C4 ratings catastrophe for The Derby

H

harry

At the Start
Joined
Apr 16, 2005
Messages
5,694
Another massive downturn reported in the RP today.

How can Racing improve its popularity to newbies?

I love Racing but I fast forward all the talk with Cunningham etc because it's boring. Big Mac was different and even though he was a joke, he made people watch.

Frankie took racing to the mainstream but with all due respect, Ryan Moore, Joseph O'Brien and even AP are not in the same league.

Feels like Déjà Vu this one :confused:
 
Last edited:
C4 Racing is doing a good job of not attracting new viewers and alienating old ones. It’s a real shame. It’s not that most of them are bad at what they do, but none of them are that good either. I can't remember the last time I bothered to watch Morningline, it became quite poor.
 
I can't believe how in a world where marketing is being shoved down every sports' throats that Racing can get it so spectacularly wrong?

The Betting Shops have fake racing and machines and promote other sports. Racing could be off the radar in a few years.

Cricket has lead the way with T20 and even that needs to improve but they are doing it.
 
Last edited:
The problem is all the presenters channel 4 have now talk like they have a silver spoon stuck up their jacksey. Other than Mick Fitzgerald, there is no-one on there that the everyday punter can relate to, nor who offers any real insight or knowledge. They are worse guessers than me!

Why oh why they brought Raj perwhatsit over from BBC (quota perhaps), he doesn't have a clue what he is talking about and has no personality. They need to change it around again and have far more interesting interviews otherwise morning line will finish soon.
 
I think it is a better programme than before but evidently its much drier style does not appeal to many judging by falling viewing figures.
 
A more common man approach would suit it better imo. There just seems to be no chemistry between any of the hosting party.

I enjoy RTE's coverage bar Tracy Piggott.

Walsh and Hall play off each other very well Hall has a strong knowledge of bloodstock and Walsh is the entertainment part

CH4 are a bunch of bores, they don't appeal to me as a racing fan, and have no magnetism to attract new viewers
 
Is it more not a case of racing failing to attract new followers rather than Channel 4? I cannot believe people aren't tuning in because McCririck and Thommo aren't on it before. I would think that people are more sick of seeing 2/3 runner races on the TV in the Winter so have turned off for good.

It does make me laugh that all the folk that slate C4 on Twitter all watch RUK anyway.

The programme is no worse than it was before the rebrand in my opinion, I would always prefer RUK because I'm a geeky racing fan but if I was a normal person who wanted a bet, I wouldn't not watch C4 due to the new lineup. I think there are bigger problems in racing than which moron is or isn't part of the C4 presenting team.
 
Gamla Stan, I agree that the problem is with racing to a certain extent however Channel 4 is the only channel free to the masses and therefore needs to appeal to everyone. The well spoken rupert brigade on there simply alienate the working class punter.

I agree also with regard to the low number of runners in races putting people off. At the end of the day racing is a betting man's sport. It will mainly attract punters wanting a bet and a good time. Why then do we have so many races with less than 8 runners? What is the issue here: entry fees, not enough horses to fill the meeting regularity, prize money, the cost of transporting the horses to race meetings? People going to race tracks will mainly go on the weekend, why do we have so many races during the week? To satisfy the bookies. For me, you should just have one jump and one flat meeting a day during the week, at the weekend you could have ten or so meetings each day meaning people who want to go racing have more opportunity to do just that. The problem is the bookies wouldn't allow that.
 
I think the issue of number of runners is a red herring - in terms of bringing in new punters I would actually think that smaller fields are a turn on, rather than off.

Put yourself in those shoes for a second - would you rather look at a race with 24 runners and try to guess the winner or a race with 7 runners and try to guess the winner?

My first ever bet was an each-way on Large Action in the Champion Hurdle at 4/1. Which meant I almost got my money back (always pay the beeswax up front!). This was then followed up by an each way on Simpson in the Stayers, which returned a bit more.

Money for nothing? Hooked.

The young guys I see gambling now are doing it on football - something they already know about because they've been brought up on it.

It would be more useful to carry out a survey on here of how people got into racing - gambling, love of horses etc etc, then focus on how to maximise horse racings image in those areas.

Channel 4 viewing figures are merely reflecting current attitudes - not changing them.

Does anyone stop watching football because John Motson is a stat wielding tosser?
 
Personally, I just don`t think the Derby has the appeal it once had for non-racing folk. No matter what C4 do would, IMHO, matter very little in terms of halting the decline. A bit like the decline in appeal of the F A cup....times change and peoples habits change.
 
imo (not worth alot :) The people I know and have talked to, believe that flat Racing on the whole is "bent" for the use of a better word.

I was always told to only bet in Stakes and above, as all other races could have trainers/owners prepping for future commitments, reasons, etc etc.

The press coverage given over the scandals of trainers & jockeys in the past years has only confirmed peoples belief. (do you remember the doping of pony's in Jersey for a gymkhana & there was no betting as far as I am aware)

The upcoming punters, as we have said here, are more interested in Football (where they believe it is less likely to be "fixed" although WC Qatar looks dubious)

Sadly it is a sport that mainly exists purely for betting purposes, (if there's betting involved then there will always be people who wish to exploit & this will never end)

Thus the sport will never lose its tag, whether the BBC, C4, Carson or Mccirick are in front of us, the general consensus is that their is too much going on in the background to be able to make informed decisions on a horse.

I could add as said, no personalitys in the game well of interest to the general public anyhow....

