- This topic has 42 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 6 months ago by
.
- Posts
I grew up watching sport on the telly; unfortunately all people want to watch these days is pop idol/x factor’ish sort of stuff..just imagine the furore if those sort of programmes were axed..what would people do with their lives…no one grows up dreaming of scoring a goal in a cup final or riding the winner of the National any more…
An interesting side issue which I didn’t know previously is that the BBC is understood to have only paid less than 3 million a year for it’s new 2010-12 Derby, Grand National and Royal Ascot contract compared with nearer 10 million previously, quite a big drop, are they getting racing on the cheap?
As Dave Yates points out in todays Mirror, where have the suits from the BHA been while all this beens going on? The BHA kept such a low profile during the whole episode, you could have been forgiven for forgetting they are supposed to be running racing.
- Total Posts 17716
The "big four" still target The Derby as one of the season’s major prizes, on a par with the Arc. Which significant owners/trainers/breeders do you claim think otherwise?
Smith, Tabor, Magnier and Mrs Magnier?
Yes: they make up between them one of the Big Four. The others would be Godolphin, Juddmonte (Abdullah), and the Aga Khan. Coolmore, as has been noted, customarily fling everything they’ve got at the race, as this year’s (extremely high class) renewal proved. Three of the officially top five rated horses in the world ran in it
(Sea the Stars [1], Rip van Winkle [3], Fame and Glory [=4]. The other two are Goldikova [2] and Zenyatta [=4].)
The same cannot be said for
any
other race in the world this year!
Move it back to a Wednesday – not only halve the TV audience but you can halve the number of racegoers too unless they plan on moving it to an evening meeting nobody can attend.
- Total Posts 17716
I doubt very much if the BBC will keep the rights to the Derby after 2012 in what is a changing world.
I sit and wonder just hwo writes these things. Who is it that says the Derby is the most important race in the world?
It may be the most important 3 year old race in the world but overall the Arc is a more competive and better spectacle.
Certainly the last 2 Derbys didn’t have a patch on the performances put up by Sea the Stars himself or Zarkava in the Arc. You only need to read the posts on here to find out which race provoked the livier debate.
I would be surprised is the Arc doesn’t have worldwide viewing figures that outdo the Derby.
Granted people still come from all over the world to watch the Derby but nowadays with links as they are the Breeders must have 10 times the viewers the Derby has.
The big plus the yanks have is the wordwide connections via internet are fantastic. I’m in Asia and go to Racing Uk and it’s a nightmare, I could connest to Mars easier at times. ATR are good but when I watched the Breeders direct and live on my computer there wasn’t one glitch over the 2 days.
I vaguely remember Super Sam who had won something like 5 on the trot being the Uk’s first ever runner in the Washington DC international and Sir Ivor going a year or two later and winning it.
From there it has grown and grown and year after year we send some of our best horses to compete. It’s an absolutely brilliant meeting with an more international flavour to it than even Ascot has and for pure excitement puts our Derby in the shade.
For me the Derby is all about tradition. I love to go to Epsom on Derby Day, even though perhaps it has not got the same "class" as the Arc. It was a great shame for me when it moved from Wednesday. I feel exactly the same about the St Leger, and I love my trips to Donny.
It is all about money these days. Sad
It is all about money these days. Sad
Correct blackpoodle, when you think about it, how extraordinary is it that such a minority sport as we are often told it is, has two dedicated channels, neatly divided into two halves. Money being creamed off left, right and centre but still racing for pathetic prize money.
By 2012 everything will be digital anyway, a FTA racing channel should be an aim by then surely, in fact didn’t Betfair want to sponsor one in the past but this was mysteriously turned down by the authorities.
Maybe not enough of them could have got their fingers into the pie if it had gone ahead.Such a cynical post,Yeats, I would have been proud of that one myself.
Colin
I doubt very much if the BBC will keep the rights to the Derby after 2012 in what is a changing world.
I sit and wonder just hwo writes these things. Who is it that says the Derby is the most important race in the world?
It may be the most important 3 year old race in the world but overall the Arc is a more competive and better spectacle.
Granted people still come from all over the world to watch the Derby but nowadays with links as they are the Breeders must have 10 times the viewers the Derby has.
From there it has grown and grown and year after year we send some of our best horses to compete. It’s an absolutely brilliant meeting with an more international flavour to it than even Ascot has and for pure excitement puts our Derby in the shade.
You make a worthwhile point in the sense that there are just so many ‘quality’ alternatives to the Derby these days that its prestige other than from a historical/traditional angle has suffered.
