The BBC lose coverage of The Open

[Brian_Ewen]

I really don't remember the U.S. Open or PGA being on the BBC during the 80s.

Definitely during the second half of the 80's, and I think it was just the last two rounds.

[Ryan Coles]

Ed,

I certainly got to watch the Us Open and USPGA on British terrestrial telly during the 80's.

In an interview on BBC Five Live Radio Peter Dawson admitted that the R&A would not have ended the 60+ year association with the BBC had there not been a SUBSTANTIAL difference in the money Sky offered. He then went on to say two things which says it all. The R&A had invested large sums of money into grassroots yet the game was still showing falling numbers of participation. The extra money they get from the TV deal will mean more investment in grassroots. So basically the Peter Dawson admits the R&A has being ineffectual in boosting the game so far and is planning to through good money after bad.

It certainly does not give one much hope for the future of the R&A who are in danger of ....... golf hari-kari maybe?

Jon

Jon

To apply the same logic, participation is declining despite the terrestrial showcase. Why would the R & A continue to throw good money after bad by accepting below the market rate when the benefit of the BBC is either ineffective/immaterial when aligned to participation? The BBC are either crucial to participation or they're not. We can't have it both ways.

Everyone else

I think it's a shame its not on BBC and would rather see it on there than not. I just think we're overstating the impact of one weekend a year coverage.

Darts is thriving at elite and grass roots level through Sky.

Boxing which has always been used, abused and tossed away by terrestrial tv is thriving again with Sky/Box nation with gate attendances up. Ricky Hatton never appeared on terrestrial ever yet was a huge star. Froch Groves last year had massive cross over appeal and even heavyweight boxing looks like it might be interesting again in 18 months. Participation through gyms, white collar boxing nights, amateur level is thriving

Snooker stays on terrestrial and is still nowhere near its peak and appears moribund.

What I'm getting at is that the growth or decline of a sport is impacted by far more important issues, trends and barriers to entry.

BBC isn't propping up participation/take up in golf and nor has it for 20 years. Its ineffectual in its current form and therefore I believe the impact will be negligible. We're all wrapped up in nostalgia and what got us into the game, or what we think got us into the game.

Plenty to bash the R&A for but I think they do a great job with the Open and despite Niall being correct about costs rising, I know of no comparable event sporting or otherwise where under 16's go free or can compete on value and accessibility for a family.

[Martin Toal]

I really don't remember the U.S. Open or PGA being on the BBC during the 80s.

Definitely during the second half of the 80's, and I think it was just the last two rounds.

Couple of hours of each of last two rounds, I think. The Masters dotted around various, including one famous year (1982, Stadler) when Channel 4 had it, and lost coverage just as Stadler and Dan Pohl were heading off on their playoff, and we got no pictures but had an audio commentary of the playoff.

[Jon Wiggett]

Ryan,

yet just a few posts ago you were claiming the money difference was small and now that it is shown to be not only big but the deciding factor you go off down another road of reasoning.

So yes, participation is declining despite the BBC  coverage so it is obvious the problem is else where. This does not alter the fact that all day coverage of the games biggest event on terrestrial is fantastic exposure to a non golfing audience which will not be the case on Sky.

The R&A have obviously failed to look find the solution and their tactic appears to be throw more money down the same drain they have already thrown millions down. The problem will be if they ever do find the solution (which is doubtful as the have failed to solve any of the big problems) they will have lost their best form of reaching new people.

As for the darts, yes I am sure Sky do a great job with it but I could have watched hours of darts during the last few weeks on free view TV during the day and evening. Oh and of course 'Bullseye' is being reshown now which I am sure is the real reason for increased participation. Slick show that Bullseye

I agree that the Open is done very well though.

[Ed Tilley]

Jon,

I really don't remember the U.S. Open or PGA being on the BBC during the 80s.

Thinking about it now. I do have memories of watching some stuff in the late 80s - e.g. Curtis Strange beating Faldo in a play off. However, I also remember having to phone up "Rapid Golfline" to get the scores in the first 2-3 rounds. We didn't have Ceefax and there was just no other way of finding out what was going on.

