- This topic has 864 replies, 161 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
You would have to think that Clare Balding would not make any decision about switching to CH4 racing until after the Olympics. While she may have a genuine love of horse racing, it is barely a drop in the ocean compared to the Games.
Presumably Sunset and Vine (of course the current producers of BBC racing) will be bidding for the contract for 2013.
It could be an even bigger change than we’d all anticipated.
Yes, no doubt with the help of researchers, she can paint a broad picture. If that kind of thing impresses you, fair enough but I like a little meat on the bones. If she were left to analyse a race by herself it would be laughable. In my opinion a racing presenter should have both presenting and analytical skills – I can’t see the point in paying ‘big money’ for half the package.
I would have to disagree with you Stilvi.
She is a very competent race reader – she picked up on Maurice Linehan’s ride on Palace Jester at Chepstow immediately, when it wasn’t that clear and certainly before any of the "professional" race readers picked up on it.
She is also a more than competent commentator – I recall a meeting where the line from the commentary box dropped and she picked up the commentary flawlessly.
By and large I have to agree with stilvi, although she seems to be everyone’s fav I’ve never been a fan of Clare Balding’s and think she is vastly overrated, can’t pass an opinion on her ability covering other sports but at times I’ve been surprised by her lack of knowledge of horse racing.
Give me Lydia Hislop anyday.A lot of people in the BBC and Channel 4 racing teams are going to be quaking in their boots and fearing the axe.
Most of the BBC team will be out of their jobs, although they all have lucrative other sources of income, through working for other parts of the media or through having other racing interests.
Some of the Channel 4 team might be fearing the chop but the likely extra work brought by the new meetings to be covered might actually mean that they will be more secure, rather than the other way round.
Just because plenty of people are speculating that Channel 4 might take on Clare Balding, there is no reason to think that the powers-that-be there will automatically think the same. They might be quite happy with their presenting teams and not want her.
It looks likely from the Racing Post today that the BBC radio coverage will remain after the loss of the television coverage.
The Cheltenham radio coverage has been praised as excellent.
The report says: "Special mention should be made of BBC Radio 5’s fantastic Cheltenham coverage. From the clean production to the informative and incisive on-course reporting to John Hunt’s stirring commentaries, the team perfectly conveyed the wonderful atmosphere and excitement of the festival."The decision to stop broadcasting racing was made collectively in the hours after last year’s Grand National. At the top of tiers upon tiers of ‘management’ at the BBC there are people on extraordinary salaries, who live in North London and are left-wing in that Post Blair Mandelson way of having almost pop star wealth but reading the Guardian and believing in ‘social democracy’ (as long as they get to live in Dartmouth Park away from all the graffiti, skunk and stabbings).
Yes, I have no written proof, but I can assure each and every one of you that last April they all thought more or less the same thing: ‘what have we got here: sport of kings; poor dumb animals being whipped; stuffy old sport we’re not interested in; queen mother liked it; not edgy; youth not interested; virtually no non-white people involved (BBC types don’t visit betting shops); tweed; Harriet Harman doesn’t like it; ANIMAL RIGHTS ACTIVISTS HATE IT (must be bad, then) we’ll look good at North London dinner parties if we stop showing it.
‘OK Let’s stop showing it.’This is a huge nail in the coffin of the British Turf. Make no mistake. Channel 5 next; then cable.
At least there aren’t any conspiracy theorists on here driven by irrational political agendas.
Politicians of any hue, and those who express strong political opinions, should be lined up against the wall and shot!
Just because I criticise the left you should not think that I am a swivelled-eyed rightwing maniac. Everyone in this country has been trained by pop culture to do this but it’s an intellectually incoherent thing to do.
Let’s unpack what you are saying: Conspiracy theory? I dislike conspiracy theories but let us understand what they are: they offer radically different explanations about major episodes in history: man didn’t land on the moon; Mossad was responsible for 9/11; the world is run by lizards in disguise etc.
My saying that the BBC wanted to get rid of racing because it doesn’t suit its political agenda is hardly radical: it is a matter of public record (the BBC’s own controllers, some of its presenters and its own internal inquiry have all concluded it is institutionally biased to a metropolitan liberal-left consensus, an agenda which is a zillion miles away from racing and most of its fans. What I was offering was an opinion based on established fact. Conspiracy theories don’t do that, there isn’t a shred of evidence to suggest the world is run by lizards, but there is more than a shred of evidence as to why the BBC wanted shot of racing.
Is Sir Peter O’Sullevan a conspiracy theorist when he said in yesterday’s Post that there was ‘no will’ to keep racing at the BBC?
Incidentally, I found it funny in Lee Mottershead’s comment peice when he said ‘racing has kicked away the BBC’ Other way round, old son, other way round.
