|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
View Poll Results: Next year I will (chose the closest most likely option) | |||
Watch live on BBC or Sky depending which it is on. | 36 | 32.73% | |
Watch only BBC live or delayed/highlights. | 48 | 43.64% | |
Watch only BBC live (live or not bother). | 16 | 14.55% | |
Not watch, it is over for me. | 10 | 9.09% | |
Voters: 110. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
26 Jun 2012, 11:36 (Ref:3098370) | #2326 | |
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,114
|
It would seem it's a part of ITV's remit. The Lewis Hamilton sycophancy did my head in.
|
|
|
26 Jun 2012, 11:50 (Ref:3098379) | #2327 | |
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 16,760
|
in itv's defence, even if national pride is quite a tabloid-y angle to go for a quick visual survey of the crowds at the british gp would suggest it's not an unreasonable idea. the majority of the crowd there support a british driver, or a british team. if you take that as a representative sample of the viewing public then to suggest a commentator focusses on british hopes is a fair thing to do.
there's a balance though, and i think james allen by nature is and definitely was at the time better at writing words than saying them. i haven't enjoyed his contributions to five live and whilst he's been busy with ball-chasers i've enjoyed the radio again. i actually think jonathan legard is brilliant for non-visual coverage. if he could tone himself down back to his pre-tv days he would be superb. i like the way he's careful to describe the scene around as well as the track action. it's proper broadcasting. i have no strong opinions on ben edwards. i don't mind a commentator getting excited, mistakes are very easy to make and absolutely shouldn't be criticised unless you can genuinely say you've commentated on a f1 race, had the story of the race running in the background of your head, been trying to keep a partnership with an expert co-commentator going and immediately been trying to think of the concequences of what you're talking about on screen. even just doing a pre-recorded piece to camera is difficult, let alone talking with a similar level of knowledge and competancy about live events. it really isn't as easy as it looks. |
|
__________________
devils advocate in-chief and professional arguer of both sides |
26 Jun 2012, 12:03 (Ref:3098384) | #2328 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4,320
|
When a commentator makes mistakes, I forgive. When they are over-excited, I'm amused.
What bugs me is dishonesty. When a commentator deliberately misleads in an attempt to preserve the commentators own authority, that infuriates me. Be upfront about what you know and don't know. I admire that. When the commentator shows a headstrong lack of knowledge of the sport, that aggravates me. A commentator should make an attempt to be informed on the sport in which he seeks to commentate on. I haven't listened to Allen in years but I don't ever remember him falling into either category for all his faults. Can't say that of some other commentators. Last edited by Paradise City; 26 Jun 2012 at 12:28. |
||
__________________
If I had asked my customer what they wanted, they would've said a faster horse. -Henry Ford |
26 Jun 2012, 12:14 (Ref:3098388) | #2329 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,114
|
Quote:
|
||
|
26 Jun 2012, 12:36 (Ref:3098398) | #2330 | ||
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 16,760
|
Quote:
but that's why we have an expert commenter alongside the lead commentator. |
||
__________________
devils advocate in-chief and professional arguer of both sides |
26 Jun 2012, 13:18 (Ref:3098417) | #2331 | |||
Veteran
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4,320
|
Quote:
|
|||
__________________
If I had asked my customer what they wanted, they would've said a faster horse. -Henry Ford |
26 Jun 2012, 19:25 (Ref:3098589) | #2332 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 44,018
|
ITV is truly dreadful in everything they do. I think it should be beeb free all the time, but I'd find the sky subscription worth every penny if it keeps it off ITV.
|
||
|
27 Jun 2012, 17:07 (Ref:3099031) | #2333 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 611
|
If they had to have shared coverage I'd rather half on the Beeb and half on ITV if I'm honest. At least the less wealthy fans wouldn't miss out totally. ITV were awful, but interest was consistent each week because everyone with a TV license could still watch it.
|
|
|
27 Jun 2012, 19:04 (Ref:3099083) | #2334 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 44,018
|
You still pay when you watch ITV, you pay with your soul.
