The Open on Sky - It's official

[Deleted member 15344]

Because the BBC shows no interest in the wider game and just wants the crown jewels. If you had suffered years of looking to listen to an elite rugby gane on 5 live onky to hear coverage of league 2 football then you might agree that the BBC gets all it deserves when it comes to sport. As for golf clubs, ideal time for the pro to get a group of kids in a lesson or on the putting green whilst the patrents watch golf or sit them in the junior room etc.

The BBC has to cater for everyone but just a rugby or football or golf fans they have to ensure they have a good spread - club rugby doesn't appeal to the masses - the 6 nations does , as does the WC final or the Open or the Olympics - they are events that even non sports fans watch - that's why they are the Crown Jewels and should be protected

Same with radio coverage - it has to appeal to the masses - club rugby in this country doesn't.

As for golf clubs - how many have "junior rooms" - how many adults want to sit around a golf club for 4 hours watching when they could be at home watching whilst also doing other stuff

Pros do have group kid lessons during the summer but then they still compete against the sports that are in schools every week - football , rugby , cricket , tennis and athletics - all sports that don't involve having a golf course. Golf as a sport and what it is involved means it's hard to compare it to other sports that are on the school timetable

 

[colint]

There is a difference between illegal and annoying which is why I never stated it was illegal. Blocking the flow of traffic is very annoying and that is what happens when riders go two abreast and stay there. Think of it another way. Cyclists are there, all lycrad up, and are steaming along a road. In front of them are a group of walkers. To go around them would mean you are on the wrong side of the road and that would be dangerous. If only they walked in single file then you could pass them quite happily. Instead you have to crawl along until eventually you can get past them safely.

Change the scenario to the cyclist who rides two abreast and blocks the road for the faster moving car. Annoying isn't it? Ride single file and then the whole traffic flow is much smoother.

It's easier and safer to pass a group riding 2 abreast than single file. If you can't pass 2 abreast safely then it's unlikely you can pass single file safely, unless you class safely as squeezing past and just not hitting the cyclist. It's not different than passing a slow moving car. 10 riders 2 abreast take up less specie than 10 riders in single file. I appreciate people vehicles other than cars using the roads annoys some people, but walkers, cars, cyclists, tractors etc are all part entitled to use the road any way they want if it's legal, whether the impatient find it annoying or not

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-wBjPU43Sd8k/UHSjy2xPx8I/AAAAAAAAAAk/KD6crsEOeDk/s1600/both.bmp

 

[Piece]

No. You are completely failing to grasp the point. Cycling is in a real boom period because a huge amount of people are seeing British cyclists succeed and want to emulate them. It is that simple.

Just a big fat NO. Cycling took off because it was a combination of these items: fitness, finance, environmental, long-term plan, investment and British success. Cycling became a real alternative in the recession years as a cheaper form of transport, whether its popping out to the shops or the daily commute. There was also the long-term plan behind British cycling to build on the success of Boardman and Queally (and even Millar). Further, and sorry for you to hear, the Sky investment helped too. It certainly wasn't solely down to people wanting to become the next 'Hoy' or 'Wiggins'. If you want further info, read any article on why cycling has worked in this country and you'll see that I have fully grasped the point, in spades.

Even the thickest numbskull should be able to see this.

You don't need this last line to make a "valid point".

 

[bladeplayer]

Participation in the game is dwindling so the R&A decide to restrict the jewel of their crown to a broadcaster that millions cannot or refuse to pay for access.

The utter stupidity of this decision beggars belief. You only have to look how a similar course of action has affected participation levels in cricket to see the short term folly of this course of action.

A dark day for the R&A, choosing Murdoch's dosh over safeguarding accessibility to golf for terrestrial TV viewers.

Fools. As is anyone who supports their decision.

Said something along the same lines to R&A on twitter ,

Kirsty Gallacher was on saying how great it was , so i told her the same


IMO its a sell out by the people trusted to grow the game , they make strides in changing male only clubs and seem to be aware clubs are struggling & need to attract new and especially new young members so what do they do ?
Take it of terrestrial TV so therefore loosing more widespread coverage ,

UP 1 ladder but down two snakes IMO im afraid

 

[Snelly]

Just a big fat NO. Cycling took off because it was a combination of these items: fitness, finance, environmental, long-term plan, investment and British success. Cycling became a real alternative in the recession years as a cheaper form of transport, whether its popping out to the shops or the daily commute. There was also the long-term plan behind British cycling to build on the success of Boardman and Queally (and even Millar). Further, and sorry for you to hear, the Sky investment helped too. It certainly wasn't solely down to people wanting to become the next 'Hoy' or 'Wiggins'. If you want further info, read any article on why cycling has worked in this country and you'll see that I have fully grasped the point, in spades.



You don't need this last line to make a "valid point".

It must've just been a massive, fortuitous coincidence then that this boom took off just as GB cyclists won loads of events and medals that WERE SHOWN ON TERRESTRIAL TV!!!!!!!!!!!!!


People are cycling because of a truck load of gold medals and the first Brit winner of the Tour. All of which were seen by millions of people in their living rooms. The other factors you mention are valid but dwarfed by this.

