SlotForum banner
1 - 20 of 29 Posts

·
David H
Joined
·
3,906 Posts
I've seen them listed Kev, but haven't been interested enough to watch. Perhaps I should make the effort.

On the subject of Sky F1, what does anyone who has access think of it? I know a lot of people who consider themselves F1 fans, but none except me has been persuaded to pay for a subscription.

Driven primarily by thinking I'd miss Martin Brundle's input, I bought a Sky HD subscription at the start of the F1 season. I've been disappointed. I wouldn't describe Sky's coverage as poor, but it is in my view inferior to the BBC's, even taking into account the BBC's highlights-only coverage of some races. Far too many advert breaks, a huge amount of padding with talking heads, significantly fewer behind the scenes features than were promised, and an anchor - Simon someone - who has all the charisma of a brick and not a great deal more F1 knowledge.

I persevered with Sky's live coverage for the first three races, then switched back to the BBC, catching up after the race with Sky's programming by fast forwarding through the build up, stopping only for Brundle's grid walk and any occasional short features that they threw in. Away from race weekends, Sky has done an interesting series of interviews with retired F1 drivers, but aside from that the channel has been a huge disappointment and I won't be renewing my subscription.

As I said earlier, it's not poor, but it's definitely no better than the BBC. Considering its cost, I expected a lot better.

What does anyone else think of it?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,614 Posts
I've found the coverage on Sky pretty disappointing too. I had previously enjoyed Crofty and Davidson as practise commentators on Radio 5 but Crofty has got way too shouty during quali and the race which gets annoying quickly.

Simon Lazenby the presenter is useless. He has no charisma, no F1 knowledge and zero rapport with the guests on the show. He presumably doesn't actually listen to the answers given by guests as he doesn't respond in any way to them or deviate from his planned questions. I say planned questions, I mean the questions that he has been told to ask.

I've watched a few races at the parent in laws who only have the BBC and Ben Edwards has transitioned really well from the BTCC and he and Coulthard are a great commentary pairing.

Last years BBC team was probably the best line up I've seen and it is sad it is over. And that's even with Eddie Jordan being on board!
 

·
Kitbasher
Joined
·
4,376 Posts
I get mine because I am a 'HD' customer I have enjoyed the Sky coverage although I do tend to start with the gridwalk and leave after the press conference. Outside of the actual races I would be severely dissapointed if I was paying extra, no way enough content and when there is extra content like the Indy cars it was not flagged enough so I missed it


Just my 'penneth...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,122 Posts
Watched the first 2 races on Sky Go wasn't impressed so went back to my original solution of RTL. To be honest I'm glad I'm not paying for it, No better than BBC and that's not what was promised.
I thought I'd miss Brundle and his grid walks but having Ben Edwards at the beeb more than makes up for that.
If the day ever comes (and I'm sure it will) when Sky is the only way of watching F1 then I'd bite the bullet and pay, But until then thanks but no thanks.
 

·
Phil Smith
Joined
·
2,638 Posts
I'm with Virgin and with a phone call and a bit of jiggling of my account managed to get SKY F1 for just an extra £7/month
I cannot be doing with Coulthard and primarily went with Sky just to avoid him and I am happy with Brundle.
If BBC were to get another commentator I probably would cancel as I have only ever watched just the races, from red lights out to the drop of the checkered flag, I have no interest in the inane rubbish that precedes and comes after these two events.
I have watched some of the other stuff on the channel but it is quite hard to find out what is being shown as there are no listings in any of the newspapers that I take. (can't be bothered to look at the online guide!)
Anyway the Tour de France is on now, so who cares about F1!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,797 Posts
QUOTE (Invicta @ 2 Jul 2012, 14:40) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>No better than BBC and that's not what was promised.

If the day ever comes (and I'm sure it will) when Sky is the only way of watching F1 then I'd bite the bullet and pay, But until then thanks but no thanks.

As I understand it, that's not going to be the last broken promise. Word is that next year, those races that the BBC isn't covering will have ad breaks, and in 2014, when the Beeb is gone, all races will have ad breaks.

