AMATEUR HOUR BY THE BBC

The coverage of the Scotland Japan game from Murrayfield by the BBC yesterday was totally dismal.   Kicks for goal missed. Play missed. Close ups of the wrong players - half -arsed close ups of the crowd enjoying themselves.  This was a good game of rugby with plenty of tries and they fecked it right up.    It was glaringly apparent that the director had never been to a rugby match on the evidence of this.   Maybe they should take the 6Ns from them ?   At least this has the added advantage of not seeing/hearing that tosspot Inverdale (or Andy Nicol who is plain annoying).

Sounds appalling Schizoid. Maybe you drew the short straw and got a TV team that were used to covering football or something...

I wouldn't miss any of the BBC team except for Butler and Moore.

Wouldn't even miss Butler and Moore these days. Just an 80 minute whingeathon with them in there.

Give all the rugby to the BT crew and be done with it, they're the best by a mile.

Well the England Argie game on Sky had so many camera shot changes and close up facials I thought the camera director was on coke. Gave me a migraine anyway. The problem is none of the media guys understands that with sports coverage, less is more. They all want to be filming the latest Hollywood biggie really.

Barney McGrew did it wrote:Well the England Argie game on Sky had so many camera shot changes and close up facials I thought the camera director was on coke. Gave me a migraine anyway. The problem is none of the media guys understands that with sports coverage, less is more. They all want to be filming the latest Hollywood biggie really.

Agree the best coverage is a combination of wide and medium shots with close ups only used during breaks in play. The problem for the BBC is that unlike BT and Sky their directors do not get to practise covering sports week in week out.

P.s. My personal pet hate at sports events is endless pictures of so called 'celebrities' in the crowd. BBC's Wimbledon coverage is worst for this.  At Rugby internationals we get a variant in which apparently the directors think we want to see endless shots of Royals.

Exiledinborders wrote:

Barney McGrew did it wrote:Well the England Argie game on Sky had so many camera shot changes and close up facials I thought the camera director was on coke. Gave me a migraine anyway. The problem is none of the media guys understands that with sports coverage, less is more. They all want to be filming the latest Hollywood biggie really.

Agree the best coverage is a combination of wide and medium shots with close ups only used during breaks in play. The problem for the BBC is that unlike BT and Sky their directors do not get to practise covering sports week in week out.

P.s. My personal pet hate at sports events is endless picture of so called 'celebrities' in the crowd. BBC's Wimbledon coverage is worst for this.  At Rugby internationals we get a variant in which apparently the directors think we want to see endless shots of Royals.

And they often pick the strangest people/groups of people in the crowd to focus on... What is that all about?

The only close up of the crowd I want to see is the occasional lady streaker - ahh what's happened to this hardy type.

They won't show it anymore Barney. PC gone mad.  

stub wrote:They won't show it anymore Barney. PC gone mad.  

Portnoy's to blame? I do remember him mentioning Erica Roe on here

Also not a big fan of many of the camera angles these days. The ref cam is a complete waste of time unless you want to see up a prop's nose.

yappysnap wrote:Wouldn't even miss Butler and Moore these days. Just an 80 minute whingeathon with them in there.

Give all the rugby to the BT crew and be done with it, they're the best by a mile.

As much as I would appreciate good coverage, and I hear BTs is good, I would prefer bad coverage on a channel im able to watch than good coverage on something I have to pay through the nose for. I wouldnt mind too much if they said ok ALL rugby will be on this channel and will be for 3 years-I would pay for that. Having 2 different subscription channels, trying to find a pub with those channels that isnt playing football, finding a friend with them, ends up costing a a bomb and makes life difficult.

Agree with that, if the BT crew were on the BBC along with ALL rugby then the world would be complete. Never happen though.

The French TV coverage is ALWAYS awful. I sometimes wonder if they don't get an improvised piano music soundtrack rather than a commentary in France.

It's funny how we are supposed to applaud competition in broadcast providers (thereby theoretically keeping prices down), but when it comes down to it we don't actually want it split so that we have to subscribe several times.

One package for everything would be great. There is sometimes a need for monopolies

Having said that, compared to football rugby is minor deal so we're always going to be lumped in. The BT Sport's Champions League deal really puts the cat among the pigeons.

A dedicated rugby channel you say?

GloriousEmpire wrote:The French TV coverage is ALWAYS awful. I sometimes wonder if they don't get an improvised piano music soundtrack rather than a commentary in France.

Gotta agree with you there GE (based on my limited viewing). Lots of brooding super slow-mo artistic shots too...

SKY went through a phase of super-slow mo's too. Truly diabolical!

Cyril wrote:It's funny how we are supposed to applaud competition in broadcast providers (thereby theoretically keeping prices down), but when it comes down to it we don't actually want it split so that we have to subscribe several times.

One package for everything would be great. There is sometimes a need for monopolies

Having said that, compared to football rugby is minor deal so we're always going to be lumped in. The BT Sport's Champions League deal really puts the cat among the pigeons.

A dedicated rugby channel you say?

Wouldn't that be wonderful? The amount of money I've spent on Sky Sports just for the odd game...

yappysnap wrote:SKY went through a phase of super-slow mo's too. Truly diabolical!

It's very, well, Latin. Like a shampoo advert.