Reading what the Channel Four bloke said made me wonder if maybe some good could come out of the disaster. A really fresh approach may help turn the sport round. I mean poker really took off among the young in the past decade. Maybe horses will.As Drone quite rightly pointed out on another thread, what right have a very small minority to expect a publicly funded network to pay over the odds to cover something which by its very nature costs a huge amount to produce.
While there may have been some degree of disinheritance by the hierarchy away from the sport and what it represents to the public consciousness, the fact is that horse racing represents a poor return on investment. In the current economic climate horse racing has to accept its expendability.
Highlighting the growth of poker (as if it were a good thing for society?) merely shows why horse racing is moribund. Poker is a game where any player can win any hand, the poorest players can beat the best on occasions. It is a betting medium where the punter feels they have more knowledge of what is happening and the percentages are readily available. Even FOBTs offer the gambler more certainty than a horse race.
I find it surprising the number of people on here who regularly knock the sport.
Where is the evidence that the BBC "would have to pay well over the odds to cover something that by it’s very nature costs a huge amount to produce"?
It’s not my understanding and the amount was described as relatively "peanuts" on BBC Breakfast with what they spend on other things.Big salaries for the likes of Forsyth, Ross, Hansen, Lineker and many more, are they all justified?
Some drama costs an absolute fortune to produce, is that always justified?The Grand National brought the country together with very large viewing figures.
I think you’ll find the reason racing will no longer be on the BBC is the will of the people in charge there not the prohibitive cost.Some of the responses on the BBC Message Boards say it all really.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mbpointsofview … ad=8335561
A big proportion of the viewing public are ignorant about horses & racing, the BBC has messed up in a very public way firstly running a One Show series on McKinley, including a web cam in his stable for him to die in the National (running loose & colliding aside) & their coverage of "dead horses" last year. This brought the black side of the sport into millions of homes & then they were fuelled by Animal Aid supporting Daily Mail.
Sadly many of these people are not aware Animal Aid is not a welfare organisation & wants the wholesale elimination of all companion animals.Clare Balding is apparently 1-4 to be presenting some of Channel 4’s coverage next year and 5-2 not to be doing so.
Meanwhile, Musselburgh seem to be panicking about making sure they do not lose their plum Channel 4 slot on Derby Day next year.
The course will be in action on Derby Day this year, when the BBC cover the Epsom meeting, and the Scottish meeting will be on Channel 4 but Musselburgh are keen to bump up the prestige of their key Flat race day next year.
Sounds like Musselburgh are trying to make a pre-emptive strike to avoid being squeezed out next year when Channel 4 cover the Derby. Bosses want to make it the most valuable Flat race ever run there, if not in Scotland as a whole, to ensure continued TV coverage.
With the Scoop 6 to be considered, Musselburgh will almost certainly be covered on Channel 4 next year but will probably get one or two races at the most televised at that meeting next year, with probably no presenter there.
Some of the other smaller courses are also going to get squeezed out by the extra Channel 4 commitments on new days, not to mention some of the other less prestigious days at bigger courses.I for one will be delighted to see the end that annoying bloke James Sherwood who comments on the fashion at Ascot.
Channel 4 irritate me with the fact the screen is almost always obscured by betting information, I don’t want to know the odds I want to see the horses.
If I were a serious gambler I would have the computer on with an exchange up on the screen.
I for one will be delighted to see the end that annoying bloke James Sherwood who comments on the fashion at Ascot.
Ironically, James Sherwood had already fallen out with the BBC and wasn’t on last year’s Royal Ascot. He apparently had a bit of a disagreement with a leading member of the BBC team, rumoured to be Clare Balding, and made his feelings very clear on his own website at the time. It was a bit of a story at the time.
Sadly, I fear that the foxy Suzi Perry, the BBC’s fashion expert for the last few years, will also be lost to viewers.
I still remember my Royal Ascot viewing the previous year being livened up by the "naughty wind" blowing her dress up, exposing her cheeky black knickers. I noticed last week, by accident of course, that a clip of it is on YouTube…..By and large I have to agree with stilvi, although she seems to be everyone’s fav I’ve never been a fan of Clare Balding’s and think she is vastly overrated, can’t pass an opinion on her ability covering other sports but at times I’ve been surprised by her lack of knowledge of horse racing.
Give me Lydia Hislop anyday.Has Lydia ever confirmed why she left the BBC? Personally, I always wondered whether she really wanted to be playing second fiddle to Balding. Yes, she is miles better and she was probably well aware of it.
Has Lydia ever confirmed why she left the BBC?
My understanding at the the time was that there were tensions between her and some of the rest of the team, thought to include Clare Balding, over the sometimes brusque and assertive interviews Lydia had conducted with trainers and jockeys, especially after races. These had, I understood, caused some unhappiness with her performance and it was considered that a few feathers had been unnecessarily ruffled.
