TV coverage

In an FB racing group of which I'm a member, I seem to be the lone voice of dissent over Mick Fitz. Everyone who has posted seems to think this is the best news possible and I'm in the unpopular corner going "WTF? He's a nice bloke but a useless presenter!" So he does seem to have popularity with other racing fans
 
I don't dislike him personally, just find him very bland

He seems like someone who you could enjoy a good round of golf with but then make your excuses and avoid a drink with after you have holed in on 18
 
I just find it staggering that someone who has racing experience that 99% of us will never have can't use that experience to inform us with actual insights. It just proves that doing it and talking about it are two very different skills, and while no one can fault his track record for the former, he can't translate it to the latter. I'm sure the jockeys would rather see Fitzy heading towards them with the mike-on-a-stick than Rishi (and for the record I think Rishi is a poor interviewer but a fine studio anchor) but since neither manage to elicit much beyond "yeah, he's a nice horse, didn't mind the ground, thanks to connections for the opportunity", that's like nitpicking over whether stewed tripe is better than boiled tripe.
 
PlaceBacker said:
Mick Fitzgerald will be joining ITV
Click to expand...

Mick had a few aces up his sleeve, namely Paul Cooper the ex Atr producer who has jumped ship to Itv.

Not to mention his great mate, Aye Pee (who will be the last name to join itv) and would've been singing his praises to the new bosses.

A very lucky guy.
 
Anyone see the interview with Joe Mercer on ATR today ?
He must be in his 80s and his recall and behaviour on screen was impeccable.
i read somewhere during his apprenticeship his guvnor had him dress up and serve at table to show him how to behave and carry himself in company; boy did it pay off in spades.
Some might consider him bland and Jimmy Lindley- like but that was the coverage i grew up with and grew to love and respect: listening to people whose experience in and knowledge of the sport was worth listening to.
Maybe I am just getting old !
 
Don't think he'd get on with Fitzgerald :whistle:

rorydelargy said:
Mick Fitz's jockey angles are hardly astute (he dismissed the big Ffos Las winner as Choc Thornton wasn't riding, for example), and his lack of analysis to go with his C4 tips suggest strongly that they aren't even his selections. Is he still fronting up someone else's tipping service? Jim McGrath seems to get a bit miffed at Mick's approach which is to identify the favourite and tip it, mention that he also really likes the second favourite, and simply describe the silks of any other horse he's asked about. It makes Alan Shearer look a genius, and surely can't last.
Click to expand...
 
From Kevin Blake's blog this week

[h=2]Give ITV Racing a fair chance[/h][FONT=&quot]The switching of the terrestrial television coverage of racing in Great Britain from Channel 4 to ITV at the end of this year has been one of the most talked about stories of the year in the world of racing media.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]There has been a great amount of speculation as to what on-screen team will be chosen by ITV and while news has been slow to emerge, with Ed Chamberlin and Francesca Cumani being the first officially-announced members of the new team, the Racing Post have recently reported a number of eye-catching developments.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Rishi Persad, Oli Bell, Hayley Turner, Sally Ann Grassick and Mick Fitzgerald have reportedly all been added to the team, while Tanya Stevenson, Tom Lee and Gina Harding have reportedly been told that they will not be part of the ITV team.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Inevitably, all this news has generated mixed reactions, as opinions of the merits of various television presenters and personalities will always differ from person to person.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]It was the same the last time Channel 4 announced their on-screen team and it will be the same for any future decisions of this type.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]However, no matter what one thinks of the individuals in the line-up as it stands or indeed of any future additions to it, one would be advised to put aside such feelings and not pre-judge the ITV coverage on its individual parts, but rather wait until viewing the finished product until passing judgement.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]While the “who” is obviously very important, the “how” is even more important. How ITV chose to use their on-screen talent will be the key to how well the coverage will be received by the viewers.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Broadcasting a sport as complex as horse racing to a terrestrial television audience is a unique challenge.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Producing a show that attracts and appeals to the general public whilst appeasing racing professionals and established racing fans is an unenviable balance to try and achieve.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]ITV deserve a fair crack at it without being pre-judged based on the appointments they make.[/FONT]
Click to expand...
 
It would be nice to say "it can't be any worse" but this is ITV we're talking about and on the evidence of Andy Townsend and their football coverage we must "be very afraid".
 
All well and good for Kevin to say wait and see how their on-screen talent is used, but we know from watching years of dross that some of those names possess very little "talent".

edit...........I see Aye Pee is quoted as saying his agent has heard nothing from ITV yet.
 
