- This topic has 38 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 3 months ago by
.
- Posts
The attitude of "racing" in this matter calls to mind the disastrous attempt a while back to charge newspapers for lists of runners and riders. It’s totally counter-productive. Putting C4’s nose out of joint would be a serious error.
And this is what Alan Lee of The Times has to say on the matter…
Good stuff today from Greg Wood as well.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/20 … orseracing
Racing taking a serious gamble to keep Willie Carson on our screens imo.
Viewing figures released by the BBC for the BBC1 Ascot/Haydock broadcast from 1.00 to 2.30 and the Masters snooker immediately afterwards show max 1 million viewers for the racing and 1.6 for the snooker. Both events are of comparable class, so it’s a fair comparison.
Not very encouraging, especially when you consider that Ronnie O’Sullivan thinks snooker is dying.
Racing really needs to market itself and its heros/characters effectively and get across the "narrative thing" better if the BBC is to be persuaded not to reduce its coverage next year.
Lessons can be learnt from the way Poker is being shown worldwide. Sure, the target market may be different, but when you consider that what is in effect a game played with similar tactics all the time, is taking the world by storm, the Sport of Kings must be able to have a bigger impact thanks to the different nature of every single race!?!
And similarly to poker, Kaaskop, there is racing narrative and familiarity which could be exploited and yet no-one has done so. Racing can be so parochial.
In Poker, you’ve got the World Series. Then the European Poker Tour (six venues across Europe). The Aussie Millions. There is a rythym, a structure – similar to the British pattern. If it’s June it must be Vegas.
During these televised tournaments, the big names are never off screen and as such, the viewer develops intimacy (Devilfish/Danny Negreanu) and anti-intimacy (Hellmouth/Mike Matusow). They get involved. Narrative progress and familiarity are allowed to develop; two critical aspects when engaging a sometimes bovine viewing public.
The relatively higher viewing figures for snooker on Saturday were almost certainly down to the presence of the familiar Ronnie O Sullivan at the centre of the narrative, the last great icon of British snooker on his way to the final.
Look at the racing narrative the BBC could be part of. The respective Guineas, the Derby. Ascot. The Leger. All the festivals. The Arc. The Breeders Cup. Then Australia. Japan. Hong Kong. Now Dubai. And then it begins again.
Their beloved football only goes worldwide every four years.
At times, horse racing misses more opportunities than Man City. Take today for example. Over half a million pounds worth of prize money in Dubai. Mass fields going round that mad top bend. Thundering hooves. Fierce international competition.
There’s familiarity; a phalanx of horses we all know and love running: Balthazar’s Gift. Buichall Dona. Asset. The wily Conquest.
There’s a narrative: the seafaring Brits up against the friendly but fiercely competitive locals; the eternal rivalry with France, the presence of the cleverly globalised South Africans, and all the new world horses poached from Brazil, Uruguay and Chile.
Can you imagine if this was rugby? The Head of BBC Sport would be selling his soul in order to get the rights.
Take today for example. Over half a million pounds worth of prize money in Dubai. Mass fields going round that mad top bend. Thundering hooves. Fierce international competition.
And, of course, the programme is not published in the papers today, that would be too much to ask.
But there’s always plenty of room for seventh rate betting shop fodder cards.
The so-called "journalists" who, in effect, showcase the sport every day in the national press really are a lazy shower.
Why don’t they display some initiative, cut out some of the rubbish cards in which no one is interested in either watching or betting on, and show the Dubai card instead?
The so-called “journalists” who, in effect, showcase the sport every day in the national press really are a lazy shower.
Why don’t they display some initiative, cut out some of the rubbish cards in which no one is interested in either watching or betting on, and show the Dubai card instead?
Were the Dubai races consistently taking more money in the betting shops, on Betfair and wheresoever else than the more mundane British fare, it’d be a no-brainer. But I don’t think they do. Not often enough to prompt the sea-change you’re advocating, anyway.
I’ve probably churned this one out before, but on the Sunday afternoon of one of the biggest French Group 1s of the season, our featured Race of the Day in the Stronspam was a class 3 handicap chase at Worcester; not in the same league as a race of global significance, of course, but one that was going to – and did – prove a more greatly patronised betting medium than anything run oversees that day.
The specialist channels certainly play their part in attempting to encourage a more holistic, pan-global appreciation of racing, be that in regard of French, American, Arabian or Australian coverage, but I think we’re all some way off the day when RUK can an afternoon at Kempton AWT and Catterick in favour of coverage of Dubai and nothing else. Y’all decide for yourself how good or bad a thing that is.
Jeremy
(graysonscolumn)Jeremy Grayson. Son of immigrant. Adoptive father of two. Metadata librarian. Freelance point-to-point / horse racing writer, analyst and commentator wonk. Loves music, buses, cats, the BBC Micro, ale. Advocate of CBT, PACE and therapeutic parenting. Aspergers.
