uk f1 tv coverage - sky, bbc and ch4

[wnut]

Were there any of those awesome infrared cameras on the tyres?

I didn't see any!

[ScotsBrutesFan]

Originally Posted by wnut

Were there any of those awesome infrared cameras on the tyres?

I didn't see any!

Not this time, I think the teams and engine suppliers might be a bit sensitive about their cars being shown with that.

Also I think these cameras are slightly larger, so teams may not want it on the more aero sensitive nose mounts.

[wolfhound]

The RB camera's are mounted inside the nose so we are unlikely to have infrared shots facing back to the tea tray.

[bravo]

Originally Posted by ScotsBrutesFan

Any comments on the FOM direction and production?

There were some new graphics although I think they had a problem with the Tower during the race,

There were several uses of the 180 camera on Bottas's front wing. I'd love it to be just a little higher so we can see a car (if side by side) over the top of the tyre, but I know that would put it in the drivers eye-line.

No graphics showing speeds, gears and energy use from what I remember which was a little disappointing - not that you need the gear one with most of the cars having a big display - especially the TFT on the Merc wheel that seems to cover the majority of the wheel.

The rotating camera on Bottas' wing was good. I've seen them used in V8 Supercars and NASCAR to good effect, but it struggled to turn fast enough on the Williams as he overtook cars.

[Knowlesy]

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

I don't think he's classy enough for F1.
.

What does this even mean?

[davyboy]

Originally Posted by Knowlesy

What does this even mean?

This.

[Paradise City]

The old Edwards and Watson duo is F1 the way F1 should be. The dodgy microphone and the slight background noise between those tacky but somehow charming continental Eurosport adverts. Blanket coverage of Friday quali but zero punditry stating the obvious. All that harks back to a great era of F1 on the telly. Edwards as F1 commentator today is correcting a cosmic injustice that he was out of F1 for so long. F1 is where he belongs.

I find Brundle can be quite cold. But that maybe down to his accent coming across slightly the wrong way - which if so is more a prejudice on my part. Crofty is all over the place - but I forgive him because unlike Legard he doesn't bluff and has a genuine passion for it. That forgives alot of sins. He's quite a typical commentator actually.

[S griffin]

I like any commentator that has passion and that includes ex-racer's too!

[VIVA GT]

I'm not (and never will be) a Sky subscriber but this weekend I was able to watch their coverage of The Austrian Grand Prix as I was staying with a mate who does subscribe.
I have to say that everything I saw (or to be more precise, heard) has made me feel even more convinced that I'm doing the right thing.
Ted Kravitz Notebook? What on earth is this purile load of nonsense? Just half an hour of him wandering around the back of the paddock making stupid comments to his cameraman and having in-jokes with his 'very good friends' commentators from other countries.
I like (or liked) Damon Hill & Johnny Herbert, but a lightly scripted (and poorly delivered chat as they walked around the campsite. What was that all about?
Then come the race and I was looking forward to hearing Martin Brundle again after so long along with David Croft who I used to like on Radio 5. Again a major disappointment, admittedly it wasn't the most exciting of races for them to commentate on, but they appeared to be desperately clutching at straws to add some drama into the proceedings to the extent that after a long view shot of the area where the circuit is tried to suggest that a probable black cloud could possibly mean a rain storm before the end of the race!
It must be costing a fortune to pay all of these talking heads to mumble nonsense at every Grand Prix which is why it costs a fortune to subscribe and in my opinion the end result is nowhere near as good as what I get free (OK, I know that I don't get every race live) from the BBC .

[Flavio Galtieri]

I don't have Sky either but a pal does and offered to come over and we could watch it on his SKY Go subscription.

The SKY feed was so bad, buffering, jerky and lagging pictures that after 15 mins I reverted to my usual free live SKY feed from the net. Ok it wasn't 720 hd but it was fine with no lag. My connection was good btw.

Croft is awful, hasn't even got a basic understanding of the art of driving a racing car. Kravitz is a joke, should be on kiddies' TV and is unwatchable without squirming. Brundle's obviously just there for the money and is nowhere near the performance he was giving at the beeb. The only one I feel has improved is Davidson, who during practice and qualifying seems to have stopped giggling at Croft's inane remarks and instead gives some very incisive commentary.

I still watch the BBC highlights afterwards though.

[bella]

i don't know, i appreciate crofty's abilities as a very good "colour" and lead commentator. his voice doesn't jar at all, and i don't find myself grumbling at him.

most of his problem is that i don't think brundle is the best expert commentator any more.

[Greem]

I think a lot of the "problems" being described here are a symptom of the ever-changing nature of sports coverage on TV.

Long gone are the days of the expert commentator (for example David Coleman) who had absolutely encyclopaedic knowledge of their sport(s); we're now seeing a move towards "Zoo" TV presentation, complete with in jokes and "matey banter". Not just in F1, but almost everywhere.

For the record I quite like the Sky race coverage *but* I generally turn it on just as Brundle's grid walk starts and turn it off when the podium's done; that's primarily because I genuinely can't stand Mr Lazenby's presentation style.

