Originally Posted by stv viewer:
“Yeah hats off to ITV they did really well and produced pre match coverage to be proud off.”
Yes (although it's a bit sad that a channel not showing adverts in the two minutes between the anthems and the kick-off is now news), although it is a fact I think that sports coverage on all channels is really good. Everyone at BBC Sport, ITV Sport, Sky Sports and BT Sport are clearly totally committed to high standards and take it all seriously. You can see that whenever there's a tragedy in sport, like when Fabrice Muamba collapsed, all the sports programmes covered it wonderfully well and with absolute sensitivity, it was the news programmes that were crass and sensationalist. Sports programmes are almost always brilliantly made, on all channels.
Originally Posted by
jlp95bwfc:
“Why do people keep pushing this idea that ITV News at 10 (10:15 actually) should be rating well with football as a lead in 
. It's one of the worst lead ins they could have with the majority of viewers switching off as soon as the match finishes. Plus with a later start time people will always go to BBC One at 10pm.”
Originally Posted by cylon6:
“My point is that it never used to happen until ITV mucked about with News At Ten. The brand was so strong that people stayed on the channel to watch. It happens on BBC1 when the 10 is delayed for sport.
There is an audience that seeks out News At Ten on BBC1 regardless. ITV's News At Ten had that loyalty in the past.”
I would agree with the latter, and for the former, that may be the point in usual circumstances but last night the football WAS the news, really, it was all over the headlines. It wasn't a normal football match and the stuff surrounding the match was as important as what went on in the ninety minutes, that's why it was on the front pages today as well as the back pages. So the post-match analysis was of interest.
And if it does rate so badly, why does ITV bother doing so much of it? Ten years ago they used to finish the Champions League coverage at 9.45 after a 7.45 kick-off. I know there were fewer adverts in those days but there still wasn't much post-match business. They've got a highlights show straight after the news they can use for more in-depth discussion. They're a mainstream channel and if nobody wants to watch extensive post-match discussion in primetime, don't do it.
Actually the ITV highlights shows have always seemed bizarre, given they have probably the longest highlights edits on telly, much longer than on Match of the Day, even though they were shown live about an hour before. The audience that needs to see some in-depth highlights is absolutely tiny. They should cut the actual highlights right down and spend more time on extended punditry. Only big football anoraks are watching, cater to them.
Originally Posted by jake lyle:
“Isn't there a slot free in between part 1 and 2 of the Strictly finale also? The stripped Oliver Twist they did a few years ago finished in between a Strictly finale sandwich iirc.”
They did, in 2007. Actually it would be interesting to see what fills Saturday night on 12th and 19th December post-Strictly as Doctor Who will have finished the week before. Though given it's the X Factor final on the former, it'll probably be In It To Win It.
”
