TV Coverage (again)

[beachbum]

How many pole-vaulters have you met?

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>

...and our cylcing, rowing, sailing, archery, badminton etc keep going from strength to strength...

<hr></blockquote>

Is it just coincidence that the sports Britain does well in are those that British people actually do?



<hr width=100% size=1><font size=1>Nobody is perfect.
I am nobody.
Therefore I am perfect.</font size=1> /forums/images/icons/wink.gif

 

[Romeo]

"I take back some of what I've said....right now (1140 BST) the Tornado race is on BBCi, the wind's up, gripping stuff, GBR are in 3rd, and the commentary's not bad...... "

My main gripe is that I have to go to work when the sailing is on. Bah.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[robp]

Nice slap in the face for other (sailing or otherwise) medal winners! Our position in the tables is dissapointing enough as it is, without picking and choosing. Why do we have to do that?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Chris_Robb]

I dunno - perhaps we should discover the answer over a pint?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Romeo]

The swimming performance director apparently said that the reason our swim team did not live up to expectations (expectations created by the performance director BTW), was that it is far harder to win medals in swimming that it is in rowing, for example, because fewer nations row than swim. There you go, no need to train, just turn up and win. All the more admiration for those British swimmers who did perform well for having to work with someone who says things like that.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[BustinAround]

What an idiot, I hope an irate rower throws him in the lake.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[bob_tyler]

Tornado Race was great TV - especially with the remote cameras mounted on the crossbeam although they were not used enough. Possibly they got too wet and did not all work properly. Commentary good too.

I cannot agree that the commentary should only include nautical terms. The majority of viewers would not understand them without explanation in non-nautical terms. Let's increase the audience and perhaps get more sailing on TV.

I did the seafront commentary for Alec Rose's return in Lively Lady at Southsea and made sure that the crowd (about 250,000) understood the nautical terms. I was told afterwards that this was much appreciated.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[AOWYN]

being rude about Richard

I know it's only a YBW forum and shouldn't be taken seriously, but sir, you go too far.

Richard Simmonds is rather good at commentating, notwithstanding other people's dissatisfaction with TV coverage of Olympic sailing.

No matter how well the British sailors, rowers and cyclists do I hope that all readers will join in prayers that our Government and Livingstone does not waste too much of our money being nice to the IOC and pray even harder that London does not win the race for the 2012 venue.



<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Rabbie]

Isn't the whole thing just plain ridiculous when the difference between medals anyway may be only 300ths OF A SECOND!. I firmly believe that there should only be one award - for the winner. Wait for it Rab!.

<hr width=100% size=1>A day not spent on my boat is a day in my life wasted.

 

[Fill]

What we really need are commentators who know their subject and who can be relied upon to make the subject lively.

Certain forumites immediately spring to mind but I have to say that whilst most Scots are more intelligible when they write than speak this lot are (for me at any rate) difficult to understand when writing.

Any suggestions for who on the forum could volunteer to help out the Beeb on this one. No false modesty now!

<hr width=100% size=1>Never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

 

[Jeremy_W]

>>> Last night one commentator said to days marathon would be Britains first 'real medal of the games. so whats wrong with rowing -sailing- swimming......

It's the BBC attitude that the Olympics are an athletics meeting with other sports attached. Once Track and Field start everything else gets pushed to one side. The evening sailing summary was pushed back about 30 minutes last night and this will get worse.

There are three 49-er races today in double figure windspeeds. That'll be 1000% more photogenic and spectacular than anything happening in the stadium. Will we see more than 15 seconds of them? No.

I really don't wish to insult track and field but it's a tiny minority sport. How many adults do you know who own a pair of spiked running shoes? Look at a major regional athletics centre like Gateshead. The stadium would be inadequate for a Third Division football team. It's a tiny participant sport with very few spectators ready to shift their butts and watch it. But it can fill hours of TV schedule pretty cheaply.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[BrendanS]

It may be a minority sport from a participant point of view, but track and field has a huge following, and audience figures show that. The general public want to see these events, very few want to see sailing events...and this is reflected in what is shown.

Every forum on the internet, from cycling to rowing, to volleyball and archery, is complaining that their minority sport is not getting enough coverage. What are the BBC supposed to do - provide a non stop 24 hour a day channel for each sport represented in the Olympics. Get real.

<hr width=100% size=1>Me transmitte sursum, caledoni

 

[Jeremy_W]

>>>What are the BBC supposed to do - provide a non stop 24 hour a day channel for each sport represented in the Olympics.

WHAT A STUPID COMMENT!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Jeremy_W]

>>> It may be a minority sport from a participant point of view, but track and field has a huge following, and audience figures show that. The general public want to see these events, very few want to see sailing events...and this is reflected in what is shown.

Quote me the audience figures and Audience Appreciation Index.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[KevB]

As someone has already said, you need to be a digital viewer to get decent coverage of anything other than track and field.



<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://static.photobox.co.uk/public/images/45/99/10714599.s.jpg?ch=97&rr=16:00:39>Nirvana</A>

 

[BrendanS]

No more stupid than your original comment!

<hr width=100% size=1>Me transmitte sursum, caledoni

 

[jimi]

That's a daft thing to say .. an original comment must be by definition intelligent and innovative

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[longjohnsilver]

Why can't an original comment be both stupid and boring?

Quiet day in the office?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Jeremy_W]

>>No more stupid than your original comment!
You don't believe that.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[BrendanS]

Well, you are obviously not a mind reader, as yes, actually I do believe that. Quite strongly actually. Your original comment was entirely vacuous in my opinion, and a quick straw poll of people in your local pub or of people on the street would show that track and field events are much enjoyed and have a strong following during the Olympics.

My point about giving a channel to each sport in the Olympics was simply to illustrate that as I said, everyone who supports a minority sport wants more coverage. How is that to be achieved? Either many sports get a small amount of coverage, or all the sports get more coverage by having more channels to show them on. It's one or the other. What the BBC actually have to do is balance the coverage on a limited number of channels. Whining about track and field events getting too much coverage is just ..........

<hr width=100% size=1>Me transmitte sursum, caledoni