Bt Sport Coverage

[waytogo28]

The on track racing only please with a brief audio and text info. So yes, show a whole meeting in that sense. It is the other parts of a meeting which usually fail to impress. Even the boring "from the gate" heats only last a minute at most.

[RobMcCaffery]

1 hour ago, someone said:

I assumed that is what was meant by highlights.  Most of a live speedway broadcast is filling time while riders are still in the pits or the track is being graded.  A 30–45 minute programme could show the highlights, i.e. the actual racing, with commercials and analysis without requiring people to give up two hours.

Although I am not so sure it would have the desired effect, as I do not think there are that many people unwilling to sample or watch speedway just because of that.  Otherwise sports like athletics would not be popular live either.

Anyway, whilst BT Sport has a good deal with the BPSA and it will continue I would be surprised if they drop the sport as it provides live content in the summer, where they have less options to fill out their schedule.  Personally I would rather it went elsewhere, though, simply because I cannot justify a BT subscription only for speedway. Although everyone is making it sound that we have such an awful competition now maybe I should be grateful I cannot watch.

So, if TV televised a concert you'd only want to hear the few chart successes in the gig? Just get it all finished after 15 minutes? Wonder why Sky and BT spend all that money on live sport when just a 'Match of the Day' style programme would be enough for the undemanding viewers with limited attention spans? 

All sport has its moments when action isn't rivetting, but viewing figures show that the public want live, full coverage of sport, even if others settle for third rate. 

The divide between the real world and the BSF is quite staggering at times. 

[A ORLOV]

8 minutes ago, RobMcCaffery said:

So, if TV televised a concert you'd only want to hear the few chart successes in the gig? Just get it all finished after 15 minutes? Wonder why Sky and BT spend all that money on live sport when just a 'Match of the Day' style programme would be enough for the undemanding viewers with limited attention spans? 

All sport has its moments when action isn't rivetting, but viewing figures show that the public want live, full coverage of sport, even if others settle for third rate. 

The divide between the real world and the BSF is quite staggering at times. 

I always look forward to the tractor grading and multiple tape restarts and lots of waffle from the commentators that come with each live meeting.

That is why many record the meetings and use the fast forward button, the same with many sports progs.

Edited June 4, 2018 by A ORLOV

[INCOGNITO]

Have to ask the question as to who pays the wages of Quirk, Nicholls, Tatum and Pearson. I would presume it's BT as presenters and if rumours are correct that's the only money they pay out for Speedway as this years deal apparantly involves no money going to clubs. 

 

Speedway could do do with an hour long programme on a Sunday night looking back at the weeks action not just here but also in the GPs and foreign leagues.

[PHILIPRISING]

FOR SGP/SON events, BSI provide the TV coverage including commentary. BT cover their own studio with Natalie and Scott.

For domestic speedway, the TV production company are provided with a budget to cover all costs including those of Natalie, Kelvin and Nigel.

[Hawk127]

Yes apologies for not being clearer on the highlights. I meant all fifteen heats.

I do not think it takes anything away and would perhaps encourage people to try a live meeting. The highlights is in effect what you get with repeat of GP and it seems OK on Motors with the Ice Speedway. Highlights in a magazine format might be more interesting with decent interviews with riders, promoters and referees rather than a few minutes with those who believe everyone understands what they are jabbering about when they end each sentence with ‘You know’. No we don’t otherwise the question would not have been asked in the hope of a sensible reply. Coverage of what is going on in other countries given that so many riders in the UK also have team places abroad. Widen the information given out and make it interesting. When was the last time anyone mentioned during a live broadcast anything about the bikes and the acceleration capabilities with no brakes. Rarely if at all is the answer. It always assumes that it is the diehards watching and not new fans.

Many including myself could go on with this topic but life is too short and nothing will change. It is what it is both live and recorded TV as well as track attendance. You pay your money and make choice but is it any wonder that more and more have become armchair viewers when the whole idea of a meeting being on has become such a lottery.

[flagrag]

From what I have been informed Natalie,Kelvin,Nigel and Brando all do the British League Racing for the love of the sport and provide their services very cheap and well below market value as they understand how important tv coverage is to British clubs with attracting sponsors and new supporters 

[waytogo28]

A pity then that some promoters don't share their point of view. Those who were firmly against TV coverage as well as those who charge full price for admission to televised meetings. It does no good to have a positive Pearson,Quirk and Tatum there live and hardly anyone else in the stadium watching ( as at Rye House last week ) PQ&T must be gutted by that.

[IainB]

11 minutes ago, waytogo28 said:

A pity then that some promoters don't share their point of view. Those who were firmly against TV coverage as well as those who charge full price for admission to televised meetings. It does no good to have a positive Pearson,Quirk and Tatum there live and hardly anyone else in the stadium watching ( as at Rye House last week ) PQ&T must be gutted by that.

