Just thought i would create an article, based on sport, but something different from the Coyle ins/outs debate.
i find it somewhat insulting that the BBC take a morale standpoint about there olympics coverage, and how it should "inspire" us to take up sport.
i love test cricket, watching England used to be brilliant, i remember the days when it was on C4 etc, and i really enjoyed it. Guess who shows that now.......
i also love Golf - i even play, im a member @ Turton. However, my nephew shows no interest, because he sees Rory Mcilroy once a year...... Guess who broadcasts the other 3 majors
ive enjoyed playing tennis - my nephew couldnt care less - he sees Andy murray once a year @ Wimbledon, i want him to wake up after Andy Murray wins a major and says, i wanna be as good as he is, except, he sees him once a year, so doesnt care. Who shows all the other tournaments..........
im obsessed with Formula 1 - Yet guess whos going to own all the rights to that..........
I applaud the BBC's coverage of the Olympics, it was truly fantastic.
However there sports coverage in general is ridiculous - a corporation the size of the BBC should have a dedicated sports channel, where i would even accept it showing the Minor Tennis tournaments, or some minor Golf etc. except we are all "not watching" bowls, and skiing, etc etc.
apart from Top Gear, and Documentaries (which are fantastic) i watch nothing on the BBC, yet i am forced to pay a licence fee!
im all for capitalism, and skys success has allowed to buy the rights, but i am entirely against monopolies and selective morale stances!
Something Other than Coyle
posted on 4/9/12
NBC had the exclusive rights to The Olympics in America. The coverage was diabolical. The vast majority of events were recorded and shown in the evenings. Even the 100m Final was not shown live.
Fox Soccer have great coverage of the PL for less than a fiver month !.
When I lived in the UK the Sky coverage was excellent. Only problem was the price. If viewers refused to pay the crazy fees, Sky would have to charge less and bid less in fees for the rights. The only losers would be the overpaid greedy players.
posted on 4/9/12
WF, you want to watch it pasting extracts from Melanie Phillips's column on here and passing them off as your own, she sues you know!
posted on 4/9/12
i find it somewhat insulting that the BBC take a morale standpoint about there olympics coverage, and how it should "inspire" us to take up sport
-------------------------------------
Surely they're suggesting that we should be inspired by the achievements of the Olympians, get off our backsides, leave the house and actively partake in sport?
I'm not sure I ever needed to be able to see cricket , football, rugby, golf etc. on TV (or now the internet) in order to be able to partake.
?
posted on 4/9/12
WF- BBC4 Dross? I don't think so- it's the most intelligent channel by a mile, that and BBC2. But I agree 3 and 1 are pretty dross.
posted on 4/9/12
I see what ur sayin finlay, but I think uve missed my point, what im sayin is, if theymaybe showed some sports we all wanted to watch all the time, then maybe we would all be 'inspired'
Basically, if a sport gets high viewing figures the bbc shoukd be showing it, as thats what we pay our licence fee for
posted on 4/9/12
I see. Fair enough Clegg. As kids we were inspired to go out in the drizzle by our sporting heroes - Daly Thompson, Ian Botham, Bjorn Borg, Steve Ovett, Glen Hoddle. Or stay in - Eric Bristow, Jimmy White.
My God I'm old!
I get your point.
posted on 4/9/12
Brian Jacks!
posted on 4/9/12
I remember watchin andy caddick destroy the windies, I loved cricket from then on
posted on 5/9/12
Exiled, I have no idea who Melanie Phillips so definitely not a copy-paste!
Madnot, your right I'm probably being abit harsh on BBC4. In my defence that comes from having pretty much given up watching anything on the BBC other than Top Gear and the likes of New Tricks and Inspector George Gently. Both of which are examples of the sort of quality TV they should put more money in to.
posted on 5/9/12
Melanie is, um, a rare voice of reason and moderation, battling against the far-left bias of the liberal elite. I don't think.