- This topic has 155 replies, 59 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 5 months ago by
.
- Posts
Matt Chapman has got himself into his first controversy after being dropped from the presentation at the Derby meeting.
Epsom took offence to Chapman’s presentation at the Oaks in which he said “Here’s johnny G!” proclaiming it set the wrong tone.
As a result Epsom replaced him with Martin Kelly.
itv were not happy at Epsom’s decision and stood by Chapman, itv’s contract states they can choose the announcer of the prize winner.
Clare Balding, newly appointed member of the Epsom board was one of those who disapproved of Chapman’s style.
I assume ITV knew the risks of signing a “Bit of a dick” when they took Chapman on. It was hardly a mystery. If you send a buffoon in, when decorum is required, you have to expect that there will be problems.
If Chapman wants to make the Classic horse race seem like the X-Factor, then even an imbecile can tell you it is not going to go down well with certain sections of the viewing audience.
Let them take it.
Mind you Clare Balding is one to talk. Almost blackmailing Sheikh Mohammed into an interview before tossing a cheap question in about the doping scandal. That was a classic, tawdry, ambush in the name of “Asking the question”
Some people had orgasms about Clare’s “Daring” question. Yet it was nothing more than low class journalism, putting forward a question that was never going to be answered, in some desperate attempt to be deemed cutting edge and probing. Pot and kettle stuff.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
Just as well for Kelly the winner didn’t have a French name, his attempts are the worst I’ve heard. True,Chapman misjudges the announcements very badly but Balding’s “my lords,ladies and gentlemen” stuff really made me shudder. Look out she’ll be putting forwarding the sour oboe tones of the ghastly Alice Arnold
ITV want Chapman to bring more theatre to the presentations. Well I guess he certainly added drama instead of the comedy he was aiming for with such a remark.
Why ITV want him to make presentations in the first place is beyond me. They hired him as a betting expert so stick to that and keep his crass presentation skills offscreen please.Total mistake to hire the git in the first place.
If you look at the other thread on ITV coverage, I think it’s obvious this isn’t the first controversy and I wonder if that Balding woman would have asked that question if Andrew had a dozen of the Sheik’s horses in his care.
I can understand that decision, as I find MC’s behavior and antics quite terrible.
Even at “normal” racing days it can be observed that many people he interviews feel bothered
and try to get away from him asap..Okay, I am a big fan of Chapman. I still think he is better interviewing conenctions, at least those who are normally media friendly. Him running around Windsor on a Monday night can be entertaining, better than Space Cadet Bob and Hayley Turner. He was brilliant for most part during the whole Epsom week with the “banter” with the bookies and his good chemistry with Brian Gleeson , who I also like (He got two great interviews with Ryan Moore and Ted Walsh during the Irish Guineas weekend) People won’t take to kindly to his comments during his interview with Mark Johnson. Yes, were were kinda rude but pretty bloody fair and accurate
But, the presentation of the trophy was a bit much. Too X Factory ,”Johnny G” was a little bit much. This is after all , a Classic , where they still wear top hats and tails. You could see Frankie trying to hurry him up, in fairness, he had to ride in the next race
“Balding woman would have asked that question if Andrew had a dozen of the Sheik’s horses in his care.”
Eh, no prizes for assuming that it would be a NO
I always tried to warm to Clair, never liked the hate that she got. I respect her for standing by Frankie when he got into a spot of bother with the auld cocaine (look, it happens)
But the Arcs of 2013 and 2014 were horrendous with her. The first one, the best thing about it was that she avoided by inches being run over by a carriage in the enclosure (ironic as she had just done a documentary about that silly woman’s right waun who threw herself in front of the King’s carriage at a Derby) and , the constant talk about Frankie Dettori not ridding Treve. Frankie had been jocked off but was injured. 2014 was just as bad as she kept reminding the audience that Treve was once ridden by Frankie – very disrespectful of Jarnet .Funny thing is, C4 failed to cover the Group 1 after the Arc, which Frankie won.
Her fawning over people like Cecil (however merited) etc can be a pain too.
Yikes, some terribly reactionary voices in this thread.
For one thing, don’t we all refer to Gosden as Gozzer or Johnny G? I know I do. I think it’s a bit stuffy from Epsom to object to something so minor, especially given the friendly relationship Chapman enjoys with the trainer. They introduced Poundland on the Hill (which looked brilliant, by the way!) in an effort to expand Epsom’s appeal to families and people without five holiday homes, but yet they stomp on a bit of playful fun.
