TV Home Forum

Is it time for dedicated BBC & ITV Sports channels?

(June 2018)

This site closed in March 2021 and is now a read-only archive
LS
Lou Scannon
I begrudge airtime being given to the kind of people who are on things like TOWIE, Big Brother, Jeremy Kyle, Love Island, Take Me Out etc etc, far more than any* sports coverage.

(*with the possible exception of golf)
UK
UKnews
Can someone please genuinely and sensibly explain to me the logic of both ITV and BBC simulcasting the final at exactly the same time? What's the difference between watching it on BBC or ITV?
It doesn't happen for any other sporting event.

A bit of TV history answers many questions here - historically all major sporting events were simulcast, even when only three channels.

Steve Williams will know for sure but I believe in the pre satellite days listed events had to be available to both the BBC & ITV, that didn't mean both showed them but they had to have the option too. So when ITV felt like it / they could get it past the unions, they would cover the Olympics - as they did in 1968, 1972, 1980 and 1988. Now of course a 'qualifying channel' can buy exclusive coverage.


thegeek is correct about the FA Cup Final and every World Cup Final has been simulcast since 1966. I think the same goes for every European Championship final aside from 2008 when ITV decided it wasn't worth showing it against the Beeb. Before the 1990s most home nations games in World Cups would be simulcast as well, it was almost the reverse of now - for a number of tournaments each of the BBC and ITV would have one exclusive home nations game and any more would be shown by both, others (the final aside) would be shared as now.
CA
Cardiffian
Can someone please genuinely and sensibly explain to me the logic of both ITV and BBC simulcasting the final at exactly the same time? What's the difference between watching it on BBC or ITV?
It doesn't happen for any other sporting event.

Even if you don't like football, you can't deny that a lot of people like watching it. Why make it hard for them to do what they enjoy?

How difficult would it be to find BBC 2?

I love watching the Olympics, but as I've said, I'd have no problem watching it on 2 and not even the Olympics is allowed to shorten the evening news so much that it's barely worth bothering.
ET
ethanh05
I begrudge airtime being given to the kind of people who are on things like TOWIE, Big Brother, Jeremy Kyle, Love Island, Take Me Out etc etc, far more than any* sports coverage.

(*with the possible exception of golf)

*tennis

What you've got to consider is the ratings. BBC always beats ITV (with the possible exception of I think 74') due to the ad breaks and the fact that many people (myself NOT included) prefer the BBC's coverage. There's no point of simulcasting smaller games as it would be unfair on ITV.

Remember - the BBC is like Arsenal in 2003/04, it never loses.
UK
UKnews
Can someone please genuinely and sensibly explain to me the logic of both ITV and BBC simulcasting the final at exactly the same time? What's the difference between watching it on BBC or ITV?
It doesn't happen for any other sporting event.

Even if you don't like football, you can't deny that a lot of people like watching it. Why make it hard for them to do what they enjoy?

How difficult would it be to find BBC 2?

For a lot of people it is difficult - switch an event from BBC 1 to BBC 2 and watch the audience drop, switch an event from BBC 2 to BBC 1 and most (well a far greater proportion) moves with it.


Its about profile - BBC 1 is the flagship channel, its where general audiences expect to find the biggest events that have widespread appeal. That profile and audience reach is one of the things that helps the BBC win sports rights against providers with deeper pockets but more limited audiences.

If the biggest events at the Olympics - as far as a general UK audience is concerned - happened to mean shortening or moving the news it would happen, infact it has- sometimes unscheduled when events are running late.
UK
UKnews

What you've got to consider is the ratings. BBC always beats ITV (with the possible exception of I think 74')

Almost - it was 1970 and generally attributed to the quality and entertainment value of their panel. They tried something similar in 1974 (minus Jimmy Hill, who'd swapped sides) and lost.
:-(
A former member
The member requested removal of this post
DE
DE88
What's the difference between watching football on BBC 1 or next door on BBC 2?
Why can't we still have the full 6 - 7pm hour of national and regional news on BBC 1 with the matches starting at 7pm and Lineker chatting with his mates on BBC 2?

Apart from if a British interest player is playing at Wimbledon, no other sports events reduce the main evening national and regional news bulletins to less than 10 mins each. Not even London 2012 did that.


Are you saying, then, that you believe that no sports event should *ever* reduce the length of the main evening national and regional news bulletins on BBC1 - even if, for instance, the FA Cup Final goes to a penalty shootout that lasts for ages?
:-(
A former member
The member requested removal of this post
AN
Andrew Founding member
Can someone please genuinely and sensibly explain to me the logic of both ITV and BBC simulcasting the final at exactly the same time? What's the difference between watching it on BBC or ITV?
It doesn't happen for any other sporting event.

Both the BBC and ITV have the rights. They can actually simulcast every match if they wanted to but agree not to.


A bit of TV history answers many questions here - historically all major sporting events were simulcast, even when only three channels.

I agree the BBC have messed up with the news here and some nights scheduled it in 15-20 minute slots when it could have a more acceptable 45 minutes. The expectations of match broadcasts have changed quite significantly in the last few years though and as such the product, which is more than the match itself, now takes a slot closer to 3 hours than 2. Similarly there are alternative sources for BBC News too, hence it not being as secure in the schedule as perhaps it once was, whilst the BBC have long prioritised the Ten over the Six anyway.


Although I disagree with the complaints raised in this thread, I did wonder how they got away with yesterday’s schedule and scheduled it like this in the first place . Not just reducing the Six to 8 mins, but then moving the Ten to 10:30 for no reason but EastEnders.

Normally if one bulletin is disrupted, the other would get more prominence such as maybe an extended regional news slot.

It was certainly a day to bury bad news, and I wonder how they would have reacted if it had been a busy news day.
MarkT76, Spencer and DE88 gave kudos
JO
Joe
You think the schedules are mucked up right now, with a four yearly World Cup and annual Wimbledon on the way. It may be a touch tasteless to speculate but just wait for the passing of our Head Of State presumably at some point over the coming decade, un-scheduled and maybe with no warning. The disruption caused by the World Cup will be like nothing compared to that event.

Surely there will be a separate channel for all the funeral nonsense and such news?
DV
DVB Cornwall
.... there's also another element. cost of transmission of these extra channels. In addition the costs of producing the 'regular programming' not displaced has to be considered too. Daft idea all around.

Newer posts