BBC Winter Olympics sob-story mini rant

Innocent Bystander posted:

I do not pay for TV other than paying the obligatory licence fee that funds the BBC. So I expect BBC coverage to be adequate.

That's fine, and entirely your choice, but the world has moved and to use a weak analogy you're free to continue to shop in Sainsbury's but can have no cause for complaint if the stuff you actually want is now only sold in Waitrose and Harrods, and costs a lot more than it used to.We'd all like our £145 LF to fund as much sport as the BBC could fit in, even opening up new channels dedicated to showing it, whilst at the same time also providing a comprehensive service of non-sporting tv that covers the whole gamut of genres from docs to music to new writers to comedy panel shows and all points in between. Aint gonna happen; we live in a multi-channel global tv world where content providers - esp sport and especially football within it - recognise the value of their product to the tv industry. And Eurosport is very good, even down to the fact that its HD is better than the BBC's - try flicking between the two when they both have the same snooker on. Eurosport wins on PQ, and has better presentation and better guests.

Anyway, back to OP. I disagree. If some young competitor discovers an ability and then dedicates a huge part of their lives to being in contention for a medal, it's hardly surprising that seeing it all come to a crashing halt for what at the time seem like such tiny reasons - the nick of the hand by a skate, a gust of wind at just the wrong moment - causes such angst so it's reasonable to be gutted about it, and even though we can profess to dislike it the tv industry knows what viewers want and will milk it for what they can get out of it. It's the way society is now and has become over the recent years. We'll often be watching some emotional situation on the news or similar and the victim of the tv's requirement will pause and draw breath with the wobbly bottom lip, and you can almost hear the producer and directors willing him or her on - "come on, cry for the cameras. Blab now dammit". It's how it is. The BBC aren't the only ones to do this, and aren't immune from pushing the personal interest. We might not like it, but it's how life is these days.

Personally I'd revert us back to the Edwardian era but with all the tech, and the disposable income. That might work.

Eloise posted:

Innocent Bystander posted:

I do not pay for TV other than paying the obligatory licence fee that funds the BBC. So I expect BBC coverage to be adequate.

I understand you don't want to pay additional for TV ... but if you were willing to; then Eurosports is available via online at £6.99 a month or 99p for the first month (no minimum subscription as far as I can see).

I am not willing to pay more than the obligatory licence - and I’d need a satellite dish etc! There really is so much trash on TV - and for sports I have zero interest in most - that I do not feel paying for more than the BBC licence and getting the other free channels is worth it. I did have a sarellite dish in a previous house, and had freesat - but most of the time that didn’t bring anything additional of interest. BBC if they devoted the peak time to concentrating on showing the Olympic action would be just fine.

Fingers, toes and anything else that can be crossed for the brit lizzy in the ladies Skeleton tomorrow.

Innocent Bystander posted:

I do not pay for TV other than paying the obligatory licence fee that funds the BBC. So I expect BBC coverage to be adequate.

I think that's fair enough. If there is was just one channel available for my licence fee, I'd be incensed if much of the time was taken up by celebrity puff pieces instead of showing the sports. (We have cable here, and just switch to alternate channels if some piece of idiotic feelgood rubbish comes on.)

Innocent Bystander posted:

I am not willing to pay more than the obligatory licence - and I’d need a satellite dish etc!

As I say ... thats completely your choice ... its just an option.  I'm not really interested in sports I just saw the offer elsewhere.  For the record though - the £6.99 / 99p offer is delivered via internet so no satellite dish is required.

ChrisR_EPL posted:

We'd all like our £145 LF to fund as much sport as the BBC could fit in, even opening up new channels dedicated to showing it 

Of course (and I think this was your point) ... many people would argue that the sport BBC already show is too much and not value for money.

Eloise posted:

Innocent Bystander posted:

I am not willing to pay more than the obligatory licence - and I’d need a satellite dish etc!

As I say ... thats completely your choice ... its just an option.  I'm not really interested in sports I just saw the offer elsewhere.  For the record though - the £6.99 / 99p offer is delivered via internet so no satellite dish is required.

ChrisR_EPL posted:

We'd all like our £145 LF to fund as much sport as the BBC could fit in, even opening up new channels dedicated to showing it 

Of course (and I think this was your point) ... many people would argue that the sport BBC already show is too much and not value for money.

I am not arging for more sport, just simply that the once in 4 year event should maximise event coverage at prime viewing time and keep the other bits including such inane drivel by presenters  as the channel delights in paying for with good money to other times of day.

winkyincanada posted:

Innocent Bystander posted:

I do not pay for TV other than paying the obligatory licence fee that funds the BBC. So I expect BBC coverage to be adequate.