ES QUE LOVE for the Kings Stand 33-1 e/w .... Get On! :blink:
 
simmo said:
I think the issue of number of runners is a red herring - in terms of bringing in new punters I would actually think that smaller fields are a turn on, rather than off.

Put yourself in those shoes for a second - would you rather look at a race with 24 runners and try to guess the winner or a race with 7 runners and try to guess the winner?
Click to expand...

Field size is everything, I can assure you. Go and speak to a bookmaker at any racecourse on a Saturday afternoon and see which races attract most punters/turnover, I guarantee it's the big field handicap.
 
I was at home and couldn't be bothered to turn the television on to watch it which is the first Derby I can remember not watching. There's not enough attention/screen time paid to the animals, so for the 10/15/whatever minutes in between races on the screen so little is spent showing the horses, I can't be bothered to sit through the rest.
 
granger said:
A more common man approach would suit it better imo. There just seems to be no chemistry between any of the hosting party.

I enjoy RTE's coverage bar Tracy Piggott.

Walsh and Hall play off each other very well Hall has a strong knowledge of bloodstock and Walsh is the entertainment part

CH4 are a bunch of bores, they don't appeal to me as a racing fan, and have no magnetism to attract new viewers
Click to expand...

Good post
 
G-G said:
There's not enough attention/screen time paid to the animals, so for the 10/15/whatever minutes in between races on the screen so little is spent showing the horses, I can't be bothered to sit through the rest.
Click to expand...

Proof that it's impossible to please everyone as one of the biggest criticisms has been there has been a lack of betting content in the run up to each race.
 
Gamla Stan said:
Field size is everything, I can assure you. Go and speak to a bookmaker at any racecourse on a Saturday afternoon and see which races attract most punters/turnover, I guarantee it's the big field handicap.
Click to expand...

Field size is everything for punters already interested in the sport and for bookmakers. They are not the ones that are causing low viewing figures for the Derby.
 
In fact, I'm off to do a poll of non-horse racing people on my facebook on the subject.

On second thoughts - that mob wouldn't give me a straight answer so **** that. :D
 
Last edited:
simmo said:
In fact, I'm off to do a poll of non-horse racing people on my facebook on the subject.

On second thoughts - that mob wouldn't give me a straight answer so **** that. :D
Click to expand...

Yes, I suppose "Go fcuk yourself!" could be construed to be anything but a straight answer.
 
My view, clouded by 'in my time things were better', is that there is too much racing, I appreciate that the economics demand 4 meetings every day but quality suffers so:

1) Get rid of the all weather, can anyone suggest its been a roaring success - NO - stick with the turf tradition and three meetings per day excepting weekends and bank hols, Mondays racing free!

2) Allow every course to develop a series of 'festivals' to bring local expectation to the fore - and them market them nationally. (That is the way of Premier League who market the games not the sport))

3)Only televise UK racing, and consider tailored bets like the old ITV7!

MR2
 
Matt Bisogno of Geegeez fame has an interesting take on the discussion.
He talks of too many presenters; Claire Balding needing a foil to allow her bounce ideas off and basically people to have a firm opinion when asked for one and not sitting on the fence all the time.
Mick Fitz as ex jockey is not conveying enough expertise compared to J Francome.
G Cunningham and J McGrath are too alike which makes for boring / bad tv.

The trend of not properly inspecting horses in the paddock irritates me.
Education of the viewer is important: nobody knows it all.
At the same time limit information to one or two new points of interest without too much repetition.
Big Mac's stats were of more interest than the trends for race that C4 currently use.

Matt also has a colour code spread sheet that show the in form horse, trainer, jockey that is simple to read if that is your bag.
The Historical significance of Australia's win was totally underplayed by C4; it would have been lovely to see Galileo's and Ouija Board's Epsom wins, even a split screen of father and son's win to show their ease and economy of movement should have been possible.
Kevin Blake had a very good article on the vagaries of Epsom comparing the rise in gradients to Galway and Cheltenham to name but 2 tracks, a trick lost on John Reid's ride around the track.
Salisbury Clerk Of Course did a good job on RUK lately; it even featured a dog for animal lovers. Why Channel 4 cannot do likewise for the big meetings especially is beyond me.
 
edgt said:
G Cunningham and J McGrath are too alike which makes for boring / bad tv.
Click to expand...

I am unable to see Graham Cunningham without visualising his lip burst all over his teeth. Cause he's a wank. Not a wanker - just a wank.

Thommo and Big Mac at least had the decency to be full blown wankers.
 
montyracing2 said:
2) Allow every course to develop a series of 'festivals' to bring local expectation to the fore - and them market them nationally. (That is the way of Premier League who market the games not the sport))
Click to expand...

This is an interesting point - did Epsom do anything to promote the event nationally themselves? The only things I can recall seeing were Channel 4 adverts - which, of course, is also the way of the Premier League.

The counter-argument is that the EPL doesn't need to advertise itself - it is effectively being paid for someone else to do that, whereas Racing is paying Channel 4 to advertise it, because they are the only terrestrial mob that are even remotely interested, so the two are not directly comparable.

Another thought would be - what's in it for the course to advertise nationally? - they won't get more money from extra viewers so whats the point in spending your hard earned boosting the profile of the sport.
 
It is the appeal of racing that is in decline more than anything specific to C4's coverage, even if some of the comments made about it are fair enough.

Being the first to train three Derby winners in a row would have been front page news in Ireland in Vincent O'Brien's day, and probably would have been in the British press as well, but namesake Aidan's achievement has made no impact outside the racing pages.
 
Back
Top