A small captive market for a channel with bills to pay (mostly legal bills for NoW staff no doubt!) means that races will have to be interrupted.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,083 Posts
What about the BTCC then? Ben Edwards has been replaced as ITV,s lead commentator for the series by Toby Moody, who is a complete disaster. He even makes James Allen and Johnathan Legard look good!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,082 Posts
QUOTE makes James Allen and Johnathan Legard look good!
For a minute there, I thought you were talking about Eddie Jordan


The last time F1 went to SKY I lost all interest and didn't bother at all until it came back to terrestial. History seems to be repeating itself in a tiresome circle.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
730 Posts
Currently enjoying flicking between a cracking speedway meeting and a film of the '64 European GP (Graham Hill negotiating bottom bend!?!? I'm only 39) hope you guys enjoyed Eastenders.

Don't want to get bogged down in the free to air vs subscription thing again but I'm sorry, the comment below is a 20yr old view of the F1 sponsorship model, and if you won't pay for Sky what chance you being sufficiently motivated to use Genii capital to manage your wealth because they own Toleman?

QUOTE (rogerbass @ 2 Jul 2012, 11:37) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Still angry because I thought F1 was supposed to have full free coverage on terrestrial TV, wonder what sponsers make of it.


We did get lucky last season, the chemistry of the BBC team was sublime but they were not in a position to continue and remember they were the ones who gave us Legard. Mid way through his first season down went the TV volume and on came the DAB.

Happy with the Sky race coverage, it's not their pictures remember, Sky pad is great, The F1 Show is fine if not unmissable and Ryders legends series is surprisingly insightful. That Andretti bleeds racing from every pore, Surtees is his own worst enemy and Mansell is a deluded prat is not news, but that one as apparently benign as Ryder gets them to reveal that in their own words is impressive.

As someone else said pre grid walk and post press conference is barely watchable, so I don't, but I don't think Sky are alone in that, witness the stream of puerile 'so and so is confident about this or that' on Autosport.com these days.

Agreed other than Teds aero features and Brundles day out at Ferrari the promised in depth articles have yet to materialise, but all the sessions are so well covered now if you follow the narrative arc of the weekend then re: the commentary team, me and the kids tend to combine the pictures with the live timing to read the race ourselves and discuss it as we go, I'm lucky in that I guess but my point is, it's what you make of it really.
 

·
David H
Joined
·
3,906 Posts
QUOTE (marctownsend @ 2 Jul 2012, 21:09) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>Don't want to get bogged down in the free to air vs subscription thing again but I'm sorry, the comment below is a 20yr old view of the F1 sponsorship model
You are completely wrong.

Turkish GP press conference, May 6th 2011:

Q: (Sarah Holt, BBC Sport)
"Speaking of FOTA, F1 and the future - I'm happy for anyone to answer this if you want to - is it important that F1, as you renegotiate the Concorde Agreement, remains on free-to-air television? Or, could it thrive on a pay-per-view platform?"

Martin Whitmarsh, CEO McLaren Racing and FOTA President:
"No, I think it's clear that the business model of all the teams relies on free-to-air. We're selling a large, broad, media exposure. That's the business model and I'm sure that that's the business model of all the Formula One teams will require going forward."

http://www.fia.com/en-GB/mediacentre/press...-conf-tur2.aspx
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
730 Posts
It may not be the version of reality the team that relies on high street brands more than many wishes to articulate in a press conference but even Mclaren do not get the majority of it's budget by putting stickers on the car. What is known about "prize money" sovereign wealth fund investment and Ron Dennis stated aim of turning the group into a diverse company of which the race team is only a part point to that.

We know from the lotus debacle that full title sponsorship of a pretty decent team can be had for £20million, how much of a fully RRA compliant budget is that? 25% tops? Do you believe any money changes hands for all that branding on the Force India or Caterham? Look again at who the brands are. Even the Infinity deal with Red Bull is related to the technical relationship with Renault.

An overly sweeping statement it may have been but I stand by the sentiment. Yes exposure is good but it is race hosting fees and Tv deals that keep the show on the road these days, not saying it's a good thing but it is what the wrangling over the concorde agreement is all about isn't it?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
730 Posts
QUOTE (rogerbass @ 3 Jul 2012, 10:53) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>you are complely wrong

Thank you Doparmine for the support

Sorry if I offended you and perhaps I should not have strayed into the territory because it's so emotive but i'm not completely wrong am I? Look at who asked the question and think about how an honest answer would have sounded.
 
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
Top