Brawn explains F1’s “new ideas” to improve TV coverage

2018 F1 season

Posted on

| Written by

Formula One has introduced several “new ideas” aimed at improving television coverage of the sport, motorsport director Ross Brawn explains.

Brawn said the changes introduced this year are intended “to emphasise the extreme talent of the drivers and make their skills driving the cars look even more exciting.”

“We have new camera angles, an all-new graphic design that we are constantly evolving and the new halo graphics which has managed to make the halo less intrusive on television to our viewers and fans,” he said.

“There’s a specially-made microphone placed to enhance the sound of the power units, and we are interviewing the drivers immediately after qualifying, following the heat of the battle. We are doing that after the race too, capturing the emotions of the drivers on screens around the world.”

Not all of the changes F1 has made so far have been successful, Brawn admitted, following the problems which it hits delayed F1 TV streaming service when it finally launched last weekend.

“The launch did not go very smoothly,” Brawn admitted, “and apologies to our fans, but we are dragging our sport from a place where none of these initiative previously existed and we will get there.”

In addition to F1 TV, Formula One also broadcast a new live post-race show on Twitter and reintroduced the FanVision handsets, now known as F1 Vision.

Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and go ad-free

2018 F1 season

Browse all 2018 F1 season articles

Author information

Keith Collantine
Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

82 comments on “Brawn explains F1’s “new ideas” to improve TV coverage”

  1. “new ideas” to improve TV coverage…

    How about free to air… ?

    1. no they want new ideas, not good ideas

    2. Jeremy Smith
      15th May 2018, 14:28

      Why should it be free ?

      1. Ben Rowe (@thegianthogweed)
        15th May 2018, 14:58

        Because that would be a good way to increase the amount of viewers. One think is for certain next year. While Sky will get more money from customers subscribing to their services, F1 will certainly have less viewers from the UK as there is nothing live on freeview any more. So live free to air would be a nice idea to improve TV coverage.

      2. It is not Free. It is Free to air. That is different.

        The channel still pays money to F1 but the viewers do not pay to watch it. Therefore the audience goes up and sponsors are willing to pay more to advertise. This also ensures that there are future F1 fans ready and waiting. It was how F1 was always shown up until recently in the UK. Since that move the audience has fallen. As far as I know Channel 4 still gets more viewers than Sky despite only having half the races live…

        1. People would then start complaining about ads in the middle of a race.

          1. What do you mean ….START ….. we here in “The Great White North” have been suffering with this for years. You would think that they could do a tape-delay and insert the adverts and return to the race 2 minutes delayed. Then you wouldn’t be hurling insults at the sponsors.
            Most of the time I tape the race and don’t watch it live and don’t watch the adds anyway. How does that help the sponsors.?
            Is it FREE …. not even close. The cable cost with the boost for TSN is pretty high. If the direct off internet service ever shows up, it will be a net money saver. Plus there won’t (or shouldn’t) be any adds interrupting coverage.

          2. Channel 4 does not have Ads in the middle of live races. It has them in highlights but that is not a problem as they just start again where they finished off.

            However you seem to be acting as if free to air would be a new phenomenon…. It is only recently in the history of F1 where there has been a paywall! It was always free to air up till then.

          3. @Ian Parker.

            The sponsors are the ones paying to have their logos painted on the cars and stuck on hoardings and signs around the track. They get more attention the more people are watching. Ads do not really affect them.

            What you are referring to is the add money the TV station can make. That is not directly connected to F1 and if people are skipping them then the tv company needs to handle them better.

          4. Before all this fracas on pay TV came up, here in Canada, our National TV CBC would air the races, with ads. The difference being that they had a PIP display. Yes the race was on a smaller screen, but you could still see the action, while the ad played.
            That way you could still let the advertisers show their garbage then the picture would return to full size. Plain simple, and effective.

    3. I don’t think that I am a rare exception when I already pay for cable anyway, never watching 80% of the channels my provider (Comcast) is forcing on me with their channel packaging. So, aside from that, I have no fundamental problem with watching F1 on pay TV. But the broadcasts should be better, enhanced with quality on-board shots (see IndyCar).