It was my understanding that Lydia’s role and general time on screen was watered down because of this, supposedly causing further ill-feeling.
I stress that this was how it I remember it being discussed at the time and do not know whether this was actually the case.Interesting article in the Guardian about the impact of the switch of the Grand National from the BBC to Channel 4 from next year.
—————————————————————————Grand National’s status may well start to slip after split from BBC
Aintree’s new partner Channel 4 will freshen up Grand National coverage in 2013 but the TV audience will be smaller than the one on BBC
It will not be as memorable as Red Rum, Aldaniti, the void race or the bomb scare, but the moment when the last OB truck pulls away from Aintree this weekend will be a significant one in Grand National history. The race’s relationship with the BBC is one that has, for better and for worse, in sickness and more recently in health, endured for half a century. Now, with scarcely a backward glance, they are about to go their separate ways.
There are those in racing who will say "so what", and others who will mutter "good riddance", but then, few separations are entirely amicable. The National is still on a mainstream station and Channel 4, its new partner, is younger than the old one and has more money to spend. Channel 4 has also been a good friend to racing when, in recent years, the BBC seemed to notice only the wrinkles. Why persevere with a relationship when so much of the old spark has gone?
These are all fair points to make in favour of the decision to award Channel 4 a monopoly on terrestrial racing coverage from 2013, but when it comes to the sport’s most famous event, my suspicion is that it is the National that will eventually look back on the split with the BBC with lingering regret. It has been a British sporting institution for the better part of two centuries, but this could be the moment when its status starts to slip.
This is not intended as a slur on Channel 4, which may well freshen up the National coverage in 2013 and find interesting new ways to convey the drama of the race to the viewing public. The problem, though, is that the viewing public is likely to be significantly smaller on C4 than it is on the BBC, and when it comes to a race which is simply a spectacle for people to bet on, the audience is all-important. The slick promo for the BBC’s coverage of the Boat Race, another venerable sporting oddity, offered a good example of what the BBC can do for an event that Channel 4 cannot.
It has nothing to do with the quality of the promotional video, since there are many clever and creative people working for C4, too. What the BBC has, though, is an extensive list of programmes with five million viewers or more, who can be reminded, both before and afterwards, about what is happening at the weekend. Channel 4, quite simply, does not. In the most recent week for which the BARB figures are available, its top-rated programme – Big Fat Gypsy Weddings – attracted 5.3m viewers, and the second-best had 3.5m. In the same week, the BBC’s entire top 10 came out ahead, with figures ranging from 9.9m down to 5.5m.
The Grand National is likely to lose viewers when it moves to Channel 4 because, in effect, no one has reminded them that it is on. Precisely how many is anyone’s guess until the exact figures arrive next April, but a drop from about eight million on the BBC to six million or fewer on C4 would not be a huge surprise. And over time, that will represent a great many people who are losing their only annual contact with racing, and countless children who will not get their introduction to racing and betting via a few pennies each-way on the National.
Just how much of a setback that would be for racing as a whole is another argument, not least if, like me, you feel that the National can be a dubious ambassador for the wider sport. The risk that a horse will suffer a fatal injury is significantly higher in the National than in any other race, but it is the only one that many people see all year. As a result they assume that it is representative of all racing, when nothing could be further from the truth.
Last year’s renewal was an unusually traumatic one, with two horses killed during the race and overhead shots of bypassed fences to ram the point home. Over the past 15 years, though, the statistics show that the chance of a fatal injury in the National is odds-against, and there is no reason to think that it will not remain that way.
Over time, the National has become a better advertisement for racing, and though it is still an unrepresentative point of contact between the sport and the British public, it is the only one we have. For one more year, at least.——————————————————————————
Here’s just a taste of things to come when Channel 4 cover next year’s Grand National, courtesy of another forum, where there have already been plenty of interesting views. Couldn’t help smiling at this spot-on comment:
"Imagine Tanya telling the nation about how many scoop 6 tickets are still running on the national??
most people watching wont know what each way is, let alone a scoop 6!!"Clare Balding has been spotted limbering up in the desert for life after BBC Racing, she’s even considering a name change – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJDrLVAjgd8
Completely disagree with the Guardian article.
If switching to C4 means fewer viewers watch the Grand National then all the better – there is no way the Grand National should be racings flagship event in the eyes of the general public.
Despite it being my earliest racing memory, Nicholas Silver winning in 1961, I have, in recent years, begun to fall out of love with the race – last year being the straw which broke the camels back.
Personally I would not be perturbed if the National were to be consigned to the history books, it is an anachronistic race and the attrition race, when compared to other NH contests is, in my view, unacceptably high.
I realise others will hold contrary views but for me enough is enough.
Move the Cheltenham Gold Cup to a Saturday and make that the televisual focus of National Hunt racing.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.