- This topic has 243 replies, 63 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Cavelino being the cross of a machine operator father and cleaner/shop assistant mother wants to make it clear he has no issues with bricklayers or anyone else who earns an honest bob, and will now stop referring to himself in the third person…
Perhaps a kinder term here would be the mundane class. The “class” that doesn’t want to get up on a Monday, the people who eat the same sandwich in the same place at the same time every day. The people who look forward to (live for?) the release of the weekend.
Take your point about Dimmock, O’Sullevan etc, Drone, but those were different times. The mundane class want spectacle and theater as much as competition and sportsmanship these days. They haven’t time for or the interest in, sectional analysis and multi-nominal regression. They want a cross of WWF and “real” sport if you like. Football gives it to them. Would Julian Wilson really be what a mass audience want of a Saturday afternoon in 2016? Honestly I doubt it.
Racing is quite strange in that it purports to be a populist entertainment industry, yet at the same wants to define its demographic. The much derided and shelved “Bill and Ben” concept was the public manifestation of it. But sadly for the Lords of Racing, their just aren’t enough customers with the one per center chic of Gina Harding, or Hexhamista’s who will go or tune in regardless, or form and data nerds who get the nuance, to keep the show on the road. The people doing this deal know it, and they have mouths to feed. I’d imagine much of the return on the thirty million outlay will be recouped in advertising to betting companies. “So what” says I.
As mentioned earlier I was generally a fan of IMG C4 Racing. It was slick, professional, and didn’t lack for investment but clearly something wasn’t working there. Going by the comments of Luck and Persad in that video above, their doesn’t seem to be much internal critical analysis going on to fix it either.
So good luck to ITV with this. Might not work and maybe Racing is doomed, but its certainly worth a try.
Will be good to have the crown jewels back on “mainstream” television again, imo.
(Bricklayers of the World Unite and Take Over)
I don’t watch very much television as most of it is visual and aural diarrhea.
However there was an exceptionally good program on BBC 4 over the Christmas period. The premise was simple, a two hour sleigh ride inside the arctic circle. The only sounds were the background noises of nature, there was no narration, no music and it was the most compelling, relaxing two hours television I have seen in years, indeed I don’t think I can remember the last time I actually sat in my chair for two hours in front of the TV and didn’t budge.
I would be quite happy with something similar for racing. Show all the horses in the parade ring – we all have eyes, we don’t need someone pointing out what we can see. Show the runners going to post, show them milling at the post then show the race. Personally it wouldn’t worry me if there was a commentary or not but I appreciate not everyone can read a race so broadcast the commentary as well.
The point I’m making is racing doesn’t need talking heads, “personalities” or clever gimmicks keep it simple – show the horses at all stages and most viewers, in my view, would be more than happy.
I don’t watch very much television as most of it is visual and aural diarrhea.
However there was an exceptionally good program on BBC 4 over the Christmas period. The premise was simple, a two hour sleigh ride inside the arctic circle. The only sounds were the background noises of nature, there was no narration, no music and it was the most compelling, relaxing two hours television I have seen in years, indeed I don’t think I can remember the last time I actually sat in my chair for two hours in front of the TV and didn’t budge.
I would be quite happy with something similar for racing. Show all the horses in the parade ring – we all have eyes, we don’t need someone pointing out what we can see. Show the runners going to post, show them milling at the post then show the race. Personally it wouldn’t worry me if there was a commentary or not but I appreciate not everyone can read a race so broadcast the commentary as well.
I agree totally with this. sadly it will never happen.The point I’m making is racing doesn’t need talking heads, “personalities” or clever gimmicks keep it simple – show the horses at all stages and most viewers, in my view, would be more than happy.
I agree totally with this, but sadly it will never happen.
Racing is quite challenging for broadcasters, in sporting terms, because of the relatively small amount of actual action. In a two hour programme you might have something like 15 minutes of actual racing and the rest left to fill.
I do get the urgings of statisticians and professional analysts such as James Willoughby and Simon Rowlands for programme makers to make better and more engaging use of the plethora of racing data. And I agree that we can surely do better than ‘three of the last 10 favourites have won this’ style of statistical analysis. But that would be a path to be trod gently, I suppose the user-friendly, limited use of stats in some football programmes is what might work best. But I’m not sure such an approach would spawn a burgeoning new legion of racing fans and TV viewers in the way that those two and others feel it might. Sure, some would find that of interest, but, in my opinion, anything other than a gentle nudge in that direction would be counter-productive, switching more off than on.
There is a challenge, I am sure, in terms of budget. While the over-use of the banal talking head is much crticised, it is cheaper than many of the alternatives. Given the viewing figures you’d imagine budget is a real blocker for the production teams in terms of being more creative and bold in their approach. I’d guess, for example, that the new promotional short for Match Of The Day had a bigger budget than an entire Saturday’s coverage on CH4 racing (although I have no idea and could be wide of the mark with that guess).
Regarding presenters, I’m not sure that is where the problem really is or is where we should be focusing. Sure, some are really good and some are less so but it is the way some are used that fails to help (again, possibly budget related). For example, I agree that Fitzgerald is excellent on discussing race-riding topics but poor on form analysis (just as some are the opposite). Not his fault that they ask him to cover additional topics and ‘do stuff’ he’s not expert at. I think there are some good people in the team and I think it needs tweaking in terms of personnel rather than starting from scratch. The issue is around what the presenters are being asked to do.