Looks like they are limited to 4 ad breaks per hour no more than 60 seconds long. That doesn't seem too bad. Also, there is a lot of cutting away to studio in the US Open and PGA but I'm pretty sure that is due to ad breaks in the US coverage - the BBC do it at the Masters as well. That shouldn't be an issue here. Coverage will probably be excellent but I still think it is a big mistake.

[Adam Lawrence]

My first memory of watching golf was Nicklaus winning the Open at St Andrews in 78 (I would have been eight). I don't remember the US Open or PGA on British telly when I was a kid. Come to that, I don't recall the Masters being on until the middle eighties. Langer's win in 85 is the first I can remember. I know I didn't see either of Seve's wins.

[Mark Pearce]

Jon,

I'm no darts afficionado but we do, occasionally, watch some of the darts on Sky.  I caught some of the BBC darts recently and was shocked at the difference in standard.  It's a bit like Sky having the Premier League but BBC choosing to televise the Conference.

[Mark Pearce]

Interesting article from James Corrigan http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/golf/theopen/11388418/The-Open-Championship-moving-to-Sky-Sports-from-the-BBC-should-not-be-seen-as-a-disaster.html

[Ryan Coles]

Ryan,

yet just a few posts ago you were claiming the money difference was small and now that it is shown to be not only big but the deciding factor you go off down another road of reasoning.

So yes, participation is declining despite the BBC  coverage so it is obvious the problem is else where. This does not alter the fact that all day coverage of the games biggest event on terrestrial is fantastic exposure to a non golfing audience which will not be the case on Sky.

The R&A have obviously failed to look find the solution and their tactic appears to be throw more money down the same drain they have already thrown millions down. The problem will be if they ever do find the solution (which is doubtful as the have failed to solve any of the big problems) they will have lost their best form of reaching new people.

As for the darts, yes I am sure Sky do a great job with it but I could have watched hours of darts during the last few weeks on free view TV during the day and evening. Oh and of course 'Bullseye' is being reshown now which I am sure is the real reason for increased participation. Slick show that Bullseye

I agree that the Open is done very well though.

Jon

It's the same reasoning as I expressed in my first post in the thread. I made a mess of the figures involved subsequently, granted.

I don't disagree with the criticisms of the R&A in other respects.

Do you see a spike in Business around the Open? Can't say I do but perhaps pitch and putt and low cost do from beginners. I think this is the bigger issue though. Where do the newly hooked people go that is affordable and welcoming to sustain the initial tv inspired interest? It's very easy for kids when mum and dad play and getting easier for kids even if they don't, everyone else has significant barriers to entry that are less of a problem with other sports.

I look forward to the last Open on BBC. Alliss will be at his bitter and cantankerous best and will give it to everyone.

[Thomas Dai]

Sky announced 2017 as the start date - which would be at Royal Birkdale.

I wonder what the situation is with all the permanently installed cabling etc that has been put in at some venues over the last couple of years? Paid for presumably by the R&A (host club too?) and 'rented' out to whoever shows the event on TV as part of their host rights fee maybe?

atb

[Martin Toal]

Sky deal with the staccato US coverage pretty well, with their cutaways to studio guests and canned segments covering many of the ad breaks. and we also mostly miss the bits where the Senior VP for Marketing at the sponsor comes on and waxes lyrically about how much the event is doing for charity and about how exciting it is to see Ben Crane par his way to a thrilling victory over some other numpty in chinos. Sky does a pretty good job of dealing with this, and some of their analysts, Butch in particular, are great value and I assume he will be involved in their Open coverage. Also, Jack Nicklaus at their Masters coverage is great.

I can't stand Wayne Riley, though, and agree with the opinions of many publicans along the A30 on him. Mark Roe is not great either.

[Niall C]

I don't know if anyone else heard Peter Dawson give an interview this morning on Radio 4 ? I have to say he came across very well and gave good cogent and reasoned arguments for switching to Sky, one of which was that Sky were committed to golf on all year round basis. When pressed by the BBC interviewer he mentioned the BBC's lack of even reporting results, citing the recent form of Rory McIlroy that was barely reported. That was the end of the interview and they switched back to the studio where the presenter tried to refute Dawsons assertion of a lack of interest in golf by the BBC by stating the next story was actually about McIlroy. Which it was, it was about his court case ! 

