ITV FA Cup coverage

[Dan Aitch]

I want to love Mondays.

Tell me why!

 

[JamesAndTheGiantHead]

Tell me why!

There's just something about being overweight and wearing scuba gear that both myself, and the baying public, want to see in action. Apparently.

 

[Twinkle Toes]

I don't know what you're all moaning about. I thought it was brilliant.

 

[trueblue]

Really is the pits, isn't it? Was looking forward to Man City v Watford, they hardly showed anything apart from the goals and somehow completely failed to reflect the drama of the game. Apparently there was a good chance for Watford to go three up, which they didn't even show. Yet they have about 5-10 mins of inane interviews and chat afterwards. Why not show more of the actual matches - who cares what Clarke Carlisle thinks?

Next time, give them a list of where all the good matches and shocks will definitely be. I'm sure they'll show those for you…


… why does this come up every time the FA Cup's on telly? TV companies can't put multiple cameras everywhere so they have to guess which games to go for. It's how it always was and how it always will be.

 

[Icy Gull]

Next time, give them a list of where all the good matches and shocks will definitely be. I'm sure they'll show those for you…


… why does this come up every time the FA Cup's on telly? TV companies can't put multiple cameras everywhere so they have to guess which games to go for. It's how it always was and how it always will be.

I cannot think of a single good reason that the Chelsea vs Stoke games was picked unless you happen to be a fan of either team.....now watch Stoke win a 7 goal thriller.

 

[jimhigham]

If I was way more geeky I would clock the amount of airtime that is actually football and then the airtime given over to advertisments. ITV simply does not have the time available to do the matches justice once the adverts are factored in. If they were prepared to devote two hours to it then they might have similar actual airtime to The Football League Show.

 

[trueblue]

I cannot think of a single good reason that the Chelsea vs Stoke games was picked unless you happen to be a fan of either team.....now watch Stoke win a 7 goal thriller.

A very simple reason. Doesn't interest me much but the fact is that the prospect of Chelsea losing in a semi-shock will get the best ratings in the financially most lucrative slot of the weekend. As simple as that. It should be a tight game. For all that a lot of people would prefer to see Man City v Watford, say, the reality is that 9 times out of 10 City would have taken the lead early and the vast majority of people would have switched off. They didn't, of course.... but City still won comfortably in the end.

 

[nicko31]

Just a pity they can't be faster with the extended highlights on Seagulls player, ITV complete waste of space on FA Cup coverage

 

[Icy Gull]

A very simple reason. Doesn't interest me much but the fact is that the prospect of Chelsea losing in a semi-shock will get the best ratings in the financially most lucrative slot of the weekend. As simple as that. It should be a tight game. For all that a lot of people would prefer to see Man City v Watford, say, the reality is that 9 times out of 10 City would have taken the lead early and the vast majority of people would have switched off. They didn't, of course.... but City still won comfortably in the end.

I wonder how many neutrals would choose to watch this game over a Championsip team vs a Premier League one though? Maybe I'm in the minority but this game holds no interest for me.

 

[kevo]

Next time, give them a list of where all the good matches and shocks will definitely be. I'm sure they'll show those for you…


… why does this come up every time the FA Cup's on telly? TV companies can't put multiple cameras everywhere so they have to guess which games to go for. It's how it always was and how it always will be.

I think you're in a minority here, as the other responses show. They have cameras at all the matches - there's no reason why they can't show more action from the more interesting games - or indeed more action full stop, instead of having the boring, inane analysis of each game which sometimes lasts longer than the actual match footage. For most of the games they showed last night it was little more than the goals. And the overall presentation is just awful.

And the only reason they chose Chelsea v Stoke is because Chelsea fans will watch it, it's not an attractive fixture for neutrals. The only thing I'd say in their defence is that there weren't many immediately attractive ties to choose from in this round.

 

[carlzeiss]

Clark Carlisle sounds like a heavily sedated Gary Barlow. Presumably with less football insight as well.

He is probably living in fear of gangster boy Leon Knight ever since Leon was crossed at loftus Road in 2003

 

[Mackenzie]

I cannot think of a single good reason that the Chelsea vs Stoke games was picked unless you happen to be a fan of either team.....now watch Stoke win a 7 goal thriller.

Shame it isn't 1985 again they could have turned the cameras around and filmed the fighting.

 

[trueblue]

I think you're in a minority here, as the other responses show. They have cameras at all the matches - there's no reason why they can't show more action from the more interesting games - or indeed more action full stop, instead of having the boring, inane analysis of each game which sometimes lasts longer than the actual match footage. For most of the games they showed last night it was little more than the goals. And the overall presentation is just awful.

And the only reason they chose Chelsea v Stoke is because Chelsea fans will watch it, it's not an attractive fixture for neutrals. The only thing I'd say in their defence is that there weren't many immediately attractive ties to choose from in this round.

They have one camera at most matches and no commentator. With one camera there are no cutaways and no replays from a different angle. It's therefore not possible to make it into a longer match edit without it looking completely crap, although the commentary can be added later and often is in exceptional circumstances. A single camera edit would hardly ever be used beyond a duration of about 2 minutes absolute max. Agreed, they could bump up the length of the feature matches and have less analysis but that's the same with all TV football coverage. They have to justify paying the pundits a fortune somehow.

As for the Chelsea choice, it will be down to money whether you believe me or not. Certain clubs guarantee ratings. Man Utd being the main one. Liverpool too. Chelsea and Spurs do well plus the likes of Leeds outside the top division which is why they get so many TV games.