TV coverage

Thanks GH - you are not wrong. I already have my first intro worked out..

"I rode her mother up The Curragh"
 
No prizes for guessing Jim McGraths view on channel 4 today about what Nick Rust is trying to do.

Does McGrath ever have anything different or any new angle to provide?
When it comes to the politics of racing he arse licks bookies as he see's it as too controversial to challenge them despite someone with much more power in Nick Rust having the balls to do it....
I suppose its easy for Jim to criticize, apart from a load of mouth and bad karma he hasn't got the balls to throw a grape in a fruit fight....

When it comes to racing analysis, he's much of a muchness...
As a person he just come across as an arsehole.
 
Last edited:
Another slating for C4 from David Redvers

From RP

QIPCO, which this year signed British racing's biggest ever sponsorship deal when extending its support of the British Champions Series and British Champions Day, has delivered a stinging critique of Channel 4's racing coverage and blamed the broadcaster for shrinking the sport's television audience.
With Channel 4 understood to face a strong threat from ITV to retain its coverage of racing's crown jewel events from 2017, Qipco's entry into the debate surrounding how racing should be televised, and which broadcaster should televise it, has come at a pivotal time.
The British Champions Series, which Qipco sponsors, was one of four signatories to the four-year Channel 4 deal, the others being RMG, Jockey Club Racecourses and Ascot. Qipco British Champions Day has gone from being watched by 1.1m on BBC1 in 2012 to 367,000 on Channel 4 in 2015, equivalent to a 67 per cent exodus.
David Redvers, speaking in his role as racing representative to Qipco, said: "I do not think it's racing's fault. I believe racing provides the storyline. How the storyline is used, produced and sold to the masses is the job of the broadcaster.


'A complete yawn'

"The problem I have had for some time is Channel 4 seems to be far too interested in portraying racing solely as a betting medium and it thereby marginalises half the audience. We have some of the most fascinating, exciting, hairs-standing-up-on-the-back-of-your neck stories generated by any sport. However, there seems to be a reluctance by some at Channel 4 to tell those stories in its morning and afternoon racing programmes.
"What got Sheikh Fahad into racing in the first place is he loved the chat, banter and storylines on The Morning Line when it was produced by the old team. It was great television and it sucked him into the sport. Now it is a complete yawn as it seems to be almost entirely devoted to the betting on the racing that day.
"Several good and interesting programmes have been produced when presenters have been sent to racing stables and places like Coolmore and Banstead Manor for The Morning Line. That sort of programme involves viewers in the nitty-gritty of our sport.
"There have also been some fantastic racing documentaries and promotional advertising of the Grand National, but not across racing as a whole.
"I understand betting is a large part of racing and must be referenced, but not to the almost total exclusion of the equine and human storyline."
Redvers added: “Channel 4 is racing’s shop window to the world. Unless Channel 4 puts on something attractive and user-friendly to people with a passing interest, it will never succeed in the remit it was clearly given, which was to grow our audience. In fact, what Channel 4 has succeeded in doing is shrinking our audience."
 
Harsh words from Redvers but a welcome wake up call for C4. Let's see more of AP and it's surely time to get shot of the smug brothers McGrath and Cunningham


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
The British Champions Series, which Qipco sponsors, was one of four signatories to the four-year Channel 4 deal, the others being RMG, Jockey Club Racecourses and Ascot. Qipco British Champions Day has gone from being watched by 1.1m on BBC1 in 2012 to 367,000 on Channel 4 in 2015, equivalent to a 67 per cent exodus.
Click to expand...

It's only fair to point out that 2012 was the year of Frankel's farewell appearance.
 
Redvers wants to get real..you only have to walk into a betting shop to see where young people spend their time and show interest..on the machines..there are wall to wall screens with racing coming out their ears if they wanted it...young folk want machines..and lets be honest..who has trained them that way..the bookies

all C4 figures is doing is highlighting a sport that has been pushed to the back of the queue...its time all shops were made to remove the machines for a start..they already brainwashed one generation though by now with the damn machines
 
If Quipco stopped sponsoring the racing equivalent of 'Queer Eye for the Straight Guy' I'd take the their flaming mincing more seriously.
 
EC1 said:
Redvers wants to get real..you only have to walk into a betting shop to see where young people spend their time and show interest..on the machines..there are wall to wall screens with racing coming out their ears if they wanted it...young folk want machines..and lets be honest..who has trained them that way..the bookies

all C4 figures is doing is highlighting a sport that has been pushed to the back of the queue...its time all shops were made to remove the machines for a start..they already brainwashed one generation though by now with the damn machines
Click to expand...

its a successful "day out" sport (I was in ascot restaurant today and it was quite suoerb.. You couldn't get better quality corporate entertaining) but a failing sport in following. It's not just the machines but the overall image of exclusion and betting coups. Exaggerated in publics mind maybe but why bet on racing and see barney miseryguts Curley lauded for stitching the game up when you can stick a tenner on the football ?

also old men smelling of p1ss moaning that every race is fixed hardly helps either

and it's a tricky sport to learn and get to bottom of

and whilst I didn't have a great deal of time for him mccricik was a draw. Francome certainly was. Again doesn't greatly matter if you agree with him of not, he had a charisma and a was a natural. I haven't seen McCoy yet but he has the personality of a wet Monday morning in Manchester. And compared with Francome I don't think too many milfs will be turning on with a charged up rabbit at the ready
 