    4. I think the problem is that a lot of the tv contracts were already in place before liberty took over, so it will be interesting to see why they do for new contracts, in Germany the sky contract is expiring an d F1 is replacing it with there own streaming service

      You only have to look to cricket in the UK, before gong betting sky’s pay wall the ashes had 4 million viewers, now 0.25, and a lack of new players, which will lead to less interest, and sky paying less in the future

    5. AussieRaceFan
      16th May 2018, 0:56

      I don’t understand this Free to air debate. Since Pay TV Coverage of motorsport, the viewing has become so much better. They now have dedicated teams who are only focused on F1, they do weekly shows between races, the coverage starts 1 – 2 hours before the race, all practice sessions are live and we get HD. Now tell me, what free to air channel would be going to deliver all that?

      1. Ben Rowe (@thegianthogweed)
        16th May 2018, 11:00

        On Channel 4 in on Freeview in the UK, When it is live, you don’t get adverts during the race or the qualifying sessions. The coverage starts 1 hour before each. The practice sessions are live in half the race weekends and everything is in HD. Also, almost everyone other than the main presenter has a huge amount of knowledge about F1. Such as David coulthard, Ben Edwards Karun Chandhok, Mark Webber. Suzi Wolf, Eddie Jordan and several others too.

        Sky isn’t much better than this and to many of us in the UK, the presentation is worse despite it having slightly less adverts and having a bit more coverage.

      2. Why can’t we have all of the options? Free-to-Air, Pay-TV and Over-The-Top streaming all at once? Let the viewer decide if and who they want to pay given their individual circumstances (money, time, interest etc).

        Seems to be best way to increase the audience whilst simultaneously providing the coverage which fans crave (and are willing to pay for).

        1. @justrhysism
          +1 That’s the most sensible thing said so far & I completely agree with you. Unfortunately, the words “sensible” & “F1 broadcasting” haven’t been heard in the same sentence for quite some time.
          I had to cancel my Sky sports, of which I only watched the F1 channel, subscription at the end of last year after ill health forced me to stop working for a while. Although I am back to work again now it is only part time & I cannot justify the extra £40 per month it would cost to add the sports to my current TV/internet/phone package. I found that I like the Channel 4 presenters & shows more than the Sky ones, admittedly this is a matter of personal preference, & am genuinely worried about how I will be able to keep watching F1 since we don’t have full access to F1TV (who I would be happy to pay £10 a month for their services) in the UK & Sky take over completely from next year.
          I’ve been following F1 since ’86 & would be devastated if I could no longer watch it which means I could be forced to find an illegal source, like several others have previously mentioned on here, if there is no more FTA coverage of any kind in the UK.

    6. What about being able to watch F1 without commercialbreaks every 2 minuts.. so sick of those breaks.. Im paying 5£ pr. Month in Denmark for the Channel and can’t see it anywhere else…would pay 15£ if it was without commercials!

  2. There’s a specially-made microphone placed to enhance the sound of the power units

    I noticed this.
    They mentioned something on screen. I certainly did NOT hear that the sound was any different; But maybe I’m just tone-deaf.

    1. To me, the onboard microphone makes the power units sound much worse than when you’re listening trackside. They make the engines sound more like industrial stamping machines than racing units.

      Fan videos often capture the sound much, much better than FOM can manage, and they often sound really good especially in the braking / acceleration areas where engine sound is mixed in with tyre squeals. I recall a good example fan video from Canada Turn 2 last year – hope I can find it…

      1. Ben Rowe (@thegianthogweed)
        15th May 2018, 15:08

        I am really into my audio and have decent speakers and headphones and always use one or the other when watching F1. The cars have certainly sounded less realistic this year. I find it annoying as the sound they play when they show the camera view point is not what it would sound like from that position. As you are often hearing it from much closer to the exhaust plus some weird effects. It sounds more like a racing game somehow. The cars sounded better on TV to be before 2017. But maybe this depends on how good your audio system is. The problem I have with fan videos is they are never done with professional cameras or microphones (which is understandable). So to me they sound bad anyway. But I guess your point is that they don’t sound heavily edited.

        It wouldn’t bother me as much if I knew the sound was coming from where they show the video. So now, I think it is just getting less realistic.

