New C4 coverage

I thought it was a promising start - much less nonsense and puff but they are going to have to sort out that giant Ipad quickly . Cunningham is an enigma he speaks a lot of sense but in a profoundly irritating manner .

The visit to the Henderson yard suffered a few glitches in camerawork but otherwise it was great to see the horses close up like that .Balding is a class act and a massive bonus for C4 .

I agree that Alastair Down was an unfortunate casualty - of the old C4 winter team plainly Plunkett should have got the boot .
 
Gamla Stan said:
How is this clear? Perhaps she's actively chose to lose weight herself?!
Click to expand...

possibly but she has made many interviews saying she was quite happy with the way she was she could and is perfectly entitled to have a change of heart and it could be coincidence it starts to show when she has a more prominence with her new role here and her forthcoming own show on TV but i dont think it is coincedence

her appearence actually dosnt bother me its more her headmistress style of talkng to people and her attempts to inject some form of excitment that i find a little gyrating

i think the content of the show is a little difficult for them as i would like to see the things that bar mentions anyilisis of previous races, stats etc etc not sure though if to much in depth discussion would be to the taste of the majority of viewers though
 
prince regent said:
her appearence actually dosnt bother me its more her headmistress style of talkng to people and her attempts to inject some form of excitment that i find a little gyrating
Click to expand...

Her appearance shouldn't be an issue (but this is television).

However, if there's any gyrating to be done, can't they enlist Myleene Klass? :)
 
It shows that producers previous links to bbc racing has decided the whole set up re. Balding persad Fitzgerald.I don't mind Balding,she has shown great diversity on tv,fitzgerald though is not my cup of tea,he looks awkward on the box.Persad is clueless,he comes across as being sorry for being there,robbed a career.
Maybe the set up will be different one Saturday with a full programme of racing.tbh I'm not bothered as long as they show the races,I tend to turn down the sound when they preview races.
 
So much less ghastly guff than the old Highflyer production. So far so good . It must be the first time in ages I watched C4 mainly and popped over to the other channels to watch the other races.
 
Last edited:
Enjoyed the coverage today and actually watched entire Morning Line as well - the new format seems an improvement
 
Generally thought it was good but I'd advise them to drop the scripted jokes.if I wanted that I'd put uk gold on.They all seem to be on thir toes as well which is understandable.For all the good is persad,he is pants,so awkward.like a fish out of water.
 
Saw an hour of this afternoon's coverage; cards zipped through much too quickly so that not all horses were mentioned and no shots of horses in the paddock before hand so again not all horses covered. Person walking in with microphone with winning horse now wearing trousers but still asking the same inane questions. Gina Bryce at Chepstow to Michael Scudamore;' with such a very small team'- yes lovely. Bloke with McGrath loves himself too much.
 
Decent day's coverage. Don't want to see them going down the route of bigging up every day/race like it's the bees knees. The Ferne Cotton syndrome. They made the Tolworth sound like the Arc at the start of the afternoon.
 
I watched it on sky plus tonight-I miss Francome and Tanya doesn't bring anything to the table-she fails to report what exactly is behind a market move.
 
I think the coverage is more of the same

Jim Mcgraph is a shadow of himself, does not add too much to the programe

I prefer McCririck than Tanya

Nick Luck is improving and is doing better

Graham Cunningham is ok

I would prefer more images of the horses in the paddock and some replies and less of the presenters


about the comments of the tolworth being hyped like it was an Arc, thats true
 
Bar the Bull said:
I spent nearly 2 hours on Monday watching Gary Neville appraise the Premier League season so far. He was insightful, honest and opinionated. I didn't agree with all of his views (on diving in particular), but he was given the time and latitude to explain them all fully.

It was a very entertaining couple of hours. I think Sky's coverage has been improved immensely since they gave Neville the time and permission to go in-depth into zonal vs. man-to-man at corners...the art of tackling...goalkeepers punching vs. catching, etc.

Racing is absolutely ripe for this type of analysis. Sire stats, course records, jumping techniques, pace analysis, etc. I accept that they have to do fashion at Ascot, and they need to do something on retired jockeys/trainers/horses every now and again. But they have 2 hours (more if you count the morning line). Take away the time for ads, actual racing, looking at the horses in the parade ring and betting news, and they should have a chance for at least 4 x 8-10 minutes of in-depth stuff. It could be a stable visit. It could be sectional analysis of previous races for an upcoming flat race. It could be an in-depth look at the form of all the contenders for the showcase handicap hurdle. It could be a detailed look at the jumping techniques of the favourites in an upcoming novice chase.
Click to expand...

Each to his own but I coudn't listen to Neville for two minutes let alone two hours. For me the appeal of football is its relative simplicity. We are not talking University Challenge. The key though is that broadcast was on a dedicated sports channel. If you really want in-depth analysis the place for that is surely the likes of RUK, not Channel 4.
 
Even if they are not going to talk about all the horses in the paddock beforehand, could they not adapt the graphics with runner/riders to include the last 6 form figures?
 
What annoyed me was when horses were "shown" in the ring or cantering down to the start, they were hidden by a bloody great graphic. Obviously never heard of a split screen.
 
treetangle said:
For me the appeal of football is its relative simplicity. We are not talking University Challenge.
Click to expand...
No offence, TT, but I think this is what is wrong with football coverage in this country. The viewing public are too happy to accept substandard coverage.

We get the Alan Hansens of this world - failures as managers - who make their living out of stating the obvious with 20-20 hindsight. In-play co-commentators/pundits are little better. Even they often misinterpret what they've just seen.

Compare that with some of the analysis of the sports in the Olympics. From the minutiaie of the tactics in each of the individual cycle races to the aggregation of marginal gains coaching philosophy, it was riveting listening to it.

I want a qualified, successful coach dissecting a game in terms of tactics, shape, options, etc as the game is in play and before things happen.

However, I accept there's as much chance of it happening as there is of me getting a blowjob off Myleene Klass.
 
Back
Top