Niall

[Paul Dolton]

Jon,

I really don't remember the U.S. Open or PGA being on the BBC during the 80s.

 Mark, i can assure you the us open and uspga in 1980 were both covered live here. It may not have been the bbc but it was certainly shown. Channel 4 were dipping into golf at the time and itv used to have masters. The early 80s us opens were all covered.
The last rounds broadcast of the 82 open started with a leaderboard and a commentator announcing " and this happened" followed by pictures of Nicklaus birdieing five in a row on the front nine .
The uspga of 80 was memorable to me as Nicklaus had a  lead after day three and i can remember running out to my parents car, as they came home from an evening out, to tell them.

Less people watching the open. Bad decision

[Adam Lawrence]

Jon,

I really don't remember the U.S. Open or PGA being on the BBC during the 80s.

 Mark, i can assure you the us open and uspga in 1980 were both covered live here. It may not have been the bbc but it was certainly shown. Channel 4 were dipping into golf at the time and itv used to have masters. The early 80s us opens were all covered.
The last rounds broadcast of the 82 open started with a leaderboard and a commentator announcing " and this happened" followed by pictures of Nicklaus birdieing five in a row on the front nine .
The uspga of 80 was memorable to me as Nicklaus had a  lead after day three and i can remember running out to my parents car, as they came home from an evening out, to tell them.

Less people watching the open. Bad decision

Channel 4 came into existence in November 1982.

[Paul Dolton]

Jon,

I really don't remember the U.S. Open or PGA being on the BBC during the 80s.

 Mark, i can assure you the us open and uspga in 1980 were both covered live here. It may not have been the bbc but it was certainly shown. Channel 4 were dipping into golf at the time and itv used to have masters. The early 80s us opens were all covered.
The last rounds broadcast of the 82 open started with a leaderboard and a commentator announcing " and this happened" followed by pictures of Nicklaus birdieing five in a row on the front nine .
The uspga of 80 was memorable to me as Nicklaus had a  lead after day three and i can remember running out to my parents car, as they came home from an evening out, to tell them.

Less people watching the open. Bad decision

Channel 4 came into existence in November 1982.

Yes i think they covered the 83 us open from oakmont. and a few days before aired an hour long programme about the history of the us open.
Still have it on vhs !

[David_Tepper]

From this side of the pond, I wonder if this will alter how the Open is shown on TV in the U.S.

I may be mistaken, but I believe U.S. TV has used the BBC camera work/feed for much of what gets broadcast here. Will Sky show as many hours per day of the Open as the BBC has?      

[Mark Pearce]

I suspect that Sky will do as they did for the last Ryder Cup and dedicate one of their channels to the Open for its duration.  Expect Sky Open to start on the Tuesday and run to the following Monday, before returning to being Sky Sports 4.  There will be previews, interviews and on course reporting for the two days prior to the actual tee off and I suspect live broadcasting all day on each of the 4 days.

[Paul Dolton]

My first memory of watching golf was Nicklaus winning the Open at St Andrews in 78 (I would have been eight). I don't remember the US Open or PGA on British telly when I was a kid. Come to that, I don't recall the Masters being on until the middle eighties. Langer's win in 85 is the first I can remember. I know I didn't see either of Seve's wins.

You must be a bit younger than me Adam.  Can remember Seves win when he made poor chip on last and then chipped in for par. Also Stadlers win. He drove down the last into a diviot! The itv coverage one year had some great music at the start which was preceded by the great sound of a Nicklaus drive with persimmon driver echoing amongst the trees.

[Doug Siebert]

Terrible idea.  I guess if the majors are going the money grab route, how long before we see sponsors logos painted in the fairways to be seen on overhead shots, as well as greens.  The tour apparently wants to force caddies to wear advertising without even sharing the revenue with them.

If they want to "grow the game" a crass sell out is not the way to do it.  I imagine those running the USGA will collect hefty bonuses or pay raises for bringing in all the additional revenue, and that's the real reason behind this.

If this comes to pass I'll drop from three tournaments a year I really watch (Masters, Open, US Open) down to just one, the Masters.  I guess they now stand alone in not chasing the almighty dollar.