One assumes PQ&T don't have to pay up their £18 to get in 

[waytogo28]

2 hours ago, iainb said:

One assumes PQ&T don't have to pay up their £18 to get in 

I hope they get in at the concessions rate ( if not free ). They must have had to pay at Rye House though.

[Midland Red]

4 hours ago, Hawk127 said:

Yes apologies for not being clearer on the highlights. I meant all fifteen heats.

I do not think it takes anything away and would perhaps encourage people to try a live meeting. The highlights is in effect what you get with repeat of GP and it seems OK on Motors with the Ice Speedway. Highlights in a magazine format might be more interesting with decent interviews with riders, promoters and referees rather than a few minutes with those who believe everyone understands what they are jabbering about when they end each sentence with ‘You know’. No we don’t otherwise the question would not have been asked in the hope of a sensible reply. Coverage of what is going on in other countries given that so many riders in the UK also have team places abroad. Widen the information given out and make it interesting. When was the last time anyone mentioned during a live broadcast anything about the bikes and the acceleration capabilities with no brakes. Rarely if at all is the answer. It always assumes that it is the diehards watching and not new fans.

Many including myself could go on with this topic but life is too short and nothing will change. It is what it is both live and recorded TV as well as track attendance. You pay your money and make choice but is it any wonder that more and more have become armchair viewers when the whole idea of a meeting being on has become such a lottery.

These days, most riders (and team managers) appear to answer questions with "Yes, no"

[waytogo28]

15 hours ago, Hawk127 said:

It always assumes that it is the diehards watching and not new fans.

Unfortunately I do think that all who are watching are diehards including the many thousands who have walked away from watching matches in the stadiums ( probably more of them than those who still attend UK matches ). The only casual fans are likely to be channel hopping for a bit of sport excitement and they won't know anything about speedway and believe quite reasonably that the bikes have gears and brakes. They will likely be looking for a crash or two thinking it might be stockcar  on two wheels.

[PHILIPRISING]

GOOD to see a preview of tonight's event at BV on the TV pages of the Daily Mail today

[someone]

20 hours ago, RobMcCaffery said:

So, if TV televised a concert you'd only want to hear the few chart successes in the gig? Just get it all finished after 15 minutes? Wonder why Sky and BT spend all that money on live sport when just a 'Match of the Day' style programme would be enough for the undemanding viewers with limited attention spans? 

All sport has its moments when action isn't rivetting, but viewing figures show that the public want live, full coverage of sport, even if others settle for third rate. 

The divide between the real world and the BSF is quite staggering at times. 

You consider watching a tractor going around in circles, Dave Goddard reading out tweets, riders doing some gardening, Pearson and Tatum arguing over whether they ever agree with each other, and literally looking at an empty track as being the equivalent of a band's album tracks?  Crikey.

Plenty of sports do have slow periods, such as a ball getting kicked around in the middle of the field or a snooker players line up a shot.  But they are actually action as part of the sport being played.  Most of the two hours of a speedway meeting is not action, which is why it gets filled out with replays, commercials, inane and otherwise conversation, and stock car racing.  Riders in pits and not on the track is certainly not action.  Repairing an air fence is not action.  Even riders on the track just waiting around for the marshall to get them ready is not action.

Personally I prefer watching sport live too, but viewing figures show that Match of the Day is very popular.  There is a reason why highlights show are still very common on all channels, people watch them.  And sports are not all the same as to how they translate between live and highlights.

A rugby match is two halves of over 40 minutes of near continuous action, whilst a league speedway meeting is fifteen races lasting around a minute.  Highlights of the former means having to cut out moments when the sport was being played, highlights but for the latter it does not.  You can make a half hour version of a speedway meeting without missing a second of racing, including all the ones which never technically happened as they had to be restarted.

If the choice is a good highlights programme or nothing, people will still chose the former.  And the idea here — though I said I disagree with it, and it does not have to be an either/or situation anyway as you could have a proper highlights show in addition to a live meeting — is that highlights would be a better format for people who are not the hardcore speedway fans who pay to see some high quality track grading action, but instead those who would be turned off by no riders being on the track for over three-quarters of the event so broadcasts are literally ust filling time.  That is why Goddard treats the Swedish coverage more like a local radio show between races, because he has to find a way to keep people from turning off when there is literally nothing happening for him to commentate on. 

How many speedway fans spend the entire two hours studiously watching the track or TV instead of doing something else between heats anyway?  You might be upset at a concert if the band does not play the three minutes of silence before the hidden bonus track at the end of a CD, but you will be in a minority.  Speedway really does not have the luxury of only performing to a minority of its fans, let alone just its fans alone.