Last edited:
it just reflects ordinary life really..its not what you know..its who

the guy is the modern day equivalent of Jimmy Lindley..that guy was an ex jock...had the best gig i've ever seen in the 70's and 80's...he was the "paddock" watcher..all you got was.."looks a picture in the paddock"...jobs don't come any easier than what he had

my favourite Fitzgerald quote is.."you need a bit of boot to win a group race"..ffs..thats worse than Lindley

its doomed before it starts with lightweight boll)x talk like Mick spews out on there..seems a nice guy..but unfortunately a completely sh1te pundit.a complete incorrect choice..but predictably the espected lazy crony driven mentality that is apparent in virtually all walks of life.
 
Last edited:
It amazes me how we, (the general public), think we can micro-engineer the racing punditry on our screens. You are allowed to be wrong at times. When people cannot be wrong they just won't say anything of any interest for fear of being crucified, (which is what we see now).

If we were being real then we'd acknowledge all this **** started because broadcasters threw away the one big audience winner they had - John Mccririck. Ever since there's been a nasty backstabbing climate within the racing punditry fraternity. Its sad to see.
 
Last edited:
edgt said:
Some might consider him bland and Jimmy Lindley- like
Click to expand...

For me, Jimmy Lindley was the start of the rot. He was the master of saying nothing.

His paddock previews amounted to saying, "I've never seen him look better," about just about every horse in the race and when discussing the various jockeys it was always something along the lines of, "There's no-one better at getting a horse to run to form".

Utter pish the whole way.

But I'm sure he was probably a lovely bloke. (Unlike McCririck.)

Edit - just read EC1's post. Spot on re Lindley.

I'm not as unconvinced about Fitzgerald, I have to say. I sometimes think he's trying to pass on tips without saying that that's what he's doing. Unfortunately, as is so often the case with C4 Racing, the really useful info isn't passed on until the last horse is going into the stalls.

I think Gina Harding is a loss. Her observations on a horse's condition were always worth hearing.
 
Last edited:
Desert Orchid said:
I'm not as unconvinced about Fitzgerald, I have to say. I sometimes think he's trying to pass on tips without saying that that's what he's doing. Unfortunately, as is so often the case with C4 Racing, the really useful info isn't passed on until the last horse is going into the stalls.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't have thought there are any "tips" to which Mick Fitzgerald might have access which would have any value whatsoever.
 
The problem comes from using expertise from the likes of Fitzgerald incorrectly. No good asking him about the form of the race last time, it's not what he's there for, other people can answer that. You should ask the ex-jockey to see the race from a riding point of view. 'If you were riding the favourite Mick, what would your plan be' etc. Post race again the same thing, don't ask him about the strength of the form, as him why a jockey made the move he did when he did etc.
 
davidjohnson said:
The problem comes from using expertise from the likes of Fitzgerald incorrectly. No good asking him about the form of the race last time, it's not what he's there for, other people can answer that. You should ask the ex-jockey to see the race from a riding point of view. 'If you were riding the favourite Mick, what would your plan be' etc. Post race again the same thing, don't ask him about the strength of the form, as him why a jockey made the move he did when he did etc.
Click to expand...

Yes, it's always intrigued me why these angles aren't exploited. Then again, you do get mentions on TV of how serious certain jockeys are about studying the form. Then again, these jockeys might not be willing to reveal what conclusions their studies lead them to. If they're involved in the race it might give away important tactics.

I think there need to be discussions behind the scenes at, say, the planning stages of a programme. If the producer asks Fitzgerald if he's studied the form for a race or just read Timeform or whatever then his input should be tailored accordingly. If he's gone through all the form himself he should be encouraged to offer his opinion. If he's just spouting Timeform or the RP analysis he should either acknowledge his source ("I see Timeform think this one will take all the beating") or limit himself to how a horse looks. (Surely a jockey can tell by looking at a horse whether it is fit?)

I often wonder if the paucity of information about race tactics etc from the likes of Fitzgerald is an admission that there isn't as much to race tactics as people would have us believe.
 
From Fontwell to Ffos Las, Cheltenham to Cartmel, there wouldn't be a single jumping track where, according to MF, the key isn't a horse who "travels" and gets into a "good jumping rhythm".

Compare and contrast with Richard Hughes who has given some genuine insights in his RP column and in TV interviews into the perils and pitfalls of riding tracks like Goodwood and the Rowley Mile.
 
gus said:
Compare and contrast with Richard Hughes who has given some genuine insights in his RP column and in TV interviews into the perils and pitfalls of riding tracks like Goodwood and the Rowley Mile.
Click to expand...

I particularly enjoyed the piece on the curvature of the "straight" at Goodwood as being especially informative.

Perhaps we could extend an invitation to ITV to read this thread and try to take on board thoughts herein?
 
Last edited:
C4 not showing the Arc this year due to "inflated media costs".

Personally couldn't give a feck as it's on RUK and ATR but good riddance.
 
Back
Top