[Mark Chaplin]

Mark you are completely right about the darts, the BBC may as well cover monthly medals!

I remember when the BBC had The Masters, PGA from Wentworth, Scottish Open, the one from Woburn (English Open) and the World Matchplay plus the one that probably got more people interested in the game than all of the above - pro celebrity golf.

[Jon Wiggett]

Ryan,

yet just a few posts ago you were claiming the money difference was small and now that it is shown to be not only big but the deciding factor you go off down another road of reasoning.

So yes, participation is declining despite the BBC  coverage so it is obvious the problem is else where. This does not alter the fact that all day coverage of the games biggest event on terrestrial is fantastic exposure to a non golfing audience which will not be the case on Sky.

The R&A have obviously failed to look find the solution and their tactic appears to be throw more money down the same drain they have already thrown millions down. The problem will be if they ever do find the solution (which is doubtful as the have failed to solve any of the big problems) they will have lost their best form of reaching new people.

As for the darts, yes I am sure Sky do a great job with it but I could have watched hours of darts during the last few weeks on free view TV during the day and evening. Oh and of course 'Bullseye' is being reshown now which I am sure is the real reason for increased participation. Slick show that Bullseye

I agree that the Open is done very well though.

Jon

It's the same reasoning as I expressed in my first post in the thread. I made a mess of the figures involved subsequently, granted.

I don't disagree with the criticisms of the R&A in other respects.

Do you see a spike in Business around the Open? Can't say I do but perhaps pitch and putt and low cost do from beginners. I think this is the bigger issue though. Where do the newly hooked people go that is affordable and welcoming to sustain the initial tv inspired interest? It's very easy for kids when mum and dad play and getting easier for kids even if they don't, everyone else has significant barriers to entry that are less of a problem with other sports.

I look forward to the last Open on BBC. Alliss will be at his bitter and cantankerous best and will give it to everyone.

Okay Ryan,

so do you expect numbers to begin rising when the Open goes to Sky? Also, it is great that the R&A are going to be able to spend more money on the grassroots but do you really believe that spending even more millions on ineffective schemes will make a difference. I get the feeling that the R&A firmly believe that by being able to say 'we have spent X milions on grassroots' that that justifies their existence.

My experience of the R&A is they have little grasp of the UK market and where it is at or heading and have given up. It is a shame therefor that such an organisation should be in the position to waste so much money which could do so much. What is even more tragic is they do not seem to care about that.

Jon

[Adrian_Stiff]

The situation that can't exist is; that more people will watch the Open because it is on SKY and not BBC, if you have SKY you have BBC, you can have BBC and not SKY. The BBC can be found in Nigeria, Nepal and Norway and normally it is free.

It is the shop window, the advert for the game. If you believe advertising works then it will be bad. If you don't think advertising works you best go sit in a bar.

The real problem is that the game has become dull to too many people, biggest reason is how long it takes to play factored into peoples available time. It is almost impossible to play regular golf if you are a normal 36 year old with two kids unless you are selfish, if a round of golf was 3 hours not 4.5 it might not be the problem it is.

Pro-celebrity Golf was a massive stimulant here in the UK. Tony Jacklin was, Nick Faldo was, Winning the 85 Ryder Cup was. Losing Tiger Woods saw a 35% dip in viewing figures and massive financial losses. The Ladies domination by Korean's is not good for the west because we can't remember their names (they almost need nicknames). The courses that the US and European tour go to are usually dull....those Chinese courses, desert courses, most US ones all roll into one, and the coverage is too focused on putting which is boring unless its the last few holes and it is close. I only watch the majors now and Sawgrass and I am/was a fanatic.

[Ally Mcintosh]

Not sure if these UK numbers were posted.

Last year, 5.5m people watched McIlroy lift the Claret Jug.

Meanwhile, the viewership on Sky for the Ryder Cup peaked at 1.7m.

Sky's highest rated sporting event last year (Chelsea vs Liverpool) had 3m.

Whilst it's important not to overstate the influence TV has on those growing up, it most certainly does have some influence. The 2005 Ashes series drove the country mad about cricket. That had to have a knock-on effect. I know I took up sports because I watched them on TV. My parents and closes friends didn't play any of the sports that I did when I first started.