All that said, as we've said before, we are not the prime market for them. We're niche enthusiasts, we represent a tiny fraction of the watching public - and like F1 itself, the TV companies want to have mass appeal to the "casual" fan. The hardcore enthusiasts can sit together in a corner and moan.

[MagnetON]

One thing that I've recently noticed is that if you use the official F1 app it shows that (here in Ireland anyway!) the live TV coverage is approximately 6 or 7 seconds behind the app.

[Paradise City]

If you're setting up an exclusive F1 channel I presume you are pitching for the niche audience?

Kravitz notebook is pure comedy GOLD. Complete, total and utter lack of self awareness that man. But that's why it's so good.

As for Croft, he's a naff DJ type. The quintessential commentator in otherwords. I don't actually need a lead commentator that knows anything - as long as the lead commentator in question is enthusiastic, isn't bluffing me, doesn't tell me lies and has a solid supporting commentator. In Brundle, Croft has that.

Traditionally many commentators where often quite ignorant of the sport they where drafted in to commentate on actually. Even Murray got a flat zero in Mastermind.

Herbert and Hill gell well together as pundits. Pinkman does ALOT of irritating somersaulting about the place but she does courageously put the drivers on the spot when called upon to do so.

I'm happy enough with what Sky are doing. If I was raising and educatin' kids I'd have to have a good look at that price mind you but otherwise they put out a very worthy service.

I've seen very little of the BBC since last year. Edwards is a draw but there's nothing more that appeals to me there since Anderson was dropped.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Greem

I think a lot of the "problems" being described here are a symptom of the ever-changing nature of sports coverage on TV.

agreed.

that said though, surely in this day and age multiple audio/commentary streams should be more common. they already do it for different languages so why not have a second English commentary to appease the needs of different age groups and styles.

actually i havent looked but are there any amateur commentary streams out there that anyone knows of?

particularly cringe worthy from the BBC coverage this weekend was the moment that DC felt the need to educate the younger viewers who MC Hammer was after LH got the 'its hammer time' radio call.

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

agreed.

that said though, surely in this day and age multiple audio/commentary streams should be more common. they already do it for different languages so why not have a second English commentary to appease the needs of different age groups and styles.

actually i havent looked but are there any amateur commentary streams out there that anyone knows of?

particularly cringe worthy from the BBC coverage this weekend was the moment that DC felt the need to educate the younger viewers who MC Hammer was after LH got the 'its hammer time' radio call.

In all seriousness, after my experience this weekend I'd put Sky F1 forward for this one...

[Adam43]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

particularly cringe worthy from the BBC coverage this weekend was the moment that DC felt the need to educate the younger viewers who MC Hammer was after LH got the 'its hammer time' radio call.

Hammer-timesizzle?

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Hammer-timesizzle?

Haha! Crazy Dave comin' atcha fo'shizzle

[davyboy]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

particularly cringe worthy from the BBC coverage this weekend was the moment that DC felt the need to educate the younger viewers who MC Hammer was after LH got the 'its hammer time' radio call.

Not as cringe worthy as DC's 'appearance' on Scott Mills' Radio 1 Innuendo Bingo this lunchtime. Mid flow during last weekend's race commentary he let slip that one of the drivers had the ability to 'make his rubber go longer'. Maybe he'd like to educate the younger viewers on what that means and more worryingly, how he discovered it

[garcon]

F1 on Radio 1. The mind boggles.

"So, F1, dem cars are dead fast, yeah? Innit. Fo'shizzle. Boom."

And that's just DC.

[codename_47]

I have felt that DC has been dragging down the BBC F1 commentary for a while now.
He just seems to have no interest in building a relationship with or even listening to Ben Edwards and seems to be his own little glib coolguy world that happens to merge with ben for 3 hours a weekend then he's off again.

Anyone who has followed Ben's career over the last 10/15 years knows he's had amazing commentary partnerships with people like Jeremy Shaw, Tim Harvey, John Watson, etc so the fault here can't be his.

Conversely the little we've heard of Edwards and McNish in practice has worked a lot better.
Might it be worth the BBC shoving DC back as a pure pundit only and let Allan have a go in the box?

Sky I feel go too much for the ex ITVF1 "cooking with Jarno trulli" style of superficial reporting.
To them it's just about what Nico has said about Lewis and what Lewis has said about Nico atm.
BBC surprisingly feel a little more in depth.
Not much but there's slightly less jingoism and spurious features that don't tell the story of the race.

[Mystery]

I watch only the Sky coverage and even then only the sessions and none of the fluff. As a result I find it all quite enjoyable.

[codename_47]

I'm sure it is, as a non subscriber the only thing that really appeals to me is GP2/3 and the classic races they show.

[Mystery]

The classics are indeed very good. They had a complete rerun of Canada 2011 including red flag delay not that long ago which brought back excellent memories.

[p-matt]

I've only watched maybe half a dozen of the classic races all the way through. I'd rather they had more highlight packages of races pre-2012 than the full race.

GP2 and GP3 is a massive draw for me. And I genuinely enjoy the Sky coverage - even the pre-race fluff, practice sessions where nothing happens, the F1 Show, and Ted's Notebook especially.