|
|
|
#66 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: West Yorkshire
Posts: 1,363
|
Quote:
In comparison Balding has started to over emphasise the magnificence of everything and the BBC coverage has become more about the celebrity/famous/royal connections than the racing itself
The irony is people moan about big event being on commercial channels. but the time which would be taken up by ads elsewhere is wasted by the BBC on frippery rather than actual analysis, which considering some of the useless pundits across many sports, isn't a surprise. |
|
|
|
|
|
#67 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 910
|
Quote:
Prefer C4, always have done, I used to prefer the ITV 7 to the BBC's coverage. Julian Wilson seemed so snooty at times whereas John Rickman was like your old Grandad!
As regards callers, I think J A McGrath is good, but Holt is the best in the business, John Hunt is good too |
|
|
|
|
|
#68 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,792
|
Quote:
Agreed about Simon Holt, by far the best racing commentator around at the minute. Some of his calls at the festival this week have been spine tingling. The Martin Tyler of the racing world.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#69 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 14,208
|
Quote:
Agreed about Simon Holt, by far the best racing commentator around at the minute. Some of his calls at the festival this week have been spine tingling. The Martin Tyler of the racing world.
Having been fortunate enough to be able to watch quite a lot of Channel 4's coverage of this year's Festival, I have to concur with the view of the majority. Simon Holt is one of the best sports commentators I've heard, he is so effective in describing one of the most difficult sports to call and does so with enthusiasm and intelligence. He has been fantastic this week. I know there are many other top horse racing commentators around but it would be hard to argue that there's anyone better than Holt right now. |
|
|
|
|
|
#70 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 17,160
|
So no announcement during Cheltenham of a new exclusive TV deal with C4 for all racing.
I wonder if HMQ is having a word with the Chairman of the BBC and the trustees of Ascot - both of whom she (formally) appoints??? |
|
|
|
|
|
#71 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 4,475
|
Quote:
So no announcement during Cheltenham of a new exclusive TV deal with C4 for all racing.
I wonder if HMQ is having a word with the Chairman of the BBC and the trustees of Ascot - both of whom she (formally) appoints??? Channel 4 are probably not too bothered if Ascot is left out of the deal - the big prizes are the Grand National and the Epsom Derby meeting. |
|
|
|
|
|
#72 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 17,160
|
Quote:
I can't see why HMQ would object to another terrestrial broadcaster covering Royal Ascot, as long as it remains free-to-air. The Palace have agreed to ITN and Sky News producing the Christmas broadcast in rotation with BBC.
I know people may say that's illogical as it's not exactly hard to press a button on a remote but it is the reality - a combination of habit, history and much stronger and wider BBC promotion / cross-promotion. In a normal year (ie not a Jubilee) Royal Ascot is one of the highest profile royal events - substantial prominent coverage on BBC TV for 5 days in a row. In contrast, who produces the Christmas broadcast doesn't affect how many people watch it. Quote:
Channel 4 are probably not too bothered if Ascot is left out of the deal - the big prizes are the Grand National and the Epsom Derby meeting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#73 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Cumbria
Posts: 16,967
|
I don't think Cheltenham has been hurt by the last 17 years on Channel 4. If anything, it's done very well and most people I speak to prefer their coverage,
The BBC was always good for the National and Royal Ascot, but everything else seemed crammed between other sports or had to switch channels due to CBBC or a political conference. While I will admit Peter O Sullevan was a legend, the rest of the BBC team like sour, stuck up Julian Wilson and dull Jimmy Lindley could never match the banter between Lord Oaksey and Brough Scott, who were like a double act. |
|
|
|
|
|
#74 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,779
|
Cheltenham in particular, and to a lesser extent jump racing generally beyond the Grand National, have a profile now beyond anything they ever had when the BBC had Cheltenham and a definite advantage in the winter game (some of the jump meetings that filled out the ITV7 were shockingly poor - Fakenham, for heaven's sake! - but that didn't seem to matter so much in the 70s when the Flat was still widely seen as the only "proper" racing). Cheltenham's profile having risen while it's been on C4 is actually proof positive that you don't have to be on the BBC to gain a "national event" status beyond anything you had historically (in the 70s, let alone earlier, the Flat starting a week later probably inspired more excitement throughout the media).
Ascot does have historical associations that go beyond that, though. Whether or not you believe in shadowy rumours of royal interference, it may be one of the few things that modern-day Conservatives would ever allow to buck the market. But those very associations may be the main things putting a younger audience off - Cheltenham, which seemed so shire and tweedy in its BBC days, now seems massively egalitarian by comparison, and I think we can thank Channel 4 for that. |
|
|
|
|
|
#75 |
|
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,136
|
Quote:
Cheltenham in particular, and to a lesser extent jump racing generally beyond the Grand National, have a profile now beyond anything they ever had when the BBC had Cheltenham and a definite advantage in the winter game (some of the jump meetings that filled out the ITV7 were shockingly poor - Fakenham, for heaven's sake! - but that didn't seem to matter so much in the 70s when the Flat was still widely seen as the only "proper" racing). Cheltenham's profile having risen while it's been on C4 is actually proof positive that you don't have to be on the BBC to gain a "national event" status beyond anything you had historically (in the 70s, let alone earlier, the Flat starting a week later probably inspired more excitement throughout the media).
Ascot does have historical associations that go beyond that, though. Whether or not you believe in shadowy rumours of royal interference, it may be one of the few things that modern-day Conservatives would ever allow to buck the market. But those very associations may be the main things putting a younger audience off - Cheltenham, which seemed so shire and tweedy in its BBC days, now seems massively egalitarian by comparison, and I think we can thank Channel 4 for that. As for the comments about coverage being better than in the early 90s- I should bloody hope so, given the massive advances in technology since then. Durr... |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 09:08.