Of course racing is not alone; other sports in general have seen their time-honoured crown jewels eroded by saturation in a host of similar alternatives.
The traditional events commanded attention due to their scarcity; the expectation undiverted and undimmed by a newer ersatz version introduced to fill the gaping-waiting void
Do the Olympic Games ‘mean’ as much now that there are innumerable other ‘world championships’ in each individual sport? No need for a four-year wait with baited breath to see if Usain Bolt can retain his place at the top in London, there was the Athletics World Championships hot on the heels of Beijing
Likewise the FA Cup Final now there are pan-european club championships
…the Rugby Union Five Nations which for eons lit up the new year, now just one of several Autumn-Spring domestic international series
…the Cricket Tests of summer now little more than part of a 365/24/7 seamless continuum of international cricket in various guises.
Over-exposure to ‘quality’ sport may not quite lead to a familiarity that breeds contempt but does result in once singularly important events such as the dear old Derby failing to raise the sap to a height they did in our forefathers.
IMVVVHO
Too much sport…zzzzzzzz
Money is the root of all evil
- Total Posts 17716
I sit and wonder just hwo writes these things. Who is it that says the Derby is the most important race in the world?
It may be the most important 3 year old race in the world but overall the Arc is a more competive and better spectacle.
You can’t argue with official ratings. Three of the top five horses in the world, finished 1st, 2nd and 4th. Fact.
I’m not going to get involved in comparisons, but if you think the Arc is a "better spectacle" than the cream of the classic crop hurtling down to Tattenham Corner in the June sunshine, and threading their way through the fairground masses up the green and undulating Epsom straight to the winning post, then your standards are very different from mine.
The Arc, I always think, is a thrilling lottery rather than a great spectacle. Run it five times, and you’d often get five winners, depending on luck in running.
Drone has hit the nail right on the head with his comments about saturation coverage.
There is so much coverage of sport on various channels, racing included, indeed racing must be unique in that every event (bar the occasional Bank Holiday meeting) has live television coverage.
Therefore those who are dedicated to the sport can easily follow it, albeit at a cost.
Of course a totally different position to what it used to be when the “crown jewels” had a logical justification. In those days the only place to see live racing was either on-course or the meetings terrestrial television covered. You couldn’t even watch pictures in the betting shops until the late 1980’s
I can remember clearly the first day television pictures were first beamed to my local bookmakers, it was fantastic actually being able to watch live pictures.
Should there be “crown jewels” still? Probably not, they had their place when there were only two or three terrestrial channels. Once the country is fully digital everyone will have a choice of a multitude of channels.
With competition from other channels, not to mention almost unlimited competition from outside influences, how many people will sit down on a Saturday afternoon to watch any sporting event on a Saturday afternoon, yet alone a horse race?
- Total Posts 17716
Drone has hit the nail right on the head with his comments about saturation coverage.
There is so much coverage of sport on various channels, racing included, indeed racing must be unique in that every event (bar the occasional Bank Holiday meeting) has live television coverage.
Therefore those who are dedicated to the sport can easily follow it, albeit at a cost.
Saturation indeed. The irony is, that saturation
for those who can afford it
has led to this perception that live coverage of events – not just sporting, but political as well – on nationally available, free-to-air terrestrial television no longer has a point.
Well, it may not have a point for those of us who are already committed, and can afford to pay £40 per month to get Sky Basic plus RUK. A large percentage of the population cannot afford £40 per month on top of the £139.50 p.a. they already pay for their TV licence, and which might reasonably be expected to cover the best sporting events.
My conscience dimly whispers, that this is another example of the "have" portion of society, washing our hands over a deprivation confined to the "have nots". The gap, clearly, continues to grow.
Drone has hit the nail right on the head with his comments about saturation coverage.
There is so much coverage of sport on various channels, racing included, indeed racing must be unique in that every event (bar the occasional Bank Holiday meeting) has live television coverage.
Therefore those who are dedicated to the sport can easily follow it, albeit at a cost.
Saturation indeed. The irony is, that saturation
for those who can afford it
has led to this perception that live coverage of events – not just sporting, but political as well – on nationally available, free-to-air terrestrial television no longer has a point.
Well, it may not have a point for those of us who are already committed, and can afford to pay £40 per month to get Sky Basic plus RUK. A large percentage of the population cannot afford £40 per month on top of the £139.50 p.a. they already pay for their TV licence, and which might reasonably be expected to cover the best sporting events.
My conscience dimly whispers, that this is another example of the "have" portion of society, washing our hands over a deprivation confined to the "have nots". The gap, clearly, continues to grow.