But there’s always plenty of room for seventh rate betting shop fodder cards.
The so-called "journalists" who, in effect, showcase the sport every day in the national press really are a lazy shower.
I’d be surprised if the journalists had much say, if any, in which racecards are printed in their paper.
A question, GC.
I understand Reith was not a particularly nice man, but he had a vision of high standards and proactivity. He saw the BBC as a leader, a cultural guide. He believed strongly that the BBC should be setting an agenda whereas in the last few years, they’ve merely responded to their perception of the auidience agenda.
The Reithian ideology leads us to Panorama, The Sky at Night, Tomorrows World, Cathy Come Home.
The Ratings ideology leads us to wall to wall Jamie Oliver, get-rich-quick carboot fantasies and tactless shows about repossessed gaffs presented by grave robbing nest builders.
The former requires a licence fee and the co-operation and will of the public. The latter requires advertising and is in fact covered already by ITV.
A clever Head of Sport would realise that you have to educate the public as we were educated. Fair enough, if in 2011 after resource allocation and coverage of Dubai racing similar to, say, the World Athletics Championships in Helsinki (something utterly uninteresting to me, a licence payer), and the viewing figures are still miniscule, I’ll withdraw to RUK and lament the days of Nijinsky on the ITV seven.
Can a broadcaster set an agenda rather than respond to it in a digital age?
The so-called "journalists" who, in effect, showcase the sport every day in the national press really are a lazy shower.
Why don’t they display some initiative, cut out some of the rubbish cards in which no one is interested in either watching or betting on, and show the Dubai card instead?
Were the Dubai races consistently taking more money in the betting shops, on Betfair and wheresoever else than the more mundane British fare, it’d be a no-brainer. But I don’t think they do. Not often enough to prompt the sea-change you’re advocating, anyway.
But a good proportion, perhaps a majority, of people who bet in betting shops pick out their bets from the cards in their daily paper. If the card isn’t printed, then they won’t bet on it.
I think we need to consider the effects, if any, on the Levy by these or similar proposals.
Every penny lost on racing in Dubai that would have been lost at Catterick will have, in the long run, a greater effect on British Racing than losing a few days racing on the Beeb, in my view.
Lets face it – us pathologicals couldn’t give a monkeys arse what’s going on in Dubai and everyone else I know thinks racing is boring.
I always preferred BBC’s racing coverage anyway. Peter O’Sullevan, Julian Wilson, John Hanmer, Jimmy Lindley…
ah those were the days.
They brought gravitas to the proceedings – imo.
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
Lets face it – us pathologicals couldn’t give a monkeys [expletive] what’s going on in Dubai and everyone else I know thinks racing is boring.
I think you should try and make some new friends!
Seriously, though, if people find a z-grade meeting in Britain more enthralling than an a- or b- grade meeting in Dubai (where you’ve plenty of UK interest in terms of jockeys and horses), then the sport is going to go nowhere.
Lets face it – us pathologicals couldn’t give a monkeys [expletive] what’s going on in Dubai and everyone else I know thinks racing is boring.
I think you should try and make some new friends!
Seriously, though, if people find a z-grade meeting in Britain more enthralling than an a- or b- grade meeting in Dubai (where you’ve plenty of UK interest in terms of jockeys and horses), then the sport is going to go nowhere.
I have to agree with Pete. We may know some of the horses but we cant be sure that they will be the same over in dubai as over here. For a start, who is M Bin Shafya? According to my paper today (with a Dubai card) he is trainer of Conquest, Sanbuch, Military Power to name but a few!! What happened to W Haggas, L Cumani and J Hills??? I watched one race and half the field had the same colours with distinguishing caps. The vast majority are owned by the sheihk family and I just cant trust I am getting a run for my money.
At least I know where I am with those slowboat NH horses at Warwick or the slowcoaches at Wolves.
If this sounds shallow then so be it. But I just dont really care about foreign racing.
As for the snooker having more viewers than the racing thats understandable. I have no idea how the tv channels work out viewing figures, but surely many of the racing fans would have been flicking channels just to see certain races…snooker needs to be watched differently.
We may well be a minority sport when measured by the general public’s attitude to racing overall.
However, when it comes to the "crown jewels" the interest level rises massively to the casual watcher so there is a constituency to be tapped into.
In football terms think Premier League compared to the Conference – both have live TV deals but Wrexham v Stevenage does not attract the casual viewer like Man Utd v anyone else does.
Unfortunately at the moment the non committed race watcher just see’s an occasional one off event and in terms of personality, equine or human it’s Frankie and Kauto Star.
