TV coverage

Yes, a bit grating for me too.

I'm getting really pished off, though, at the race commentaries. Very annoying.

I don't recall ever getting annoyed at Simon Holt's commentaries bar the odd occasion when he'd get over-excited in a tight finish to a big race.
 
WTF was this morning's programme all about??

This is supposed to be an hour-long racing programme covering 8 televised races later in the day, including a two big handicaps and two classics trials..

5 minutes to introduce the fvcker and a minute or so off the end for the adverts ahead of the next show leaves 54 minutes.

Chapman talking shite for 5 minutes about the course and the betting. 49 minutes.

Nine minutes to mention four horses in the Victoria Cup. 40 minutes then 2 minutes for adverts. 38 minutes left and seven races to cover.

Ten minutes of meaningless shite with the meaningless twonk that is Ian Wright [and McCoy]. Then 2 minutes for ads. 28 minutes left and still seven races.

Then some second-rate actress and 10 minutes about the Derby that isn't being run for three weeks. And the trials are still this afternoon. Better mention those races in passing. Then the second-rate actress and the second-rate jockette fawn over each other's looks. What the fvck is this? The Morning Rainbow Show??

By this time I've lost the will to live. The only thing that's kept me there so far has been Martin Dwyer trying to entertain. He's got more humour in his pinky than Chapman has in his entire being.

Can anyone précis for me what little was left of the show?

(C&Ping this for AC's rant thread.)
 
Last edited:
tiggers1972 said:
Maybe best not to watch it then DO? That's what I tend to do if I don't like a programme.
Click to expand...

I know you're right, tiggers, but it's a bit like supporting a diddy team. You want it to be better.

I often wonder if there was no early programme would it make a difference. Probably not. But what's the alternative? Housework?
 
I think some people need to get tested for ITVROCD

ITV Racing, Obsessive, Compulsive, disorder.

Only joking.

Ps, Ed Chamberlain is a good addition to terrestrial television coverage.
 
Last edited:
OTC, it's a showcase meeting with the most well contested and informative of all the Derby trials - confined to a TV backwater, for what?
 
Last edited:
"Lets go to Ollie in the parade ring, Ollie, where are you"
"I'm in the parade ring"
"Oh, can you tell us what your up to"
 
simmo said:
I think the next time I hear Donncha pronounced Donnacha I may well reach for the shotgun and search the culprit out.
Click to expand...

Isn't Donnaca / Donnacha (ch as in loch/lough) the right pronunciation? Isn't that how Aidan says it?

Is the horse's name meant to be different?
 
I find it sad that something like the TV coverage is causing division.

It was supposed to be a bright new dawn. I for one hoped we'd all be celebrating an entertaining and informative new product, an eclectic condensation of C4, ATR, RUK and BBC.

What do we get?

Chapman - ignorant loudmouth
Harvey - clown
Bell - lightweight
Chamberlin - lightweight
Persad - clearly sleeping with somebody with influence as there's no other explanation for his appearance on any sports programme.
 
Well I like it. I think they've changed it largely for the better - yes it would be nice to see more of the horses in each race beforehand, but it's still very fledgeling and they do seem to take on board when people get in touch with comments.
If you do what you've always done you get what you've always had.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Desert Orchid said:
I find it sad that something like the TV coverage is causing division.

It was supposed to be a bright new dawn. I for one hoped we'd all be celebrating an entertaining and informative new product, an eclectic condensation of C4, ATR, RUK and BBC.

What do we get?

Chapman - ignorant loudmouth
Harvey - clown
Bell - lightweight
Chamberlin - lightweight
Persad - clearly sleeping with somebody with influence as there's no other explanation for his appearance on any sports programme.
Click to expand...

I would take issue with the Chapman ignorant loudmouth clown comment.Lets start by looking at the person he replaced a mumbling,stuttering wreck who was going backwards after 15 years-a person who wanted to report market movers at 815 on a Saturday morning only to see them drift in the afternoon.Would listen to any old crap from bookmaker reps-never knowingly questioned anything.
Chapman is possibly the only person to regularly criticise trainers,jockeys and owners-nobody else asks the questions that he does.He does a reasonably good job reporting on the betting -if you want something to compare him have a look at Leon Blanche being interviewed by Brian Gleeson and Tom Lee on RTE -basically he gets an uncontested 5 minute slot where he not only reports on what is allegedly being backed but also gets to offer his own interpretation of the form book -Chapman would never allow him to get away with that.
I would also say that Chapman raising over 200 K for Freddie Tylicki in a couple of days says a lot about him.
 
LUKE said:
I would take issue with the Chapman ignorant loudmouth clown comment.Lets start by looking at the person he replaced a mumbling,stuttering wreck who was going backwards after 15 years-a person who wanted to report market movers at 815 on a Saturday morning only to see them drift in the afternoon.Would listen to any old crap from bookmaker reps-never knowingly questioned anything.
Chapman is possibly the only person to regularly criticise trainers,jockeys and owners-nobody else asks the questions that he does.He does a reasonably good job reporting on the betting -if you want something to compare him have a look at Leon Blanche being interviewed by Brian Gleeson and Tom Lee on RTE -basically he gets an uncontested 5 minute slot where he not only reports on what is allegedly being backed but also gets to offer his own interpretation of the form book -Chapman would never allow him to get away with that.
I would also say that Chapman raising over 200 K for Freddie Tylicki in a couple of days says a lot about him.
Click to expand...

Chappers is an inherently decent man I reckon too. He has to live up to the character at this stage as it has got him so far. I like him, funny at times too.
 
Chapman will always polarize. And at times I find him over the top.
Having said that I think he is being completely wasted in his role. The guy has a deep knowledge of historical context.

Throw up most any racing colors and he can rattle off all kinds of horses from the past, jumps or flat.
I find his Punch and Judy routine with Phil Smith compelling.

Most subjects being interviewed by him must know they are not going to get a free ride.
Watching Chapman and Roger Charlton duel it out on a Monday night at Windsor is must see racing tv.
No quarter asked and none given. All very sporting.

That's what he should be doing, interviews!

He is however a complete waste of time for the American racing slot on ATR. Knows nothing about the subject matter and cares even less.
 
It's almost as though Chapman was brought in to assume McCrirrick's old mantle and pass himself as some loud mouth eccentric who just knows about betting. He's far better than that, and, imo, would be a very good anchor. He does know his stuff.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top