[Ryan Coles]

Ryan,

yet just a few posts ago you were claiming the money difference was small and now that it is shown to be not only big but the deciding factor you go off down another road of reasoning.

So yes, participation is declining despite the BBC  coverage so it is obvious the problem is else where. This does not alter the fact that all day coverage of the games biggest event on terrestrial is fantastic exposure to a non golfing audience which will not be the case on Sky.

The R&A have obviously failed to look find the solution and their tactic appears to be throw more money down the same drain they have already thrown millions down. The problem will be if they ever do find the solution (which is doubtful as the have failed to solve any of the big problems) they will have lost their best form of reaching new people.

As for the darts, yes I am sure Sky do a great job with it but I could have watched hours of darts during the last few weeks on free view TV during the day and evening. Oh and of course 'Bullseye' is being reshown now which I am sure is the real reason for increased participation. Slick show that Bullseye

I agree that the Open is done very well though.

Jon

It's the same reasoning as I expressed in my first post in the thread. I made a mess of the figures involved subsequently, granted.

I don't disagree with the criticisms of the R&A in other respects.

Do you see a spike in Business around the Open? Can't say I do but perhaps pitch and putt and low cost do from beginners. I think this is the bigger issue though. Where do the newly hooked people go that is affordable and welcoming to sustain the initial tv inspired interest? It's very easy for kids when mum and dad play and getting easier for kids even if they don't, everyone else has significant barriers to entry that are less of a problem with other sports.

I look forward to the last Open on BBC. Alliss will be at his bitter and cantankerous best and will give it to everyone.

Okay Ryan,

so do you expect numbers to begin rising when the Open goes to Sky? Also, it is great that the R&A are going to be able to spend more money on the grassroots but do you really believe that spending even more millions on ineffective schemes will make a difference. I get the feeling that the R&A firmly believe that by being able to say 'we have spent X milions on grassroots' that that justifies their existence.

My experience of the R&A is they have little grasp of the UK market and where it is at or heading and have given up. It is a shame therefor that such an organisation should be in the position to waste so much money which could do so much. What is even more tragic is they do not seem to care about that.

Jon

Jon

No I don't expect numbers to rise with Sky - I don't believe it will impact greatly either way at this stage. If golf was on terrestrial tv all the time every week, then I think the move would be damaging, but the horse or at least golf bolted from the BBC long ago.

I think the R&A do the Open well and I can only speak as I find, have found them very helpful with golf course/agronomy. Equipment aside (a big aside granted), I think they do a good job with the rules - they are silly at times, but I haven't seen anyone write a better version.

As for wasting money on initiatives to "grow the game", I agree with you. These are little more than a photo op with a kid holding a plastic club and another statistic of someone "new who has been introduced to golf".

Whatever they're doing in the UK clearly isn't having much of an impact and more of the same clearly isn't the answer, but I don't know what the answer is without fundamentally changing the game itself. Golf changes slowly or not at all. Golf doesn't appear conducive to fitting in with modern life for many. Other sports have changed (twenty20 etc) which the purists hate.

Specifically on the TV deal, host Broadcaster (be that Sky or BBC) provide the feed to the rest of the world. I've read that the BBC's lack of production quality/modern innovation was a factor in the decision and the R&A may have been leaned on by their more lucrative american tv partners.

Could it be that two hours in the evening at prime time is about as much as the modern attention span can handle anyway, as least for the casual fan, newly interested?

[Adrian_Stiff]

Ryan - I think there are not many that watch all 13 hours each day and yes I think 1 hour - 2 hour span is the time many watch, but.

20.00-22.00 Might be prime time but its prime time for other TV too. What if it clashes with Big Brother?

The long daytime slot allows people to watch in and out and you have more chance that viewers will catch it.

That aside it is not the real problem, merely the advert. Maybe the R & A could spend £3,000,000 per year on advertising the health benifits of golf. That is only bright spark I can see that would stimulate more new players playing the game and existing ones playing more. The real truth is that a lot of people have drifted away from the game. Quite a lot actually have a set of clubs.