- This topic has 97 replies, 36 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I cannot pretend that I always agree with what they say or their overall personalities, but they used to have a positive demeanour, which has now disappeared.
A positive demeanour is not allowed in racing at the moment. You must be anti everything. Our sport’s very existence depends on it apparently.
I have to put my hand up here and say that I enjoy the Morning Line and think it is good programme especially for the likes of me who likes the game but does not take it too seriously. I happen to like John McCririck and Derek Thompson and rate Alice Plunkett, Mike Cattermole and Alistair Down highly. I am not Matt Dawson’s biggest fan but he is a former England rugby player and as a matter of principled, bloody minded Scottishness I don’t like them, however if it is something different the so what.
I liked the bit with Kim Bailey and the Guest Test it is just the thing for a Saturday morning. A nice gentle, but not too serious wander through the great sport, then down to the shop for the papers (of off to catch the train to the point to point as next Saturday) and then back for Saturday Kitchen, lunch and the C$ racing followed by Flog it and a good book. Lovely.
"They will do everything bar talk about horses"…
that was my fathers critique of the Morning Line 20 years ago and, in my view, it remains valid. In those days there was 4 or 5 income driven diversions, these have mostly gone but they still don’t seem to realise the rich source the form book (backed by video) gives them. Please focus on this
Some improvements but essentially the horses should be at the centre of the programme, they should have the video evidence to start with and then add expert views with the aim of constructing a debate and not simply comments that produce a quick list and then a selection from about 6 people.
Once the viewer understands the horses and their form, a personal view soon follows (that would appear to be a hard wired part of human nature if the last few thousand years are any guide) and then the betting guides and subtelty should follow.Meet the new ML
Same as the old MLAs others have said little real change. Graphics a bit tacky and seemed to have been lifted from Question of Sport c. 1987…
Meet the new ML
Same as the old ML…Come on, the experts are on the hosts left now and not to the right.
- Total Posts 17716
Lotta people who don’t like the show, or claim they don’t, watch it an awful lot. How odd!!!
The production values were astonishingly poor. Why? Isn’t the show sponsored by the Maktoum family and supported by a Levy payment?
The muffled, ill positioned microphones, the Super 8 picture quality, the cereal box and sticky back plastic set, the cramped sofas, the crayon and stencil cutaways – complete with cardinal-sin graphics and colour schemes (sky blue?) The uncharacteristically nervous presenters shoehorned onto an old sofa like students at a bedsit pot party. Only the wry, knowing, reincarnated Kim Bailey saved the show from being, well, a bit
embarrassing
.
Is Matt Bannister still around?
I watched it in my hotel room in Doncaster for the first time since I was last in Doncaster about 4 years ago.
They told me absolutely nothing about the day’s racing, Cheltenham was covered briefly, mainly over would they or wouldn’t they, Doncaster (albeit abandoned later) nothing at all.
They seemed concerned with what went on in the preceding week, which it pointless as it had no bearings on today’s racing. And they talk about Pricewise as if he is the be and end all in tipping.
It has a long way to go to compare with Mark Your Card and it will proably be another 4 years or so before I tune in again.
The Morning Line is one of the biggest missed opportunities on television.
It has so many things wrong with it that it would be easier to say what it does right.
If (big ‘if’) the show’s going to be worth watching the remedy’s a simple choice:
1. Change the dead-beat production team, or;
2. Put the production team’s pay on a (viewing figures:) results basis 100%, or;
3. Move it to radio ….. at least it would offend less.Agree with comments above, and the question mark has to centre on why have the changes been made? In the same ilk as racing for change, they must be of the belief, that they need to aim to a new demographic, when it should be on the contrary. Irrespective of the production, personnel and the racing, the same, loyal, hard-nosed punters will tune in every 8am, every Saturday, and instead of focusing on the viewers they don’t have, focus on the ones they do. If their efforts instead of ‘jazzing up’ their programme, was to focus on the strong elements of the show, respected people from the racing world, a strong video library, extensive knowledge on breeding, racing, trainers, owners, jockeys etc, the show would be a tremendous success. Instead, the show is ‘dumbed down’ and diluted, to appeal to the mainstream.