Better to gouge you eyes out than watch ITV. I think I've made my views clear here |
||
|
27 Jun 2012, 19:10 (Ref:3099089) | #2335 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 611
|
||
|
27 Jun 2012, 19:38 (Ref:3099104) | #2336 | ||
20KPINAL
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 29,853
|
Quote:
The Beeb coverage has had some really good montages and historic pieces but the punditry on ITV has been vastly superior. Vastly. Their commentators, whilst still slightly grating, don't seem to be chasing annoying soundbites for the highlights reel either. And the BBC have Mark Lawrenson passing bitter, unfunny pub bore comments off throughout matches. Fair play to ITV I say. |
||
|
27 Jun 2012, 19:59 (Ref:3099115) | #2337 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 44,018
|
|||
|
28 Jun 2012, 07:11 (Ref:3099266) | #2338 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 611
|
Me neither. Allen, Brundle and Croft have always annoyed me to a degree regardless of which broadcaster employer them. Kravitz is a good journalist but I wouldn't swap him for Gary now we have experienced his input.
|
|
|
28 Jun 2012, 18:22 (Ref:3099536) | #2339 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 44,018
|
My overall objection to ITV would not have changed if they'd stopped the whatsit.
|
||
__________________
Brum brum |
30 Jun 2012, 16:58 (Ref:3100233) | #2340 | |
Race Official
Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 9,114
|
I'm not sure if all is right with the world Mr V. They have a convoluted way of doing things because I've now got a letter saying it's £40 a month from July and I have an 'entertainment' package. Originally it was supposed to be 30 quid and the F1 package. I'm starting to think they invent these things to get a bit of extra money. Looks like I've have to call them again as this contradicts what they told me on the phone. Hopefully, it's just a stock letter that doesn't correlate with what they told me.
|
|
|
30 Jun 2012, 18:20 (Ref:3100247) | #2341 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 13,211
|
|||
__________________
That's so frickin uncool man! |
30 Jun 2012, 23:41 (Ref:3100319) | #2342 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 44,018
|
It is true that sky are trying to make money out of their subscribers.
However in the many years I've been with them (I only started because I wanted F1digital) I haven't noticed any comedy price rises. It has only happened whe. I'vebought the new technology or package. |
||
|
1 Jul 2012, 08:45 (Ref:3100377) | #2343 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 611
|
Quote:
|
||
|
1 Jul 2012, 09:47 (Ref:3100398) | #2344 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 13,211
|
|||
__________________
That's so frickin uncool man! |
1 Jul 2012, 09:50 (Ref:3100399) | #2345 | |
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 611
|
Well as long as I have the subscribers permission, there no harm done. But yes, I suppose I am lucky not to have to pay, but then again for the majority of races I haven't needed to use Sky.
|
|
|
2 Jul 2012, 09:50 (Ref:3100792) | #2346 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,027
|
Message to Bernie and all F1 sponsors: Sport on the BBC works!
Just imagine the pathetic figures if Sky were involved last night..... http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012...win?CMP=twt_fd |
||
|
2 Jul 2012, 17:05 (Ref:3100984) | #2347 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 611
|
Quote:
With this kind of potential on the Beeb, it should be the sport investing in its popularity, not selling if off to a satellite company with a quarter of the viewers!! Bernie and the sponsors should be happy a FTA channel is capable of reaching a figure like this IMO. This just highlights what a dull move this whole deal was. Sure its great for the fans in a position to have a dedicated channel, but in the grand scheme of things its produced the start of a decline in popularity with the majority of British fans still sticking with the Beeb. With rumours live coverage is likely to disappear completely off FTA in the next couple of years, it makes you wonder what they know that we don't? Bernie may put a brave face on the surface, suggesting Sky are doing great and its all for the good of the sport, but simple logic prevails and he's fooling nobody. |
||
|
2 Jul 2012, 18:35 (Ref:3101000) | #2348 | ||
14th
1% Club
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 44,018
|
A quarter of the viewers, I doubt it is that high!
Reduce the number of viewers, there will be less money for the teams, more cost cutting and less of the excesses that we don't like. Only hardcore fans watching? Less need for artificial rules that appeal to the masses and it becomes more of a sport. What's not to like? |
||
__________________
Brum brum |
2 Jul 2012, 18:40 (Ref:3101004) | #2349 | ||
Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 611
|
Quote:
|
||
|
2 Jul 2012, 19:34 (Ref:3101021) | #2350 | |
Racer
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 291
|
I'm from Sweden and I watch the BBC iPlayer stream because of:
1. Good quality and no need to go for a livestream site with 40 pop up windows. 2. Ben "The man" Edwards and David "Coolthard"! 3. Swedish commentators suck ballz! 4. Georgie Thompson is with sky just because for her tits and not for her knowledge. My Honest Opinion! |
|
|
Tags |
outrage, sky |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Sky Sports is Go............. | Nittymaki | Rallying & Rallycross | 24 | 18 Mar 2006 13:26 |
Sky Sports? | MikeH | ChampCar World Series | 7 | 18 Nov 2002 13:32 |
Sky Sports F1 - the team??? | LucaBadoer | Formula One | 17 | 9 Feb 2002 11:23 |