      2. @juan-fanger

        Of course an onboard sound wont be the same as trackside. Jump on a motocrosser and you’ll hear more engine nosie and some whine rather than all exhaust noise which you’re projecting behind.

        The ‘machine’ noise from the drivers view is what it is.

    2. It sounds the same to me too.

      1. My guess is it is a plot to save money on announcers. When they are feeding the track-side sound (noise) in with the announcers, all you hear is the noise. Clearly they don’t need commentators since no one can hear them. Maybe it is better else where, but our coverage is c…p for sound.

  3. I wonder how much money brawn gets paid for his pointless job. He does nothing, race fan commentary on sites like this is more important than this f1 poleticians views. Brawn was in a lucky place twice in his career, at ferarri in its golden era, and buying a Honda car that ended up being title winning, but he showed his true sporting colours, and showed that he is a poletician first when montoya overtook Schumacher at the nurburging in 03, brawns comments were of the worst sportsman in f1, and the same went for his interjection in the tyre width thing at end of season 2003, where Michelin were asked to change their tyres with 3 races left in the season, gifting ferrari a championship they were to lose. This guy is completely overrated and I can’t believe F1 has hired him to help dictate the years ahead in this sport.

    1. Hehe, overrated perhaps, but he has a record of being at places where the job gets done..

    2. He does nothing, race fan commentary on sites like this is more important than this f1 poleticians views

      Hahaha no. Just no.

    3. Invisiblekid
      17th May 2018, 0:34

      You do realise almost everything is tied up in contracts right now that would cost millions to rip up. At the minute he has very little he can do. In 5 years time if we are in the same boast then feel free to come back here with “I told you so”. Until then we just have to wait. Oh and add to that veto’s and team fighting/moaning.

      Your here quoting this site as a wealth views and you dont get this?

  4. Use CGI to hide the empty seats? or maybe lower ticket prices so TV viewers dont get the impression i’ts not worth the money.

    1. How about putting the driver’s name on the halo so we instantly know who we’re watching? Wouldn’t cost a thing, just a simple three letter graphic. I think Haas does this and it’s helpful.

  5. Umar A (@umartajuddin)
    15th May 2018, 14:49

    I love the new microphone placement. It really needs to be stressed more how much better it sounds. The engines arent as loud as before, but with the new microphones they still sound pretty good. Especially in qualy.

    1. This. And they also borrowed the audio up mode, from indy, where commentators shut up for a few minutes and we can hear the engines growl.

      1. Invisiblekid
        17th May 2018, 0:35

        Tell that to Brundle.

  6. pastaman (@)
    15th May 2018, 14:56

    Putting the graphics on the halo was a great idea, turning a negative (looks-wise) into a positive.

    1. Seconded. Once you’ve seen it done, it seems obvious and i believe it’s the hallmark of a great initiative

    2. I still despise the halo, but at least the graphics reduce its visual impact. I wouldn’t go as far as calling it a positive, but I agree otherwise

    3. I think it looks tacky, like something you would see in an unlicensed F1 game knockoff

      1. I agree. When i’m watching it,it makes me focus more on the graphics than the track. I don’t know if thats just me but i dont like it. The halo alone lookes out of place and i haven’t liked it since they thought of the idea.

    4. It looks tacky, but does make Halo look like a natural part of graphics and gives you important telemetry. All I am missing is the brake pressure sensor.

    5. I fully understand using the dead space of the halo to display information, but I don’t know why the speed display along with a ‘fake’ windshield are shown above the halo. It encroaches on race track we could actually see, and there is definitely room to integrate that information over by the brake light (which isn’t shown progressively like throttle application, it is just on or off), or even below the RPM band without obstructing our view of the drivers hands.

    6. SparkyAMG (@)
      16th May 2018, 14:01

      I think putting the graphics on the Halo was a good idea, but I’ve got no idea why they’re off-brand unless they’ve bought the tech in quickly and haven’t had a chance to fine tune it yet.

      I’d hope, and expect, for those graphics to end up being black and red instead of blue and yellow like they are currently.