I think that's fair enough. If there is was just one channel available for my licence fee, I'd be incensed if much of the time was taken up by celebrity puff pieces instead of showing the sports. (We have cable here, and just switch to alternate channels if some piece of idiotic feelgood rubbish comes on.)

For clarity, we pay a licence fee that nominally funds the BBC as official public service broadcaster, obviating punctuation of programmes with adverts. In addition there are a number of “terrestrial” free-to-view channels, about 8 or 10 accessible where I live, funded by advertising. The BBC is the only one covering the Olympics, split between two of their channels (mid evening prome time has one hour on one then one hour with different presentation immediately following on another. At times there is one additional parallel “red button” channel showing a different event, though when last I checked it was showing something That had been on half an hour earlier.

there is also live coverage overnight, starting at something like midnight or 1 AM - for those able to be up all night

I would like there to be less sport on the BBC.  Drivel or otherwise.

Sorry - I'll just go and hide, shall I?

Beachcomber posted:

I would like there to be less sport on the BBC.  Drivel or otherwise.

Sorry - I'll just go and hide, shall I?

I’m quite happy for there to be less sport overall, on BBC (ditto other channels): I can’t think of any of the common sports that I watch, other than some parts of events of the winter olympics.and somewhat less of the olympic games. Othr things I might be interested in are similarly infrequent.

Beachcomber posted:

I would like there to be less sport on the BBC. 

That's perfectly reasonable. I, for the most part don't watch sport on TV. I do watch some cycling, (mostly on pirated internet feeds as cycling isn't generally broadcast much at all in North America) but generally regret the time wasted once it is over. The only sports I'm really interested in are the ones I actually do. For many sports there are many more fans than there are participants. That's missing the point, in my view.

I guess you don’t watch sumo then. Probably 99.99999% of sumo fans don’t participate, far too specialised, skilful and dangerous for the average person to attempt.

The BBC’s coverage is woeful, non existent. Luckily NHK world broadcast a daily 30 minute highlights show during each 15 day Basho.

https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/en/tv/sumo/

Sumo wrestling on ice would be good to watch.....

The BBC do seem to be laying it on a bit thick in their coverage.

Eurosport is not perfect either as it is peppered with adverts.

Overall though a good spectacle with events like the men's downhill and the ski jump.

Ray

fatcat posted:

I guess you don’t watch sumo then.

 

You are 100% correct with that guess. Nor do I watch football, tennis, wrestling, equestrian, athletics, swimming, fencing, archery, ice hockey, rugby or anything much else.

According to the sports reporter on R4 at 7.30 this morning Elise Christie offers the possibility of her 'Olympic redemption' in her next event.

I conclude that Mrs W is a far, far nicer person than me too!

C.

If only they had winter Olympic swimming and freestyle diving.

Christopher_M posted:

According to the sports reporter on R4 at 7.30 this morning Elise Christie offers the possibility of her 'Olympic redemption' in her next event.

...well that went well!

All this ‘down wiv the kids’ speak - The ‘Big Air’ commentary is toe curlingly forced. If I hear ‘She absolutely stomped it’ once more.

Bring back rp, decorum and some restraint I say. 

G

Conclusions

1) Winter Olympics always seem rather jolly, bit friendlier and less macho than the summer games. Sports you'll not see or hear of for another 4 years but are fun to watch when it comes around. Some require serious cojones.

2) Lots of sports that rely on judging rather than the stopwatch but I did not hear too many complaints over bias etc.

3) The BBC need to learn that just because you are a former or current athlete and look easy on the eye this does not automatically make you a good presenter or pundit. I do also find Ms Balding pretty wet and irritatingly inoffensive.

4) Maybe I'm not the target audience but I found the commentary on the freestyle sports either risible or deeply infuriating. Too much 'slammin it down', 'going big' and 'WOW' by far.

Bruce

My feelings are pretty similar. I found a fair bit to enjoy, though not helped by BBC1’s too presenter-centric prime time slot and repetitiveness between that and the immediately following prime time BBC2 slot.

In addition, overall I felt the  Olympic spirit in relation to both North/South Korea and, though to a slightly lesser extent, the Russian athletes was a positive one, and the Games did the Right Thing. 

I do wonder, however, about the mechanism and principles of funding that seem to be more focussed on pushing some people towards medals than overall development and encouragement, though that is based purely on snipoets from the presentations, not on any real knowledge.

Having been in the US for the first week of said games, NBC were just as bad about their country folk. Skiers, ice hockey etc. They even called one of the medals on the skiing just after half the contestants had gone. All rather embarrassing.