Last edited:
clivex said:
its a successful "day out" sport (I was in ascot restaurant today and it was quite suoerb.. You couldn't get better quality corporate entertaining) but a failing sport in following. It's not just the machines but the overall image of exclusion and betting coups. Exaggerated in publics mind maybe but why bet on racing and see barney miseryguts Curley lauded for stitching the game up when you can stick a tenner on the football ?

also old men smelling of p1ss moaning that every race is fixed hardly helps either

and it's a tricky sport to learn and get to bottom of

and whilst I didn't have a great deal of time for him mccricik was a draw. Francome certainly was. Again doesn't greatly matter if you agree with him of not, he had a charisma and a was a natural. I haven't seen McCoy yet but he has the personality of a wet Monday morning in Manchester. And compared with Francome I don't think too many milfs will be turning on with a charged up rabbit at the ready
Click to expand...

i seem to remember they celebrated on this forum when Mac got the chop...many couldn't stand him and failed to see that outsiders actually identified racing with him..so some of the shortsightedness lies with punters themselves for not seeing the game as outsiders see it and needing a figure to associate it with. No one gave a sod what his personal habits were outside the game..they saw him and thought "horse racing"...or something else:)

the game needs characters..but when we get them..folk within racing want rid of them

how many people will get drawn to the game listening to Tom whatshiname or blundering Tanya..none i'd think
 
Last edited:
Big Mac was entertaining. Was ruddy ridiculous getting rid of him, even if I did think he spoke sh*te on some things.
 
I miss Francombe and Alistair Down.
The current crew are all nothings and add no value at all.
One person who I'm glad has gone is Tommo: when he is commentating on ATR I always mute the volume.
 
I read the Redvers article today and struggled to find a single aspect with which I agreed.

I reckon I am much more likely to watch the Morning Line than, say, Mrs O. In fact I can say with 100% certitude that I am more likely to watch the ML than Mrs O.

I am unlikely to be a casual viewer of any programme about F1.

Or shinty, or curling, or rugby, or cricket... and of just about any other sport bar football and maybe - just - golf or snooker.

Why would Redvers expect a casual viewer to tune into the ML or C4 racing.

TV viewing stats are misleading to the point of being almost irrelevant. How they are calculated is seriously flawed and any BBC1 or BBC2 programme will have a huge ratings advantage over any other channel.

Redvers bemoans the strong bias towards the actual races.

FFS.

That's what the programme is supposed to be about. When they switch to 'human interest' stories or, God forbid, Rishi trying to ride a horse, is when I leave the room to re-stock the tea and toast supplies.

The day the balance tilts towards that sh1te is the day I give up watching for good.

Channel 4 is a minority channel. Racing is now a minority sport.

That's the way it is.

Live with it.
 
When I got into racing in 1989 because of Dessie, the only tv channels were BBC1 & 2, ITV and C4.
Racing was always prime time on Saturday on BBC1 and C4.
The only live football was the FA Cup final and the World Cup.
How times have changed.
 
For starters he's stuck in the dark ages. He's also sexist, loud mouthed, obnoxious, not really that knowledgeable either. Considering he is a failed bookie then he is about as qualified as me to talk on the subject.
 
There is no doubt McCririck divided opinion.

I'm strongly of the opinion that he passed his sell-by date about 20 years before he was removed.

Last year I went through all my kitchen cupboards and checked all the cans, jars and bottles that had amassed. At least one dated back to 2001. I wasn't for throwing it out as I thought I might be able to put it to good use but accepted Mrs O's argument that while I liked the item in question and it might be okay it was too risky to keep it.

I couldn't say the same about McCririck.

The affected flamboyance that was a quirky draw to start with became an embarrassment to the sport and, if anything, probably chased away the casual viewer. Whenever conversation at work got round to TV, horses, etc, the non-racing colleagues would more often than not say something about enjoying the races but "that loudmouth bloke with the weird gear" put them off not just the programme but the idea of going racing, in case a lot of racegoers were like that.

I also witnessed first hand remarks he made off-air to two young, attractive female racegoers, remarks that I would describe as lewd and libidinous.

Regardless of viewing figures, C4 Racing is a much better place without him.

Losing Francome was a huge mistake, though.
 
tiggers1972 said:
For starters he's stuck in the dark ages. He's also sexist, loud mouthed, obnoxious, not really that knowledgeable either. Considering he is a failed bookie then he is about as qualified as me to talk on the subject.
Click to expand...

Apart from that :lol:
 
For starters he's stuck in the dark ages. He's also sexist, loud mouthed, obnoxious, not really that knowledgeable either.

Throughout the years in betting shops..i find many punters within them to have displayed similar traits..maybe that explains his success then:)
 
Last edited:
EC1 said:
For starters he's stuck in the dark ages. He's also sexist, loud mouthed, obnoxious, not really that knowledgeable either.

Throughout the years in betting shops..i find many punters within them to have displayed similar traits..maybe that explains his success then:)
Click to expand...

Yes, but should we really be appealing to the lowest common denominator?

Shouldn't we really be aiming to raise the bar in terms of analysis, insight and, dare I say, finding winners?
 
Back
Top