BBC take an early lead, although not due to any great display of quality
We’ve seen some decent goals, some woeful goalkeeping and let’s be honest, a couple of fairly dull games, and yet one of the most intriguing contests of the World Cup so far as been the duel between BBC and ITV.
Obviously at this stage there’s no choice of viewing – the matches are dished out evenly and the viewer gets what they’re given in terms of punditry. However, the coverage still needs to be rated and of course when it gets to final time, there will actually be a choice to make. And on current evidence, I’ll be selecting the BBC. That’s not to say the Beeb’s coverage has been brilliant by any means, but compared to ITV it’s non-stop fireworks and entertainment.
The talk before the tournament was of the big money transfer of Adrian Chiles, but this is isn’t really the issue from what I can see. Chiles is fine. Personally, I find the man a little irritating but overall he does a steady job and I can understand the general appeal of the chubby Brummie. It’s ITV’s commentators and in-studio pundits where the issues arise. In the studio, things don’t start well. ITV’s premier line-up appears to consist of Gareth Southgate, Patrick Vieira and Kevin Keegan. The quality descends in that order too. Southgate is primarily ok, but remains bland other than when he becomes spiteful and unnecessarily aggressive, needlessly laying into referees before kick off on the sole basis on their nationality. Nothing like a bit of casual bigotry to gets the fans onside Gareth.
Sandwiched between the England “legends” is Vieira. His analysis might well be rather incisive, but I couldn’t tell you for sure as every time he speaks I’m away in the land of nod. Paddy V may have been explosive on the pitch, but off it he’s pure tedium. His monotone voice, and the lack of his expression on his remarkably small face, just doesn’t get the pulse racing.
Yet this dreariness is welcome in comparison to Keegan, who quite simply looks like a man about to put a bullet in his head. Keegan has often seemed a tad unstable, but his current state is genuinely worrying. White as a sheet, gaunt and fatigued, Keegan drones through his analysis like he’s waiting for his next treble Scotch to numb the pain. I mean sure, England were poor, but surely it’s not bad enough to end human life? Actually, that’s slightly misleading as Keegan wearily told us how brilliant England were and how the only negative was the score line. I think King Kev might need to lay off the pre-match shorts. For his own sake as much as ours.
ITV’s commentary team doesn’t exactly soothe the pain either. Clive Tyldesley is already at his nauseating, whining best, endlessly jabbering away with his crass anecdotes and exasperating “ad libs”. Following Steven Gerrard’s early goal on Saturday, Tyldesley smugly sang “this could be fun!” A goalkeeping howler and 85 minutes of mediocre football later, and I wasn’t exactly having a ball.
ITV’s number two commentator, Peter Drury, must be commended for his enthusiasm, but perhaps even Peter might admit he got a tad carried away when bellowing out this following Siphiwe Tshabalala’s opening goal for South Africa on Friday:
“Goal, Bafana Bafana! Goal for South Africa! Goal for all Africa! What a moment in the history of sport!!!”
Jesse Owens’ record-breaking 100 metre run, Muhammad Ali vs. Joe Frazier, Steve Redgrave’s fifth Olympic gold, Maradona’s hand of God…and now the opening goal in a World Cup group game between South Africa and Mexico which ended 1-1.
BBC’s coverage is certainly not without its flaws either. “Manu” Adebayor provides some respectable analysis, but personally I can’t understand a word he’s saying due to the sheer pace of his delivery. And I get the impression not all the pundits have conducted as much research as we might like to think they have either. Not judging by this comment from Mick McCarthy during the Argentina – Nigeria game anyway:
“I looked at the teamsheet and thought, eh, is that the ‘Juan Veron’. Didn’t realise he still played.”
It’s reassuring to know Mick’s done his homework. The broadcast battle continues…
Can we also have a shout-out for that cock-end Corden who appears to be a regular feature on just about every form of media, though most notably ITV (with his frankly nauseating own shit show).
ReplyDeleteHe needs to be locked in a room for 6 months until we have all forgotten who he is.
That Corden programme was absolutely horrific - who was it aimed at??? I hate how that guy is meant to be representative of the typical football fan in the street, no wonder we’re all tarnished as morons. When I had root canal was less painful than watching that show.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of the pundits race, he may not be quite ‘up’ on his world knowledge, but Mick McCarthy is always good value for the fact he’s so ridiculously harsh on people. That and the fact that he described Argentina’s performance as ‘mullering’ Nigeria.
One thing I will say – where’s Leonardo? He was the highlight of the last World Cup’s coverage – eloquent, interesting, stylish and speaking from experience – the complete opposite of Martin Keown really...
Yeah the BBC might have missed a trick by omitting Leonardo, although I must say that I’m quite enjoying Seedorf at the moment. He strikes the right balance of humour and genuine insight I think.
ReplyDeleteWhat more can be said about Corden? Some people out there must like the man, but I’ve yet to meet one of them. This latest offering is the worst of the lot too. Horne and Corden was possibly the poorest excuse for comedy I’ve ever seen, yet the standard was so unbelievably low that it almost made viewing bearable, if only to marvel at just how many times Corden could get his belly out in the belief it was wit.
The football programme isn’t even amusingly dire though. It’s simply dull and pointless. And for anyone who was unfortunate to catch it – why was Adam Johnson on it, and is he actually the most lifeless and uncharismatic individual on the planet?