This is obviously extremely disappointing for fans without access to Sky, and contradicts Bernie Ecclestone’s previous promise that F1 would remain on free-to-air television. F1 fans who want to see every race live will now be expected to pay to receive Sky’s coverage – difficult to justify when the BBC are still showing half of the races, and given Sky’s morally questionable ownership (the recently tarnished News Corporation).
The context to this move is pressure on the BBC to cut costs across its entire business. Nevertheless the approach that the BBC has chosen to take, in showing only half the races, is disappointing, and symptomatic of their increasingly half-hearted approach to Formula 1.
When coverage first moved across to the BBC in 2009, expectations were high that the quality of the broadcast would significantly improve on that which ITV offered. The ITV coverage had numerous problems – adverts in the middle of races, appalling ‘lifestyle’ pre-race features (e.g. “let’s visit a fashion show with Jenson Button’s girlfriend”), Mark “tyres what were done on the car” Blundell and the buttock-clenchingly awful lead commentator James Allen.
Early signs were promising that the Beeb would improve matters, with the appointment of all the best people (Martin Brundle…. er, Ted Kravitz?) from ITV’s coverage. David Coulthard and Eddie Jordan, while irritating at times, also proved to be an instantly entertaining pairing.
But the BBC, while appearing to try to cater for the ‘hardcore’ audience in the beginning, has also made numerous concessions to the mass market. Their initially excellent ‘Classic F1’ online feature has increasingly been marginalised and now appears to only show races from the last five years. And the pre-race coverage has also taken a turn for the worse by giving little or no insight into goings-on in the pit lane or on the actual track, instead focusing on the B-list celebrities and supposed glamour of the Formula 1 paddock.
I don’t understand the point of this. No doubt the BBC would say that they are trying to appeal to a ‘casual’ audience, but in my experience the ‘casual’ Formula 1 audience don’t watch the build-up at all; they switch on just before the start of the race, watch the first few laps, and then go off and do something else before tuning in again at the end to see who has won. The sight of the two McLaren drivers directing a photo shoot is hardly likely to change their viewing patterns.
The BBC also openly admitted recently that they were trying to make the ‘Classic F1’ feature more suitable for the mass market – a contradiction in terms in that fair-weather F1 fan are exactly the sort of people who won’t want to watch 10 minute highlights of old F1 races… Similarly, only showing half the races in a season is hardly likely to inspire a casual audience either.
Of course, the flavourless cherry atop the increasingly stale cake which the BBC has decided we F1 fans must endure is lead anchor Jake Humphrey. The patronising, moronic former children’s television presenter gives the impression that he’s never seen a Formula 1 race, despite having fronted the coverage since it moved to the BBC in 2009.
At every race he asks idiotic questions (witness him asking George Lucas in Canada what tyres he expected the cars to be on after the restart – I half expected him to ask Martin Whitmarsh about the chances of a further Star Wars prequel), talks complete drivel and makes ridiculous statements about a sport which he clearly knows nothing about. He’s also shown a staggering lack of loyalty, skipping the potentially crucial Japanese Grand Prix last year to present that school sports day of athletics tournaments, the Commonwealth Games.
I wouldn’t be at all surprised if, given that Formula 1 is clearly no longer at the top of the BBC’s priorities, Humphrey swiftly abandons ship and moves across to ruin another of the BBC’s sports (not that there are many left). Or perhaps Blue Peter are looking for a new presenter? In any event, the possibility of half as much Jake Humphrey per year (or even, if we all pray together, none at all) is definitely the silver lining around this particular dark cloud.
So, it’s been clear for some time that the BBC have been losing interest in Formula 1, and their coverage certainly has problems. In that case, are we really losing out on that much with F1 moving to Sky? Well, yes and no. Perhaps Sky will revolutionise coverage of the sport; they did run a well-regarded digital F1 service a decade ago, which was somewhat ahead of its time.
They have at least confirmed that no adverts will be shown during their coverage, and if they could make similar “no James Allen” and “no Jake Humphrey” promises then that would go some way to ensuring their popularity. But the crux of the matter is that F1 fans who do not wish (or can’t afford) to buy subscriptions will, from 2012, be denied the chance to watch their favourite sport live.
People have made comparisons to Premier League Football moving across to Sky two decades ago. The difference is that hardcore football fans can potentially go to the majority of their team’s matches in a season anyway and therefore aren’t missing out on as much as F1 fans who, short of being millionaires, will not be able to fund trips around the world to watch all (or even some) of the Grand Prix, especially as these are increasingly being held in far flung corners of the globe.
The BBC has promised to show the “most interesting” races live, but how are they supposed to guess which races are going to be the best? Of course, the Monaco Grand Prix is an obvious example (although not always an exciting race) which will remain on the BBC, but otherwise it’s down to guess work. In football, it’s easy to predict that (for example) Chelsea against Manchester United is always likely to be a potential title decider. But in a 20 race Formula 1 season there’s no way of knowing where the key events are going to take place.
So overall, this is a sad day for Formula 1, and particularly for the legions of dedicated fans around Britain – the sort who get up at 4am to watch the Australian Grand Prix year in year out and never miss a moment of their favourite sport, as well as those who simply want to tune in from time to time. It feels like a kick in the teeth from a sport which has long been accused of not being a sport at all, and is only interested in making money. Bernie Ecclestone claims the deal is “super for F1”, and in the short-term his pockets will no doubt be lined with Sky’s money.
In the long run, however, the effect of having half the F1 season on subscription based TV will undoubtedly be negative. The BBC’s coverage will inevitably suffer further, with no real incentive to maintain standards and no budget to do so either. If the majority of fans simply switch off, either in protest at the half-hearted coverage or through a lack of access to Sky, sponsors will turn their backs on the sport and in turn advertising revenue will be reduced. Quite frankly such an outcome would serve the increasing out-of-touch Ecclestone, and indeed the whole sport, right.
