- This topic has 979 replies, 136 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 3 months ago by
.
- Posts
overnight ratings for the first show were 676k (5.4%)
How would that compare to a regular Sunday afternoon slot?
In 2016 C4 had 601k on new years day and in 2015 they had 558k
Peak figure was 831k
Anyone know what filled that timeslot for ITV last year and what its viewing figures were?
Anyone know what filled that timeslot for ITV last year and what its viewing figures were?
1.10pm ITV Lunchtime News
1.25pm Film : Dr No (1963)
3.35pm Midsomer Murders (Repeat)Well if kicking the studio out is what you wanted, you’re easily pleased. Can’t see what that has to do with it, can do five minutes of analysis whether sat in a box or stood at a table.
You made the point that no form analysis = alienating the racing fan. I don’t believe that at all. As has already been stated earlier in the thread the racing fan can do that study themselves and if they want overkill they can tune into RUK – at a cost.
Obviously not every racing fan Stilvi, take a look at this thread and you’ll see a lot of disenchantment.
Value Is EverythingNothing much to criticise here and the people on here who only ever want to see horses will never be pleased.
McCoy was surprisingly articulate and involved by his standards and himself and Luke Harvey played off each other really well.
Chapman does need to tone it down and Ed Chamberlain is a very good anchorman.
Weather girl is stunningly beautiful but not needed and Pendleton can’t add much.
It’s not going to be much different to C4 and I never had a problem with that ….the fact is that for the vast majority unless people have had a bet they couldn’t care less about watching racing so attempts to boost figures won’t work.
Well if kicking the studio out is what you wanted, you’re easily pleased. Can’t see what that has to do with it, can do five minutes of analysis whether sat in a box or stood at a table.
You made the point that no form analysis = alienating the racing fan. I don’t believe that at all. As has already been stated earlier in the thread the racing fan can do that study themselves and if they want overkill they can tune into RUK – at a cost.
Obviously not every racing fan Stilvi, take a look at this thread and you’ll see a lot of disenchantment.
I haven’t exactly been counting, but after the initial salvo from people who probably couldn’t wait to give it a bashing, the reaction on this thread appears to be reasonably positive.
Sorry, but surely the horses are the most important things here? Otherwise you guys would be betting on football or using those machines.
Horses are more important than some unfunny bloke with a big ego making a fool of himself in front of the cameras, he was like a sixth former in a bad ad libbed revue, I felt embarrased watching him.
If you go to the Horse and Hound forum or to some of the FB racing forums you will find quite a large proportion of the posters want to see the horses as well, not everyone who watches racing is a punter.Maybe it was just the droplets of water on the cameras, but I did actually feel as if I was at Cheltenham on a cold and rainy day and, much as I’ve always liked listening to Simon Holt, Richard Hoiles [sp] is very good at telling the story of the race as it unfolds. But I honestly don’t think I can face seeing Matt Chapman on a regular basis [if at all]. And I’ve never felt that about a tv presenter before [with the possible exception of Noel Edmonds on Deal or No Deal]. I actually missed Tanya the most, something I never thought I’d say; she had a passion for racing and betting, and it wasn’t all about ‘her’. No one can try to do a McCririck; like him or loathe him he was a one off.
Weather girl is stunningly beautiful
Isn’t it amazing that despite all the gender equality legislation, equal rights campaigns and movements, a female still has almost no chance of a career on television anywhere, without being at least an 8.5 on the totty scale.
Weather girl is stunningly beautiful
Isn’t it amazing that despite all the gender equality legislation, equal rights campaigns and movements, a female still has almost no chance of a career on television anywhere, without being at least an 8.5 on the totty scale.
Didn’t BBC use Carol Kirkwood at Royal Ascot?
Two future problems for ITV to consider.
The idiot factor in the betting ring is going to be that much greater on a dry day. Not so sure Chapman is going to be able to cope and although it might be reality it isn’t going to reflect very well on the sport. Would you want a day out with these people?
If they are intending to up the interviews it is pretty obvious it is going to be that much more difficult once the Flat season starts. Aidan O’Brien is a man of a million words but most of them are ‘listen’. Then you have the likes of Stoutey and it is easy to see the entertainment gauge hitting zero.
… an 8.5 on the totty scale.
That’s totally subjective, though.
Weather girl is stunningly beautiful
Isn’t it amazing that despite all the gender equality legislation, equal rights campaigns and movements, a female still has almost no chance of a career on television anywhere, without being at least an 8.5 on the totty scale.
I read a complaint somewhere that the female presenters offered nothing. Difficult when you have one brief appearance in 90 minutes whilst the lads are stood round a pub table giving it some ” bantz ”
Racing still has one foot in the 1970s.
I have not watched terrestrially for many years save the actual race when it is not covered by RUK.
It’s personal preference of course but I think RUK provides the best coverage of any sport anywhere in the world and I am surprised at the number of forum members who criticise it.
There are a few programmes other than just the racing, there are no adverts as such, the profits go back into racing. RUK has a variety of outstanding presenters, pundits and commentators. When there is time there is unrivalled pre & post race analysis. When there is not time it is because they are showing (more) racing. The average level of quality of UK racing shown is higher than that on ATR.
In particular I would highlight Stewart Machin (who is by streets the most accurate & descriptive caller) and Jonathan Neesom both of whose knowledge is unsurpassed and whom together are on on a par with the halcyon days of Test Match Special. If your cup of tea is the pantomime of the likes of Chapman et al then fine but you will learn a lot less.
I would wholeheartedly recommend anyone thinking of subscribing to RUK to do so. It’s less than £1 per day and does not require a Sky or Virgin package – I watch from the online platform via an HDMI cable to the TV.
Love the TMS comparision. Think they are brilliant. An old-fashioned dry, but ultimately fantastic and cheeky sense of humour, that is difficult to replicate.
I have not watched terrestrially for many years save the actual race when it is not covered by RUK.
It’s personal preference of course but I think RUK provides the best coverage of any sport anywhere in the world and I am surprised at the number of forum members who criticise it.
There are a few programmes other than just the racing, there are no adverts as such, the profits go back into racing. RUK has a variety of outstanding presenters, pundits and commentators. When there is time there is unrivalled pre & post race analysis. When there is not time it is because they are showing (more) racing. The average level of quality of UK racing shown is higher than that on ATR.
In particular I would highlight Stewart Machin (who is by streets the most accurate & descriptive caller) and Jonathan Neesom both of whose knowledge is unsurpassed and whom together are on on a par with the halcyon days of Test Match Special. If your cup of tea is the pantomime of the likes of Chapman et al then fine but you will learn a lot less.
I would wholeheartedly recommend anyone thinking of subscribing to RUK to do so. It’s less than £1 per day and does not require a Sky or Virgin package – I watch from the online platform via an HDMI cable to the TV.
Love the TMS comparision. Think they are brilliant. An old-fashioned dry, but ultimately fantastic and cheeky sense of humour, that is difficult to replicate.
What a surprising view. Just to qualify that opinion perhaps you should come clean and admit you seem to appear on the Channel nearly every day of the week?
Perhaps Hislop, Willoughby, Steedman and co would also like to come on and say how good the Channel is?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.