But surely that is just a fact of life – we all have to live within our means.
There are things I would like to do but cannot afford to, so I either accept I cannot have them or I earn the money so I can afford it.
At the end of the day watching a horse race, any sporting event, or even watching television, is a lifestyle choice, not an essential. Nobody is going to die if they don’t watch an event.
- Total Posts 17716
But surely that is just a fact of life – we all have to live within our means.
Of course. But for the last fifty years or so everybody has had access to basic news, information and media coverage of important events including "sporting jewels". The Media diaspora is changing that for the worse.
There are things I would like to do but cannot afford to, so I either accept I cannot have them or I earn the money so I can afford it.
Not everyone is in our fortunate position of having spare money, or being in the position to earn more of it. Living in London, I’m reminded of that every day when I look around me.
At the end of the day watching a horse race, any sporting event, or even watching television, is a lifestyle choice, not an essential. Nobody is going to die if they don’t watch an event.
Not essential, no. But in an information-rich age, the irony is that this information is increasingly concentrated in the hands of the fortunate few. When "free to air" access is denied, that is cutting a lot of people out of the loop. That’s what I believe we should be worried about: and it’s why (in its small but significant way) the "Listed event" system is not an anacronism, but a safeguard of meritocracy.
The only surprising thing about this news is that it has taken so long for the recommendation that the Derby should be ditched from the ‘ crown jewels ‘ and I have never understood why a sport such as horse racing should have two events in it.
The Derby may be important to us because we are enthusiasts of the sport but many members of the public take little interest in flat racing nowadays ( ask a lot of people ‘ what did you think of Sea the Stars ‘ and the majority will think it is a celebrity tv programme which they have missed ).
The Derby was very popular a few decades ago when there were only 3 tv channels and there was no internet or computer games etc to occupy people’s thoughts but now there are so many other things for people to take an interest in and not too many are going to care about a race which only lasts about 3 mins and has competitors that few have heard of ( unlike the Grand National where familiar names take part regularly ).
The Ashes and soccer internationals are of much more national interest in my opinion.
Some thoughtful posts in this thread, well worth reading.
I think any sport, apart perhaps, from football, that hopes to secure its future should be thinking about exposure. By hook or by crook, ensuring that your ‘product’ (apologies) is put in front of as many people as possible, as often as possible. In cricket, the ECB do not understand this, or rather, they do, but they have other appetites to feed (the insatiable greed of the counties, above all).
To that end, losing the Derby from free-to-air television is a bad thing for racing. Questions about whether or not it deserves to be on terrestrial television are worth asking, but modern sports are in the market for all the viewers they can get, by any method they can get ’em and therefore any erosion of racing’s exposure should be fought tooth and nail.
In the digital future, a single free-to-air racing channel, covering all courses, pooling all the available presenting/producing talent and heavily promoted, is surely a must. If, in the far future, the television audience is completely fragmented, having one port of call for all racing, from the Grand National to the Derby, would surely be desirable.
But in the meantime, the biggest audiences are for terrestrial channels and that is where racing must fight for every single minute of coverage.
Incidentally, does anyone know why the BBC have not set up a digital sports channel? Or possibly even two or three?
- Total Posts 17716
To that end, losing the Derby from free-to-air television is a bad thing for racing. Questions about whether or not it deserves to be on terrestrial television are worth asking, but modern sports are in the market for all the viewers they can get, by any method they can get ’em and therefore any erosion of racing’s exposure should be fought tooth and nail.
Very well put. I’m quite surprised that so many knowledgeable racing people don’t seem to believe that the disappearance of the Derby from free-to-air would be any loss.
Our world is all about perception, not reality. The fact that more people attend racing each week than any other sport apart from football cuts no ice against the media’s perception that it is somehow exclusive, old-fashioned and dull. Lose the Derby, and you foster that negative perception.
You ask a good question about the BBC’s lack of digital sport channels. It had its hands slapped for bad practise a year or two ago, for undercutting the appeal of the commercial premium providers, and was forced to cut several of its digital channels as a result. Throttling the competition, don’t you know?
Beyond that, of course, the organisation operates very largely nowadays in most areas as a mere receiving house for programmes made by external companies – the amount of in-house resource it has for doing its own outside and/or arts broadcasting is appallingly limited compared against how it was 20 years ago.
Even the Grand National is now bought in. Since 2007 it’s been a Sunset & Vine show, funded and fronted by the BBC. S&V do the Derby now as well. Essentially the organisation itself no longer has the technical resource and manpower to fill one channel with sport, let alone three.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.