 

[Snelly]

You don't need this last line to make a "valid point".

You are probably right and if this caused offence then please accept my apologies.

 

[Piece]

It must've just been a massive, fortuitous coincidence then that this boom took off just as GB cyclists won loads of events and medals that WERE SHOWN ON TERRESTRIAL TV!!!!!!!!!!!!!


People are cycling because of a truck load of gold medals and the first Brit winner of the Tour. All of which were seen by millions of people in their living rooms. The other factors you mention are valid but dwarfed by this.

This is worth saying: cycling had a mini-boom after Boardman's gold medal success in 1992 Olympics. Then it fell on its face despite being seen by millions. Then another mini-boom after Hoy and Wiggins success on the track at the Athens games. But this was all on the track, not really accessible for the millions, thus again, cycling didn't really take off. It was only when the British cycling plan realised the road-racers as well as the track guys, it gave rise to success and then sustained boom that you are referring too. Although you are not wrong in what you say, you have to consider that its not quite as clear cut as you argue.

You are probably right and if this caused offence then please accept my apologies.

Cheers, no problem.

 

[Imurg]

Putting the quality of the coverage to one side, if The Open is on terrestrial TV then everyone who has access to a TV has the opportunity to see it and maybe decide to take the game up.
Moving it to Sky simply has to reduce the potential for people watching it and beginning to play.
It can be the best coverage in the world but if it reduces the numbers watching how can that be good for the game?

 

[Rumpokid]

The BBC ought to be ashamed of themselves.The people at the top have no interest in sport whatsoever, or else a corporation this big should have a dedicated sports channel..
They are awash with money, so that does not cut it with me regarding losing the open to Sky.
They fund non descript channels abroad, the waste of time cbeebies, parliament and BBC 3.
Also, they have started to send front line news readers and broadcasters to cover news stories abroad, instead of leaving it to the foreign correspondent...At least we have got the World Netball Championships in 2020 to look forward too..You couldn't make it up.

 

[Jimaroid]

I'll say it again.

Participation numbers have declined whilst The Open has been on the BBC. It's already evident that the BBC aren't a solution to golf's problems. So it's time to try something new.

 

[Piece]

I'll say it again.

Participation numbers have declined whilst The Open has been on the BBC. It's already evident that the BBC aren't a solution to golf's problems. So it's time to try something new.

You can't argue with that.

 

[sportsbob]

Ridiculous! how are you supposed to attract new/young players to the game (so that our clubs can then flourish and spend more money on the course for us golfers) when all the golfing administrators want to do is line their own pockets with cash by not having any golf on terrestrial tv. Highlights - can't see me allowing my kids to stay up late at night to catch the highlights

 

[nta73]

Does not matter who has it! Sports coverage is getting hard work imo, Too much hype and build up, too much looking back through past years(we know what happened last year, we watched it). How many commentators does it really need?. Adverts everywhere, coverage brought to you by blah blah blah! etc, i just want quality pictures and sound, and a bloke with a microphone to let me know whats happening. Runs for cover!

 

[Tongo]

Such a sad day. Thank you bbc, whilst it has been great to have you cover the Open for so many years you have, like you did with the cricket, sat in your ivory tower with a certain arrogance whilst mimicking an ostrich with his head in the sand. Television has moved on and the beeb have shown that they either cant or dont want to move with it. Yet i will still have to fork out for the licence fee to pay for whatever dross you produce instead of stumping up the cash for rights to the Open.

 

[patricks148]

I'll say it again.

Participation numbers have declined whilst The Open has been on the BBC. It's already evident that the BBC aren't a solution to golf's problems. So it's time to try something new.

Too right Jim

 

[Snelly]

Saw this on Twitter and thought it was a very accurate summing up.

"Another iconic British sporting occasion goes to the Channel built for chavs, run by wide boys and owned by a extremely nasty Aussie/Yank who owns publications that love to hack murdered childrens phones. Good old Golf, the price of everything and the value of nothing."

 

[Tongo]

Saw this on Twitter and thought it was a very accurate summing up.

"Another iconic British sporting occasion goes to the Channel built for chavs, run by wide boys and owned by a extremely nasty Aussie/Yank who owns publications that love to hack murdered childrens phones. Good old Golf, the price of everything and the value of nothing."

That is a good quote!

 

[Crow]

What annoys me is that Sky always insist on an exclusive rights package.

If their coverage was so good then surely they could afford to share the rights with terrestrial TV and most people would flock to Sky to get a piece of the action anyway?

I don't suppose it would have anything to do with Sky only being interested in making as big a profit as possible rather than any passion for the game of golf?

 

[Deleted member 15344]

I'll say it again.

Participation numbers have declined whilst The Open has been on the BBC. It's already evident that the BBC aren't a solution to golf's problems. So it's time to try something new.

I'll give you a reason why numbers have declined - economy and cost

So now people have to not only pay to play they also have to pay to watch - how is that going yo incesse numbers

 

[hines57]

Sad day

Totally agree. How many young potential golfers will miss out on the opportunity to see the best in the game on TV that doesn't cost a fortune to watch!! Can't see how this makes golf more accessible to the masses.