"Accentuate the positives, hide the negatives". The show would be an unparalleled success if on the radio instead, but alas.
- Total Posts 17716
Agree with comments above, and the question mark has to centre on why have the changes been made? In the same ilk as racing for change, they must be of the belief, that they need to aim to a new demographic, when it should be on the contrary. Irrespective of the production, personnel and the racing, the same, loyal, hard-nosed punters will tune in every 8am, every Saturday, and instead of focusing on the viewers they don’t have, focus on the ones they do. If their efforts instead of ‘jazzing up’ their programme, was to focus on the strong elements of the show, respected people from the racing world, a strong video library, extensive knowledge on breeding, racing, trainers, owners, jockeys etc, the shoe would be a tremendous success. Instead, the show is ‘dumbed down’ and diluted, to appeal to the mainstream.
Well said, JJM – though your summation of TML’s ills come eerily close to what’s also happened on this forum.
Oh great, Phillip Davies MP?
**OFF**
To be fair to Mr Davies (if I really must), I did not know he had an interest in racing and he may have had some interesting things to say. But seeing as this is the fella who the Daily Mail and Express turn to when they need an MP to agree with their latest "it’s peecee gone maaaadddd!" rubbish, then I cannot watch. To quote the excellent Tabloidwatch website, he is "A rent-a-quote idiot who has never knowingly said anything meaningful or interesting"
He is an offensive cretin who is on record as failing to understand why ‘blacking up’ may be offensive; he has called measures to tackle homophobic bullying as ‘barmy nonsense’; and let us not forget that his dad is Peter Davies, the English Democrat mayor of Doncaster, responsible for this performance here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLrMXsS4rwA
Yes, he thinks anyone who opposes cutting translation services is ‘an affront to democracy’.
Anyway, rant over. I dislike the fella and all he stands for, and I don’t want him on my racing coverage. I’d rather have Matt Dawson.
Instead of focusing on attracting new viewers they ought to remember why people watch it. Where was the in depth analysis of todays racing…
I dont know. Lets see how it goes but i wont be tuning in just to watch pointless ‘guest tests’ and ‘guides to betting’…That was my first opportunity to see the new show and I think they’ve achieved the seemingly impossible and actually made it worse. McGrath’s analysis apart, it’s garbage. Will stick solely to the satellite channels in future.
And Tanya’s hairdo reminds me of the Friends episode where Monica got a Dudley Moore rather than a Demi Moore. Maybe some enterprising C4 exec will show that episode after next week’s show.
Ouch!
It’s getting there, they’ve learnt a few lessons from last week’s slightly forced jollity.
Admittedly, today’s guest was a bit of a twonk, but the programme is a huge improvement on the old Morning Line. Contrary to what some crusty old posters feared, the Matt Dawson segment didn’t appear to result in the end of civilisation as we know it.
While you couldn’t quite say it’s the last word in sports magazine broadcasting, it’s actually quite watchable now, something I haven’t been able to say for many years.
It was my misfortune to watch the show today and have to agree thay have made it worse:
Seeing Nick Luck in his jeans is just wrong,
I don’t know what Tanya has done to her hair,
What was the point in having the MP on today’s show?
Where were the previews of today’s racing apart from the lame preview of the Scilly Isles chase?
Mac and Tanya’s guide to betting is embarrasing and has to be dropped.
Tanya’s "Betting Pointers" or whatever its called is unnescessary in its current format.
As soon as I saw that Matt Dawson was on the show I turned over immediately.Overall I just don’t know who this dumbed-down show is aimed at anymore, its certainly not for serious racing people.
- Total Posts 17716
It’s abysmal!
Anyone who doesn’t know how to work the return out on a 1 to 2 shot never ought to be allowed money, let alone putting it on horses, and Matt Dawson’s piece with Paul Nicholl’s told us nothing other than PN gets up early, works hard, and has a lot of horses.
What little gravitas the programme ever had is now diluted down to a few meaningless vignettes, seemingly filmed in a hurry in someone’s shed.
Come back John Rickman – all is forgiven.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.