In the real world speedway is struggling yet you are arguing the viewing figures show that the public are happy with what they are getting and there is no need to consider other options?  You are right, the divide between the real world and the BSF is quite staggering at times. 

[Grachan]

27 minutes ago, someone said:

You consider watching a tractor going around in circles, Dave Goddard reading out tweets, riders doing some gardening, Pearson and Tatum arguing over whether they ever agree with each other, and literally looking at an empty track as being the equivalent of a band's album tracks?  Crikey.

Plenty of sports do have slow periods, such as a ball getting kicked around in the middle of the field or a snooker players line up a shot.  But they are actually action as part of the sport being played.  Most of the two hours of a speedway meeting is not action, which is why it gets filled out with replays, commercials, inane and otherwise conversation, and stock car racing.  Riders in pits and not on the track is certainly not action.  Repairing an air fence is not action.  Even riders on the track just waiting around for the marshall to get them ready is not action.

Personally I prefer watching sport live too, but viewing figures show that Match of the Day is very popular.  There is a reason why highlights show are still very common on all channels, people watch them.  And sports are not all the same as to how they translate between live and highlights.

A rugby match is two halves of over 40 minutes of near continuous action, whilst a league speedway meeting is fifteen races lasting around a minute.  Highlights of the former means having to cut out moments when the sport was being played, highlights but for the latter it does not.  You can make a half hour version of a speedway meeting without missing a second of racing, including all the ones which never technically happened as they had to be restarted.

If the choice is a good highlights programme or nothing, people will still chose the former.  And the idea here — though I said I disagree with it, and it does not have to be an either/or situation anyway as you could have a proper highlights show in addition to a live meeting — is that highlights would be a better format for people who are not the hardcore speedway fans who pay to see some high quality track grading action, but instead those who would be turned off by no riders being on the track for over three-quarters of the event so broadcasts are literally ust filling time.  That is why Goddard treats the Swedish coverage more like a local radio show between races, because he has to find a way to keep people from turning off when there is literally nothing happening for him to commentate on. 

How many speedway fans spend the entire two hours studiously watching the track or TV instead of doing something else between heats anyway?  You might be upset at a concert if the band does not play the three minutes of silence before the hidden bonus track at the end of a CD, but you will be in a minority.  Speedway really does not have the luxury of only performing to a minority of its fans, let alone just its fans alone.

In the real world speedway is struggling yet you are arguing the viewing figures show that the public are happy with what they are getting and there is no need to consider other options?  You are right, the divide between the real world and the BSF is quite staggering at times. 

 

It should be pointed out that Match of the Day is popular for one reason and one reason alone - it's football.

For me a live speedway meeting is the only way to go on television these days, but I think they miss a lot in their coverage in terms of what they talk about. Speedway lends itself to tactics and statistics that really should be analysed in greater detail. It's a major part of its appeal.

They should also bring back proper tactical substitutes, and get people on there who understand tactics to talk about it. I remember in the days of the old TS rule where there would be massive group conversations among the crowd about what was the best way to use the tac subs. This could be a major discussion point if it weren't limited to just one TS -which takes out much of the tactics.

I would like to see that. Plus talk about, say, R/R and who could go in where and how it could benefit the teams. For me this would make for interesting viewing and I think it would open out the sport more to casual observers who can only see the "4 blokes on bikes doing 4 laps" aspect of the sport.

[BWitcher]

50 minutes ago, someone said:

Plenty of sports do have slow periods, such as a ball getting kicked around in the middle of the field or a snooker players line up a shot.  But they are actually action as part of the sport being played.  Most of the two hours of a speedway meeting is not action, which is why it gets filled out with replays, commercials, inane and otherwise conversation, and stock car racing.  Riders in pits and not on the track is certainly not action.  

A rugby match is two halves of over 40 minutes of near continuous action,

Staggering how often this nonsense is trotted out on this forum.

You are deeming a snooker player 'lining up a shot' as 'action'? Seriously? But you dismiss 'gardening' as not action. Where's the difference? Answer, there is none. 

And no, rugby is not two halves of over 40 minutes with near continuous action. Not even close. Average time of ball in play is around 34-35 mins. I bet you deem a player taking up to a minute to 'line up' a penalty kick as 'action'.

[mikebv]

1 hour ago, Grachan said:

 

It should be pointed out that Match of the Day is popular for one reason and one reason alone - it's football.

For me a live speedway meeting is the only way to go on television these days, but I think they miss a lot in their coverage in terms of what they talk about. Speedway lends itself to tactics and statistics that really should be analysed in greater detail. It's a major part of its appeal.

