- This topic has 34 replies, 29 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
With all the threads and hypothesis on why C4’s viewing figures are falling, just started to watch a recording from yesterday and yet again can pick Rishi as one of the major factors.
He actually has a horrible voice for TV and is in the Tanya bracket. Quite why he is considered as an anchor, he must be very good friends with the presenters is all I can say.
From who’s available, I’d rather have Jim McGrath as the anchor.As I watch on, from what should be a very good racing day’s programme is being made very un-interesting by Pershad.
Make a change here at least C4, though other changes on broadcaster personalities need to be made as well.
We don’t need perfection in interview skills, the programme just needs characters rather than in some cases quite boring people.Would disagree. Think he know comes across very well (having improved considerably) and is a positive for C4.
Whether he’s any good at his job is not important to Ch4. He ticks an important PC box that none of the others do and that’s all that matters.
....and you've got to look a long way back for anything else.
Think of TV presenters as a tin of Roses chocolates.
Sure, you may wish it didn’t contain any Brazilian Darkness or Coffee Escapes, but if each tin didn’t contain a certain proportion of each variety there would be a complaint from some PC nutter with the accompanying hysterical over reaction.
This would be closely followed by various politicians (usually Labour) scrabbling to jump aboard the out of control PC bandwagon.
....and you've got to look a long way back for anything else.
Whether he’s any good at his job is not important to Ch4. He ticks an important PC box that none of the others do and that’s all that matters.
Ticks an invisible box that the ‘powers’ think is important but the humble viewers don’t give a monkeys about
When the BBC pounced on Persad following a brief and entirely unconvincing career on Attheraces, I think it would be accurate to assume that his ethnicity played a part.
The only reason I hold this view is that he was such a poor presenter at the time, it was hard to fathom any rational explanation for such a stellar move.
Having acquired this ‘talent’, the Beeb seemed to be unsure of what to with him, farming him out to a plethora of sports that he seemed ever-so-slightly uncomfortable with (although Tuesday afternoons at the indoor bowls was riveting).
However, I think this at least gave him a thorough grounding in TV presenting and I now find him polished, passably knowledgable and extremely personable. These are all good qualities for an anchor.
He may have benefited from a modicum of positive discrimination early in his career, but he has clearly worked at the business since (especially in racing, which is his forte) and he’s entitled to plenty of credit for that.
Mike
…racing, which is his forte..
If racing is his strong point, he must be absolutely woeful at everything else.
I’ll leave the condescending and slightly racist sounding stuff to others but I also don’t think Rishi is anchor material for a big day’s racing but I dont think bringing his ethnicity into it is is anyway helpful or indeed acceptable.
In any case his overall contribution is considerably better than Mick Fitzgerald for example.
The programme flounders for me without McGrath and Cunningham working together providing their generally excellent insight into horses form and the show would benefit greatly from not sodding about with the replays of archive races in particular……on Eclipse day there were any amount of brilliant previous Eclipse finishes shown but instead of showing the final 2 furlongs with the proper commentary we had silly effects and loud music and winners going past the post….really frustrating and doing nothing to promote the sport.
I’ll leave the condescending and slightly racist sounding stuff to others but I also don’t think Rishi is anchor material for a big day’s racing but I dont think bringing his ethnicity into it is is anyway helpful or indeed acceptable.
.
Isn’t giving someone a job because of their ethnicity racist? Pointing out that that may be the case isn’t racist. It may be a misinformed and / or ignorant view, possibly, but it’s nothing more than that.
Personally I don’t mind Rishi Persad. There are better presenters out there but there are some that are a damn sight worse as well. Mick Fitzgerald for one is absolutely awful yet features constantly. Tom Lee has all the charisma of a table leg. Emma Spencer is eye candy nothing more. Tanya is totally unnatural in front of the camera.
Channel 4 has bigger problems than Rishi Persad.
IBR – you are quite right. C4 will be the last one’s holding the baby, British racing is heading downhill at quite a rapid rate.
Mick Fitzgerald for one is absolutely awful
He certainly isn’t ‘better than sex’ that’s for sure……….
Blackbeard to conquer the World
I have never liked Rishi – and I find his interviewing of those who have suffered bereavement excruciatingly painful i.e. Richard Hills. Yes I appreciate he has the producers in his ear saying things but his grasp of how to interview is appalling still. And when he’s on Interview the Jockey duty, he trots out "And how did that feel?" every time. He should have a job based on his ability not his ethnicity.
Emma Spencer I think is fine. She’s knowledgeable and a whole lot better now Mike Cattermole is out of the way – I like MC a lot but their constant flirting wasn’t good TV.
Of the others GC & JMcG make a good team. I don’t miss Francome at all – he was good for a long time but in the latter years he just looked at everything as though it was a 3m chaser physically when appraising the runners. Tarnya has improved, knows her job but is still awkward in front of camera.
Nick Luck is by far the best anchor, IMO. And then they wheel out the National Treasure for high days and holidays.
What I would like to see is less chat and more horses pre-race. Why can’t they show the pictures and have them talking in the background instead of this ridiculous "Lets Interview a Celebrity who happens to be here just to appease one viewer who has casually channel hopped"
Wheeling out Clare for just the big meetings just undermines the whole CH4 set up. If she was that important she’d be the weekly anchor. Nick Luck is quite frankly just boring. The Emma and Cat show was fine (just see how ratings have plummeted) horse racing was broadcast as a sport for everyone. Emma eys candy yes, Cat a professional.
…racing, which is his forte..
If racing is his strong point, he must be absolutely woeful at everything else.
It certainly isn’t snooker.
I’ve been reading up on how TV ratings are compiled. What a joke.
It’s no wonder the programme has gone so far downhill. It is basically trying to appeal to a very limited number of households who volunteered to have a special monitoring device installed.
So these are the asreholes who watch Big Brother, ensuring that it continues to be screened. Why would anyone who watches crud like that be interested in racing?
I liked Fitz at first but he’s becoming more and more a caricature of himself. Emma is getting better all the time. She is knowledgeable and I agree she is better without Cat. To this beholder’s eyes she isn’t really candy and nor should she have to be be. Clare isn’t eye candy either (and I don’t think she would want to be) but she is very good. I just want people who are good at the job. McGrath is definitely good. Cunningham will get better as he relaxes more with experience.
Nick Luck is a good presenter but the problem I have with him is my aversion to the public school chappie type. But that’s my problem, not his. I prefer Cattermole in that respect as he doesn’t come across that way. But keep him and Emma well apart.
Rishi Persad. Aarrgh. The only good thing about him is the way Aidan O’Brien always calls him Listen Ritchie.
Tanya is, I understand, a production secretary so I can see why she’s there but she is still awkward, after all these years, in front of the camera.
I have a rule about tv presenters : that is, if said presenter makes for uncomfortable viewing because of stuttering, looking awkward, fumbling with papers, exhibiting nerves or being tongue-tied, then that tv presenter should not be a tv presenter or interviewer.
Whereas Rishi Persad is quite competent at his job, and Mick Fitzgerald getting steadily better week by week, I’m afraid to say Tanya Stevenson remains a complete fish out of water.
Her fumbling, tongue-tied style makes for uneasy viewing ; at times I actually cringe in embarrassment for her, and also feel for her. She must have some very close friends in the CH4 Racing production team. How else can you explain her longevity in a job which she is not suited or comfortable.
Say what you like about John McCririck but he was a consummate professional in front of the camera – whether his style appealed to you or not.
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.