Totally rubbish ITV French Open coverage

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 1
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous template Next
  • Dave2002
    Full Member
    • Dec 2010
    • 18010
    #1

    Totally rubbish ITV French Open coverage

    We tried to watch the final of the French Open this afternoon - Nadal - Djokovic.
    We time slipped the main channel - ITV as we were interrupted by someone who needed attention.

    Just as the score reached 5-4 (Nadal) ahead the channel switched to ITV4 - useless - since we were time slipped.

    In the days when the BBC presented such events, they would judge switchover according to the state of play, and also give reasonable warning beforehand.

    ITV's judgement was completely flawed on this occasion.
    Tags: None
  • Nick Armstrong
    Host
    • Nov 2010
    • 26525
    #2
    Exactly the same here Dave - was watching with a 30 minute delay.... At least the final game was a bit of squib, the deciding point being conceded by ND on a double-fault.

    But yes - disappointing. I think it's because ITV have a big live Soccer Aid event following on and have a stadium full of celebs and audience in Manchester they couldn't delay.
    "...the isle is full of noises,
    Sounds and sweet airs, that give delight and hurt not.
    Sometimes a thousand twangling instruments
    Will hum about mine ears, and sometime voices..."

    Comment

    • Dave2002
      Full Member
      • Dec 2010
      • 18010
      #3
      Yes - now seen the last few minutes on ITV4+1.

      We started off live, but had to slip during the afternoon, so we were about 25 mins behind by the end. A warning about 1 hour before would have enabled us to set recording on ITV4 - if it really was going to be impossible to delay the switch over.

      A shame about the final double fault - I don't know what makes clay so different. Yesterday Sharapova admitted she doesn't really like it much, yet found it ironic that she has now won a Grand Slam twice on that surface. I'm sure that Novak can play better - or at least has in the past - he didn't seem at the top of his game - but maybe the surface really does make a significant difference. Is it the grip, or the hardness on the feet, or the bounce of the ball which makes the difference? All of those?

      Comment

      • Nick Armstrong
        Host
        • Nov 2010
        • 26525
        #4
        I wonder what they'd have done had one A. Murray Esq. been in the final (which was no doubt the devout hope when they scheduled it across an entire afternoon on ITV1)... A sporting event in France between a Spaniard and a Serbian was always going to be second best for the advertisers. I thought it was a gripping match, two favourite players and the psychological and stamina issues that make 5 set tennis so compelling compared with 3 sets...
        "...the isle is full of noises,
        Sounds and sweet airs, that give delight and hurt not.
        Sometimes a thousand twangling instruments
        Will hum about mine ears, and sometime voices..."

        Comment

        • Old Grumpy
          Full Member
          • Jan 2011
          • 3602
          #5
          Originally posted by Caliban View Post


          But yes - disappointing. I think it's because ITV have a big live Soccer Aid event following on and have a stadium full of celebs and audience in Manchester they couldn't delay.
          Calib, surely you mean Slebs!

          OG

          Comment

          • Warlock
            Full Member
            • Apr 2014
            • 35
            #6
            Radio Times did say it was going to ITV4 at 5.40! Everything has to give way for the "game for gentlemen played by thugs".

            Comment

            • mangerton
              Full Member
              • Nov 2010
              • 3346
              #7
              Originally posted by Dave2002 View Post
              We tried to watch the final of the French Open this afternoon - Nadal - Djokovic.
              We time slipped the main channel - ITV as we were interrupted by someone who needed attention.

              Just as the score reached 5-4 (Nadal) ahead the channel switched to ITV4 - useless - since we were time slipped.

              In the days when the BBC presented such events, they would judge switchover according to the state of play, and also give reasonable warning beforehand.

              ITV's judgement was completely flawed on this occasion.
              I have absolutely no interest in tennis, so can't comment on ITV's presentation of it. However, the BBC's presentation of it for the last forty years or so has been worse. Wimbledon for many years past has been billed on BBC1 till about 6.00, then for reasons known only to the BBC it is switched to BBC2. There may have been an argument for doing this when BBC2 was not widely available, but that has not been the case for decades. This information is published in the schedules, viewers make choices based on it, and set their PVRs accordingly. On a whim, some clown in the BBC frequently decides to let tennis overrun, so later programmes are changed or cancelled. Worse, if a game is what someone in the BBC deems to be "of national importance" (sic) the change to BBC2 does not take place, as the game must be shown on "the prime channel, BBC1". At a stroke, therefore, they upset the viewers of two channels.

              Popular though tennis undoubtedly is, there are many more people who don't watch it, than who do. Complaints to the BBC about this - and I have made many over the years - are met with the same sort of self-serving, we're right and you're wrong responses that we read about daily on this forum.

              On a related note, why, according to the schedules, are world cup football matches scheduled for anything from 2 hrs 40 mins to over 3 hours? I thought they lasted 90 minutes, plus 15 mins for half time.

              Comment

              • gurnemanz
                Full Member
                • Nov 2010
                • 7382
                #8
                It was claimed at the time that the BBC was responsible for Tim Henman not winning Wimbledon in 2001, because it used its influence on scheduling to make sure his semi-final against Ivanisevic was on at tea time to boost ratings. His match was duly rained off with Henman looking to be on his way to the Final. As a result, Ivanisevic, the older man, came back refreshed the next day and won the match.

                Comment

                • Dave2002
                  Full Member
                  • Dec 2010
                  • 18010
                  #9
                  Originally posted by mangerton View Post
                  On a related note, why, according to the schedules, are world cup football matches scheduled for anything from 2 hrs 40 mins to over 3 hours? I thought they lasted 90 minutes, plus 15 mins for half time.
                  Presumably for the same reason that tennis coverage has the first hour with a few people wittering on about the weather, who might win, etc., before any balls are tossed in the air. After all, presenters, and commentators have to earn their keep, don't they

                  Comment

                  • gingerjon
                    Full Member
                    • Sep 2011
                    • 165
                    #10
                    The BBC's desire to stop broadcasting live Wimbledon tennis at 8pm (or sooner if they can get away with it) and start showing 'highlights' of matches we already know the score of - or, worse, John I*******e's septic mouth opening and closing - is something that has always annoyed me. I cut them a bit of slack for having to move between BBC1 and BBC2 because, you know, those repeats of Cash in the Attic won't watch themselves.

                    ITV deserve some credit for showing as much of the French Open as they do but I do despair that a friendly between celebs not only fills Wembley but also gets as much prime-time coverage as the FA Cup final.
                    The best music is the music that persuades us there is no other music in the world-- Alex Ross

                    Comment

                    • Honoured Guest
                      #11
                      So, Dave2002 and Caliban are complaining that ITV honoured its published schedule precisely and switched tennis coverage from ITV1 to ITV4 exactly when they said they would, incidentally with a generous overlap of a minute or so to allow the more dim viewers to find their remote controls.

                      And Mangerton is complaining that the BBC schedules tennis matches of maximum general interest flexibly, with very late changes to the published channels and timings, and the channel-shifting, postponement and cancellation of other scheduled programming.

                      I propose that Mangerton finds a partner and that the issue be decided on the outcome of a doubles match between the two opposing factions. French Frank could umpire.

                      Comment

                      • burning dog
                        Full Member
                        • Dec 2010
                        • 1510
                        #12
                        Originally posted by gingerjon View Post
                        you know, those repeats of Cash in the Attic won't watch themselves.

                        .


                        "Flog it!" sounds like it should have a late night slot on Channel 5...

                        Comment

                        Previous template Next
                        Working...
                        X