Some things are simply past their sell-by. Betting ring coverage always relied more on Mac’s style rather than any content.The tired format of showing horse by horse in the paddock and having J.McG doing a quick one liner on them is not captivating viewing by any stretch. Better ways to examine each horse and/or the race in a more engaging way.
I don’t think it needs to be either betting OR racing. I think the trick is to tap into the appeal of both.
One thing that I think does need addressing is the reluctance of the presenters to be critical. Generally there is a real reluctance to confront any issues involving racing professionals. Racing is a small world and these guys and girls are in daily contact with the small, tightly-knit, group of jockeys, traners and key owners making any critical content awkward for them. But, again comparing with MOTD, the pundits and analysts on football coverage are much happier to tackle (sorry!) areas where people are given criticism, and their programme benefits for it. People like Matt Chapman and Lydia Hislop shine, and contrast sharply with some of their colleagues, in their readiness to dish out medicine where they feel it is justified.
It’s a tough ask, as the failure of what I am sure are some professional teams in turning the sliding figures around alludes to, but there are lots of grounds to think a much better fist could be made of it.What a joke channel 4 really are. There is a race at Kempton at 1:25 but channel 4 coverage is only starting at 1:25 and not showing the race. Why couldn’t they start coverage at 1:20 in time to show the race
If the brief is to grow racing’s audience, their best bet lies with a successful resurrection of the ITV7. There is probably enough nostalgic resonance in it to tempt those who recall their parents betting on it.
The tired format of showing horse by horse in the paddock and having J.McG doing a quick one liner on them is not captivating viewing by any stretch. Better ways to examine each horse and/or the race in a more engaging way.
Any suggestions what this “more engaging way” might be?
I don’t profess to have mastered the dark art of paddock inspection, other than rank negatives, but do believe that trying to do so from TV pictures is a non-starter. As an on-course acquaintance of mine – who was a half-decent judge of horseflesh – remarked: “it might as well be a Disney cartoon”, though that was pre-HD admittedly, and I’ve not seen racing, or anything, in that format
The only TV pundit whose paddock comments I ever gave any credence to was Ken Pitterson: is he still around?
Side-on shots of parading horses make for pleasant viewing but IMO front-on and threequarter views from front and back are more revealing, particularly to elucidate gait and conformation as these views are three-dimensional: something all but impossible to replicate on the goggler
Really, video of attractive racehorses wandering around, tails swishing and heads lolling just makes racing broadcasts more enjoyable doesn’t it?
No more, no less
What a joke channel 4 really are. There is a race at Kempton at 1:25 but channel 4 coverage is only starting at 1:25 and not showing the race. Why couldn’t they start coverage at 1:20 in time to show the race
No doubt to show something like Come Dine with Me, they only show that programme countless times a day
Ken is on William Hill Radio most days – the studio call him “on-course” for his observations.
They work him hard as quite often he will cover an afternoon meeting and then an evening one.
What a joke channel 4 really are. There is a race at Kempton at 1:25 but channel 4 coverage is only starting at 1:25 and not showing the race. Why couldn’t they start coverage at 1:20 in time to show the race
No doubt to show something like Come Dine with Me, they only show that programme countless times a day
Ken is around alright. At every meeting in the south east I go to and that’s a fair number.
I like him and your friend is right. You can tell virtually nothing from a flat screen Imo
I selfishly don’t want Ken to work for Ch4 as I often have a last minute bet on his paddock picks!They were joking today about which of them would be good on Ch4 and who had a ‘tv face’. I love W Hill radio.
I actually think the paddock images are a guide to the make and shape and fitness, but they could be better. If there was less “chat and celeb” then they could show the horses in front and behind and going down to the start. The action is a very important guide to how they’ll act on the going. Some explanation of this and what to look for would engage new viewers and help punters. It is astonishing hearing people about to put on bets at the racecourse, some of them haven’t the foggiest idea about horses.
A couple of things have really annoyed me about CH4 racing in the last few weeks:-
1. Barely a mention of the big Leopardstown Xmas festival during the programmes on 26th/27th December (especially in light of the Wetherby & Chepstow abandonments). While I’m not anti-AW (don’t want to start that argument again) why do the producers think we would rather see 3 class 5 races at Chelmsford when they could have inserted a Grade 1 from Leopardstown?
2. The ongoing Kerry Lee love-in. Yes, we know she used to work on Channel 4 (and Tom Lee is her brother) but do they have to wet themselves every time she has a winner?
A couple of things have really annoyed me about CH4 racing in the last few weeks:-
1. Barely a mention of the big Leopardstown Xmas festival during the programmes on 26th/27th December (especially in light of the Wetherby & Chepstow abandonments). While I’m not anti-AW (don’t want to start that argument again) why do the producers think we would rather see 3 class 5 races at Chelmsford when they could have inserted a Grade 1 from Leopardstown?
2. The ongoing Kerry Lee love-in. Yes, we know she used to work on Channel 4 (and Tom Lee is her brother) but do they have to wet themselves every time she has a winner?
Chelmsford was added at the last minute they probably didn’t have the rights to Leopardstown, this is why Channel 4 have the rights to all the tracks even if they never show them ie S4C being refused rights to Ffos Las.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.