Racing needs to understand what TV needs from it to maintain it’s place on mainstream TV and make those changes just as other sports have. It may anger the traditionalists but change always does and always will.
The sovereign series may have been ill constructed, poorly marketed etc but as an idea it’s not ill conceived in my opinion.
A question, GC.
I understand Reith was not a particularly nice man, but he had a vision of high standards and proactivity. He saw the BBC as a leader, a cultural guide. He believed strongly that the BBC should be setting an agenda whereas in the last few years, they’ve merely responded to their perception of the auidience agenda.
The Reithian ideology leads us to Panorama, The Sky at Night, Tomorrows World, Cathy Come Home.
The Ratings ideology leads us to wall to wall Jamie Oliver, get-rich-quick carboot fantasies and tactless shows about repossessed gaffs presented by grave robbing nest builders.
The former requires a licence fee and the co-operation and will of the public. The latter requires advertising and is in fact covered already by ITV.
A clever Head of Sport would realise that you have to educate the public as we were educated. Fair enough, if in 2011 after resource allocation and coverage of Dubai racing similar to, say, the World Athletics Championships in Helsinki (something utterly uninteresting to me, a licence payer), and the viewing figures are still miniscule, I’ll withdraw to RUK and lament the days of Nijinsky on the ITV seven.
Can a broadcaster set an agenda rather than respond to it in a digital age?
A counter-question, Max.
Is racing’s popularity, or lack of popularity, actually as dependent on a pan-global, high quality threshold being applied to its broadcast output as certain other sports?
Or does the interest in wanting to watch racing in the first place have to be forged first, before a greater appreciation of the quality of what is being watched is engendered?
Both of us, I suspect, were first drawn into this joyous sport through the BBC’s then weekly coverage and also that of the ITV Seven. I wouldn’t presume to speak for you, but in the first instance, it was the ubiquity of horse racing broadcast that hammered home an endearing love of racing for me rather than the quality of it.
It could have been the Muck And Nettles Opportunity Handicap Chase at Nottingham for all I knew. And, having looked back through some Chaseform Annuals from the period to see what races I’ve actually remembered best, it turns out it usually was.
Looking back at that initial entry into racing some 28 years ago (thereabouts), it’s apparent that that love of racing was predicated on the names and faces that became familiar.
Why else is it that I can remember names and details of relatively obscure early 80s jumps horses that I saw regularly on the box back then – horses like Space Baby, Straight Cash, Basil’s Choice, Big Bryma, Getoutofmeway, Bee Sting, Downpayment, etc. – yet can bring to mind the name of possibly no more than about three Prix de L’Arc de Triomphe winners ever?
Quite possibly because, like so many of the truly successful television sports, racing is dependent on a narrative over a period of time to engage its target audience.
I’d argue that the domestic racing season achieves that objective as adroitly as a 38-game soccer Premiership, golf’s race for the European Order of Merit, an F1 Word Championship, and many more sporting competitions besides. And it does this on a barely calculable number of levels; whether that’s some nascent 2yo being turned out in the Brocklesby in the hope of challenging for late-juvenile season honours, or some of the best of last year’s young chasing intake starting out around Cheltenham or Chepstow in November on the road to Aintree.
Unless it contains enough of the home contingent to inspire interest (and even then they might not be enough in and of themselves to inspire), regrettably overseas racing’s place in a wider, less parochial narrative is slightly lost on many – at least lost on them enough, it would seem, for so many of the Dubai or French meetings to leave comparably more punters absolutely stone cold than an East Midlands Fibresand sprint in February.
Even as a youngster, my disinterest in the Arc was not symptomatic of any especial hatred of the contest (far from it), but rather more of an incomprehension of what broader significance it would have in my television racing diet otherwise – a thought process along the lines of, “I don’t know any of these horses. And they’re not about to turn up here anytime soon, are they? What do I do with this?”
Luckily saturation exposure to all facets of the sport in recent years – be that on TRF, or during my days at the Sprotsnam, or in my current freelance capacities – has developed the mind somewhat, even if I’m not about to go through the card at Velifiendi any time soon.
But if what was formerly for me my predominant thinking on racing is even halfway commensurate with that of many, many other racing fans out there now (and I suspect it might be), then really I’m not sure I see how a too-selective, very-very-best-of-breed-only approach to broadcasting the best racing elsewhere on the globe can be expected to stir the imagination, the wallet pocket or the back / lay finger to the same extent.
Jeremy
(graysonscolumn)Jeremy Grayson. Son of immigrant. Adoptive father of two. Metadata librarian. Freelance point-to-point / horse racing writer, analyst and commentator wonk. Loves music, buses, cats, the BBC Micro, ale. Advocate of CBT, PACE and therapeutic parenting. Aspergers.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.