BBC athletics

The commentry on the BBC AARGH. Last night was so bad I turned the sound off.

It was awful wasn't it. I mean, whatsisname and Cram were ok, but Jonathan Edwards and Colin Jackson were just embarrassing. Like they'd never met, never seen any athletics and weren't really interested.

Cram has tunred out to be the jewel in the crown - but have to agree can't see the point of either Edwards or Colin jackson

Wait until you have the whole set together, Edwards, Jackson, Lewis, Irvin and Inverdale. Sod the athletics action,  these people have talking to do and damn it they are going to talk. Oh for the days when all you had was a seamless succession of events with just Cram like commentary, no superflous presenters and no mindless post race interviews.

Well RicF in a world where a good percentage of the population cant go outside without headphones playing, do you really think that the watching public can do with out a commentary? Its drowns out that silence that otherwise may be filled with your own thoughts.

Dangerous things happen when people are left with their own thoughts. Best leave it alone you subversive.

I am not sure who said it but did one of them say ( these people have come to watch a race )  or was I delusional by then.

Well, expanding on my subversive antics, remember when Channel 4 had a go at athletics. They spent so much of the program with 'build ups' and post event analy sis. That out of a 60 minute broadcast only 7 minutes were made up of actual action.

Ah, Channel 4 who could forget, "Oscar Pistorius, the fastest man on no legs", "the weather is great in the studio, Jessica Ennis, Goodnight."

The coverage of athletics is probably like it is because the producers and directors are bored out of their expansive minds by it. They can't imagine anyone apart from athletics fans being remotely interested in the subject because they will have asked themselves, 'what can we do with this?, we can't eat it, drink it, sniff it up our nose or f it, so what then? Their jaded cynical journo minds simply adopt the default setting of controversy and sensationalism. Its why sprints are their thing, they don't have 30 mins mins of air time wasted by inconvienient honest performance.

RicF ohh controversial. Are you saying that  the 100 metres is the "Opium of the Masses". "The Fools Gold"?

No?

Well i will then offer up a small prayer;

"Dear up there somewhere, can you stop Mr Bolt from doing his pointy finger thing during the Olympics. Amen Ps Dont strike him dead or anything though. I know what your like. Over reacting and all. Amen again

Bolt get my vote for declaring that the best runner in the world is in fact the distance runner Bekele.

I loved watching the Diamond Legue on BBC interactive tonight - a great alternative t Saturday night telly. I'd rather have any coverage of athletics on TV rather than 0% even if it means naff presenters.

RicF - I think you'll find that outside the Olympics it's only athletic fans that watch athletics on TVon a regular basis rather than the glory 100m record seeking audience that the advertising gurus are after. Having naff presenters is a small price to pay to actually see it on TV.  I'd rather have a former athlete on there than some numpty bimbo.

knight rider wrote (see)

 

RicF - I think you'll find that outside the Olympics it's only athletic fans that watch athletics on TVon a regular basis rather than the glory 100m record seeking audience that the advertising gurus are after. Having naff presenters is a small price to pay to actually see it on TV.  I'd rather have a former athlete on there than some numpty bimbo.

I don't mind presenters but I do get fed up of the amount of time they spend talking about nothing while the majority of events get nothing more than a 'oh, the 10,000m, here's the last 2 laps, now where were we?' That's the problem with BBC athletics, huge amounts of time are dedicated to chat and interviews which means less coverage of actual athletics. 100m? 20 to 25mins coverage typical.

Athletics can't be an easy sport to cover on TV, as there are so many individual events taking place over a relatively long period.

Like Knight Rider, I'm glad when it does get covered fairly extensively on BBC or Eurosport, even if I do get nostalgic for the "good old days" of Coleman and Pickering !

Looking at other sports, I think the way ITV 4 covers cycling and especially the Tour de France is exemplary in the way it caters for casual viewers and hardcore cycling fans and I also enjoy their coverage of the Isle of Man TT's - even though I know absolutely nothing about motor cycle racing and it seems pretty squarely aimed at "those in the know".

I think the BBC's problem with athletics coverage is they aren't sure whether to cater for knowledgable fans or try to get casual viewers interested and they end up pleasing neither.

David Jones gets it in one. They are trying to be all things to all men. At some point you have to say, this is athletics, its lots of sports that take time to go from the heats stages to final competition. You dont have to shield the casual viewer by making out its all 10second bursts of speed. Its similar to test Cricket in that is a long game. I don't watch or have any interest in it, but the idea that there are many people who will spend days watching a test match is comforting.It says we still value concentration, contemplation and the rejection of instant gratifiction.

David Jones 39 wrote (see)

 

 

I think the BBC's problem with athletics coverage is they aren't sure whether to cater for knowledgable fans or try to get casual viewers interested and they end up pleasing neither.

Exactly!

More of the same? hope not.