Also – pardon me for asking – but weren’t we all glad that Clare Balding asked Sheikh Mohammed that question? It was the single most important issue in racing at the time, it was an ultra-rare chance to question the Sheikh directly and it was one of the few moments where a pre or post-race interview has ever been worth watching.
Also – pardon me for asking – but weren’t we all glad that Clare Balding asked Sheikh Mohammed that question? It was the single most important issue in racing at the time, it was an ultra-rare chance to question the Sheikh directly and it was one of the few moments where a pre or post-race interview has ever been worth watching.
What good came out of that? Zero.
We all knew she was setting a trap. It was embarrassing to watch. There was no answer. That was exactly what we all knew was going to happen.
Godolphin were still investigating and evaluating their position at that time. Why should they tell Clare Balding anything about that?
It was a classic myth that there was a question to be asked on the behalf of the public. The matter lay between the trainer and the authorities. The implication was that Sheikh Mohammed should somehow have his eye on every horse he owns on a 24/7 basis. It was pure chanty wrassling.
Clare Balding went about it like a bumbling amateur with all the subtlety of an elephant toting a sledgehammer.
Presumably Clare would be happy to see our Queen getting badgered in Dubai by some numb nuts arab journo, so long as “The question was asked”
What was worth watching about it? We knew there would be no answer, so the only attraction would have been for lovers of “Car Crash” TV.
That whole episode was a Myth as having any worth whatsoever.
Thanks for the good crack. Time for me to move on. Be lucky.
I watched Matt Chapman doing his bit at the presentation. I thought he was absolutely terrible – it is a presentation of the Oaks not the calling of the lottery on Saturday night. ITV should have used Francesca Cumani – who is presentable, eloquent and creditable.
Were I a bookie, I’d tell Chapman to go away but in less words. Can anyone imagine him in their local pub or betting shop?
About his best attribute is he stops you looking for the countless flaws in the whole team….maybe that’s why he’s there.
I don’t like Matt Chapman’s style or ITV’s coverage. However, it is ITV’s choice to (among other things) ‘bring more theatre to major-race presentations’, they have paid a lot of money to racing for the privilege, and Epsom is said to be one of the two courses (Ascot the other) who exerted biggest pressure for a change from C4 due to dramatically falling viewing audiences.
I suspect the banishment of Chapman on Saturday to be the product of the usual Flat snobbery. Whether that is the case or not (and presumably bang goes ITV advertising their summer entertainment shows on the sides of the carriages in the royal processions the week after next!) Epsom/Ascot cannot have their cake and eat it. If ITV are denied taking the approach they wish to and viewing figures do not show a sustained increase then racing will receive a lot less money/exposure when the broadcast contract is next up for renewal.
Whether you think so or not , Matt Chapman bases his whole on screen persona on John McCririck’s over the top act . However , McCririck , for all his faults , knew when to rein it in a bit – and was certainly more mindful of the accepted unwritten rules of decorum .
The trouble with Chapman is that he forgets himself and is oft to get carried away ; whether with the bombast or his predilection to hyperbole .
I noticed during the Oaks awards ceremony that even the amiable and tolerant ( on screen at least ) Frankie Dettori had to tell Chapman to hurry it up and stop milking it , before finally introducing the winning jockey .
In short , you need to rein it in a bit Chappers and ditch the John McCririck tribute act . Big Mac was so much better at performing that gig anyway .
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
I think the presentations themselves could do with a makeover. They are too drawn out and I don’t think they make for great viewing.
Instead of owner, trainer, jockey and sometimes groom, why not just one trophy presentation to winning connections (they can dish out the rest of the prizes after).Bit of a contradiction from the racecourse removing Chapman for lowering standards when at the same time they weren’t slow about lowering standards when the Poundland cheque book opened
I think the presentations themselves could do with a makeover. They are too drawn out and I don’t think they make for great viewing.
Instead of owner, trainer, jockey and sometimes groom, why not just one trophy presentation to winning connections (they can dish out the rest of the prizes after).I respectfully disagree here. I think all the connections – from the owner right down to the groom – deserve their moment in the spotlight and individual recognition. At the end of day winning Classics is what it’s all about, and if we can’t have a bit of fanfare about that what can we have it for? I think to rob the people who dedicate so much of their lives to the sport of their moment of glory, for the sake of ‘better television,’ would be a cheap act.
Why ITV want him to make presentations in the first place is beyond me. They hired him as a betting expert so stick to that and keep his crass presentation skills offscreen please.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.