- This topic has 29 replies, 21 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I have to say for the first time in a long time I sat down and watched C4 coverage of Ascot on Saturday.
All I can say IMO it was shocking. How on earth they expect to get young and new people into the sport with that coverage God only knows.
Who on earth wants to watch and listen to Gok Wan. Why and I have heard it before and I suppose it will continue until he does retire have we got to listen to Mick Fitzgerald say to Richard Hughhes, so this is your last time here.
Who is interested. He is retiring, he is not the best jockey of all time, yes he is good. I suppose we will have it at all the big meetings from here on in.
The camera angles are shocking. Who wants to watch a load of horses running straight towards you. I don’t. I want a view that allows me to see the whole field and be able to tell who is in front.
The vehicle that precedes the horses and gives you a distorted view. Again who wants that.
No wonder viewing figures are down. They are useless.Agreed, very poor coverage.
I sat through all 5 days and even with top class races and a few personal wins I felt flat at the end of each programme.
Camera views in much of C4 racing leave a lot to be desired and for sure the whole field should be visible for much of a race. Gok Wan was not as good as last year but he is preferable to some of the old-fashioned journalists or eccentrics from previous years. Rishi Persad, however, should have taken the week off with his irritating, for him and us, hay fever.
In fact, none of the programmes was as good as last year. The Morning Line was OK, though.
I didn’t think it was too bad to be honest. I mostly watched RUK’s coverage as its aimed at racing followers more, but I did flick over and watch chunks of C4 coverage and found it to be decent enough.
I think it’s very easy to be critical of it, almost fashionable to criticise it.
It serves it’s purpose and brings the racing world into the mainstream without getting to specialist. Let’s be honest, if you want a more specialist coverage of racing for these big festivals, then RUK is required.
I’d love a combination of American form analysis and RUK’s feature interviews, with C4’s Simon Holt as permanent caller.
It neither appeals to the racing nuts or the casual viewer. As I’ve said before any of a number of guys from atr could present much better including Matt or Sean. Such a shame but as it keeps losing viewers it just seems C4 doesn’t know what to do to stop the slide.
Well, someone at Racing Post agrees with you about Matt Chapman.
Frankly, he puts me off and I certainly wouldn’t make a point of watching because he’s presenting it – not that I do for any presenter – it’s the racing I’m interested in, not all the gabble, gabble they use to fill the gaps between races. He drives racing punters mad so God only knows how Joe Public would view him.
I really don’t see why C4 needs around a dozen presenters to do the same job that 3/4 managed at the Beeb. It’s always been overkill – more numbers, less quality.
I have to disagree BG.
Matt is the young modern day equivalent of Big Mac. Like marmite you hate him or love him.
I am the latter and the reason why is he says what we all say about bad rides given by jockeys but nobody else does,be it on ATR, RUK or C4 willdo. If the ride is poor he will say so, he won’t make some pathetic excuse for the jockey. Sometimes he is wrong with his opinion but he will admit it.
Racing needs more like him as opposed to the sycophants we have at the minute.
I could watch him all day.I agree, I think he would be a fresh of breath air for Channel 4 and I would watch him no problem. I don’t always agree with what he has to say, but he is entertaining and offers his opinion well. I don’t see why people would hate him, its a bit strong, HATE.
Disliking him is understandable, but hey ho he isn’t to everyone’s taste.
I haven’t seen a racing review show on ATR for a while as I don’t have sky anymore, but when I did I thoroughly enjoyed it.The difference being that Big Mac only appeared briefly to talk about the betting side. Matt will be there in our faces the whole time! That’s quite a big difference if you find someone irritating/annoying. I’m not saying he doesn’t say what needs saying at times because he does, but I just find him an abrasive personality.
I haven’t seen the figures, but does anyone know what C4’s viewing figures were with the old team and when “competing” with the Beeb for viewers? I’m just wondering if this is all a made up story really in that viewing figures for C4 haven’t dropped at all, but remain stable no matter who was/is presenting. If they haven’t changed that much then I’d suggest it’s more likely people can’t be bothered to put up with things like commercial breaks and other rubbish that C4 has always had and which the Beeb never did that explains why figures are not comparable to the Beeb’s. In which case they need to look at the whole presentation/coverage and not just at the presenters themselves.
Hey, just a few points.
1. I thought ch4 coverage was terrible. Far too much Gok – found myself regularly switching over to RUK.
2. IMO Matt Chapman is the best racing presenter on TV. Hes got personality, doesn’t sit on the fence and often says what we are all thinking. Love him on ATR.1. I thought ch4 coverage was terrible. Far too much Gok – found myself regularly switching over to RUK.
2. IMO Matt Chapman is the best racing presenter on TV. Hes got personality, doesn’t sit on the fence and often says what we are all thinking. Love him on ATR.Ditto.
Royal Ascot is different to other race meetings. The fashion, like or not, and I’m ambivalent, is a key part of the proceedings, and Gok was entertaining in his way. I enjoyed the C4 racing coverage and post race analysis. I found some of the build-up to the races on RUK preferable, aside from some awkward camera angles. Its easy to criticise. I can’t recall the previous BBC coverage as better. At times it verged on embarrassing and boring. C4 has a broad audience to appeal to, and by and large, I think its a much improved product. It’d be a poor thing if there was no terrestrial racing coverage, and that could become reality, as it virtually has for cricket.
I would rather 4 French speaking hippopotami present than have no terrestrial coverage at all. That would be a disaster.
I’m astounded such a minority sport still gets terrestrial coverage of any kind. in 5 years, these will be the ‘good old days’, and you’ll wish you had CH4 back.
I am surprised that people who have RUK, who thought that CH4 coverage is was so bad, even bothered watching CH4.
I
m glad the free to air racing coverage continues although I dont think it sits well within the Channel 4 identity theses days. Wouldnt mind it on one of the ITV channels. I watched it on record and soon got used to fast forwarding past deadly dull aspects like Mick Fitzgeralds jockey changing room stuff and Gina at the starting staLLs. Why the hell do we have to see everyones face in the picture these days, always at the expense of seeing the horses. Some of the team are not bad at all but are being given unsuitable briefs. I dont think latter day BBC coverage was any better and Id be very disappointed with some of the Racing UK personnel if I was forking out for their coverage. I think we have to accept that the fashion angle is always likely to vie for time with the racing. I can recall Peter OSullevan handing over to the likes of Jean Rook, Judith Chalmers and Eve Pollard in the pre – Jeff Banks days. For all I could do without Gok, I think it would have been even worse had they used that ubiquitous lightweight daughter of Eve Pollard, Winkleman.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.