They should also bring back proper tactical substitutes, and get people on there who understand tactics to talk about it. I remember in the days of the old TS rule where there would be massive group conversations among the crowd about what was the best way to use the tac subs. This could be a major discussion point if it weren't limited to just one TS -which takes out much of the tactics.

I would like to see that. Plus talk about, say, R/R and who could go in where and how it could benefit the teams. For me this would make for interesting viewing and I think it would open out the sport more to casual observers who can only see the "4 blokes on bikes doing 4 laps" aspect of the sport.

And MOTD is on the BBC free to air therefore has a great many viewers who don't have access to both Pay TV packages that broadcast it..

To add to your point re 'discussions to be had'....

As a Sport that slavishly uses averages to determine team strengths I do think that it doesn't use these 'stats' anywhere near enough..

I am a convert to Baseball and they throw batting averages, pitching averages, fielding errors %'s out like theres no tomorrow..

They even break down the pitcher v batter historical performances against each other, how many runs the batter has had at that particular venue previously, performance v left handers/right handers etc etc etc..

Speedway could show and discuss the head to head performance between individual riders, previous points scored/average at that track by each away rider and wins % over the season, seconds, thirds lasts %'s for each competitor..

They could also discuss individual points scored by riders from the four gate positions over the season, update the League table through the programme as points change. (With fixed nights several meetings take place so 'the table as it stands' could be a recurring theme). Maybe each riders fastest time around the circuit could be discussed and highlighted if he beats it? The track record never seems to be mentioned? Why not?

Speedway uses so much data, and kicks out so many possible stats that it should use them in the inevitable down time to keep a watching audience, at home and at the track interested..

Announcing how many times 'Hans has beat Jason at Leicester this season' and 'Hans has won 'x' % of races from Gate 1' in the space before his heat starts must be of some interest to some I am sure..

Each race could have its own little snippet of info as a build up to it, adds a bit of spice too if the last time some of the riders had a coming together etc etc.. Which ultimately builds anticipation..

And got to be better than just having 'K Tels Hits of the 70's' on repeat or 'Birthday Wishes to Gladys who was 88 last Thursday and her favourite rider was Bjorn Knutsson'  as the 'entertainment' between races..

Edited June 5, 2018 by mikebv

[Orbiter]

The only thing I found great about the Rye House meeting was the round old guy with the straw hat eating his Burger!

[someone]

On June 5, 2018 at 12:13 PM, BWitcher said:

You are deeming a snooker player 'lining up a shot' as 'action'? Seriously? But you dismiss 'gardening' as not action. Where's the difference? Answer, there is none. 

And no, rugby is not two halves of over 40 minutes with near continuous action. Not even close. Average time of ball in play is around 34-35 mins. I bet you deem a player taking up to a minute to 'line up' a penalty kick as 'action'.

 

I am not interested in snooker, but yes I do.  When you see a player lining up a shoot you are seeing their thought process on which ball to hit, the angle to take, where they want the cue ball to end up to line up the next shot.  It is not just dead time, it is revealing something about what the player wants to happen.

When you see a speedway rider gardening it tells you they want more grip.  Of course they do.  What exactly should a casual or non-speedway viewer gain by watching someone stamp their foot for a minute that should keep them watching? 

As for rugby, aside from the fact you are only considering rugby union as the ball is in play much longer in a rugby league match, I would still consider the times when a line out is set or a scrum packed as being part of the action even before the ball is put in play.  It is still part of the game, unlike in speedway where there is literally nothing happening to watch between races when riders are in the pits.

But I am happy to be proved wrong, that there is so little action in snooker and rugby that people are turning away from it, and are flocking to speedway because of the exciting gardening action.

Spectators prove otherwise.  TV ratings prove otherwise.  The amount broadcasters are willing to pay prove otherwise.

But I like speedway and want it to survive so would be very happy if you could show me that everyone but hardcore speedway fans think gardening is no different to snooker players lining up shots.  That casual viewers think the one hour and forty-five minutes of a speedway meeting without racing is part of the action and equivalent to a scrum being formed.

Please prove to me that this is "nonsense," and that speedway's constant decline to the point where it essentially has to give away its TV coverage for free just because it needs the exposure is going to reverse by doing nothing to make it more attract to new fans.

[waytogo28]

16 minutes ago, someone said:

that speedway's constant decline to the point where it essentially has to give away its TV coverage for free just because it needs the exposure is going to reverse by doing nothing to make it more attract to new fans.

I still believe, and yes I know that many fan's don't, that live streaming of UK league matches is financially viable and indeed profitable. Pay Per View works in other sports.It does not have to be BT standard broadcast and there is no need to hire T&P . I would pay for such a facility and dream of the day when one club will launch that - even as a trial.. It's something that the BSPA could and should have tried as admissions and travelling costs have soared.