  7. I absolutely hate the sound from the new OnBoard microphone position, Makes the cars sound like a wasp or something & it’s simply terrible IMO. And both Anthony Davidson & Paul Di Resta have said on Sky’s broadcast that the cars sound nothing like that either from trackside or when your in them as a driver so it’s not even giving us a more realistic impression of what they sound like.

    And I still feel that aspects of the graphics have been dumbed down & is now lacking data. For example when they had the ‘battle’ graphic it now only shows speed, gear & steering angle when in the past it was Throttle/Brake & Hybrid usage which was far more useful data & there’s similar across other aspects of the graphics. The Rev-counter for instance where again Throttle/Brake data is missing.

    I also feel that aspects of the graphics are far bigger & take up more space then they really need to be.

    And the font still remains a problem as despite been told ‘You’ll get used to it’ i’m still having a much harder time reading it than I did the old font…. An issue that is only been further highlighted given how F2/GP3 are still using the old graphics set which is way clearer than what F1 now has.

    The post qualifying interviews are OK but I hate how there doing it after the race & feel that the podium interviews worked way better. The post race parc-ferme interviews feel rushed, Lack any interest & were missing out on some of the extra emotion & crowd interaction we got with the podium interviews.

    Also not fond of this ‘Audio up’ thing there trying in practice/qualifying. Having a lap where commentators shut up & the track audio is turned up works OK in the US where the broadcaster (Fox, ESPN etc…) are controlling the feed so know when its coming up & can be ready for it. But when you do it an random on a world-feed & you suddenly have commentators having to shut up for this feature even if there mid-explanation or analysis of something simply doesn’t work & serves as nothing but a distraction.

    1. yes i agree with all of this here!

    2. Ben Rowe (@thegianthogweed)
      15th May 2018, 15:38


      I strongly agree with this. The graphics and other things to me are just making it worse. I also get driven mad when they show the driver line up just before the race. Making silly bleeping noises each row of drivers they show. It getting more and more like a computer game. They also seem to have made several of the drivers stand in different positions and some of them look rather silly. They clearly wouldn’t choose to stand like this. It was better when they all just had the same expression stood in the same position rather than looking like they have been forced to do something special for the picture. I mean, Verstappen looks like he is trying to get something out of his pocket and Grosjean is pointing at something and Magnussen has his fist clenched in his hand. Then others look odd too. This is more than strange…..

      While I think the Halo seems like a reasonable place to a lot of people to put some of the graphics, I find it very annoying as it isn’t at all realistic in terms of what the drivers are seeing from their on board view. I think it would be better if they put this right at the top of the screen. That is where most of the time, you are seeing the barrier or sky or the road up ahead. It to me would be better there.

      I still have issues with the on board graphics this year and the last showing the drivers position. There used to be a small and discrete bar at the bottom in the middle. It just showed 5 drivers at a time, changing every 7 seconds or so. A disadvantage compared to now is that you don’t see them all at the same time. But more of the time, it showed the gaps between the drivers more than it does now. The issues with the new one is that it is MASSIVE I mean really big. A big box on the left side of the screen showing all the drivers that takes up too much space. I am surprised I’m one of the few complaining about this but the cars constantly keep driving behind it. It is clearly blocking the screen more than the old one.

      I also think that the way the guys on the podium get interviewed is s total failure. Give them a chance to recover from the race. I mean seriously. If they want to run and go and see their team, let them do that rather than get loads of questions by the media thrown at them. It just feels too chaotic and rushed. Give the drivers a chance to go to the cool down room, have their podium and speak to them afterwards. Just like you used to. This was something they did right and now seems completely wrong. I don’t want to blame Coulthard or Di resta as they did what they should have done by trying to get words from the drivers, but it looked and felt so unprofessional when comparing it to when drivers are interviewed on the podium. I don’t see it working for long. Imaging if a driver lost out one a well deserved win but still managed 3rd due to a technical problem. Are they going to be in a mood to talk to the media instantly after they get out of their car? I thought the cool down room is where they recover. I don’t know who came up with doing things this way round. It makes no sense. I get the feeling some drivers are going to end up refusing to say anything at times and I won’t blame them.

      Unfortunately, there are loads of other things in terms of how the coverage has been getting worse in my view but I think people will be fed up with the moaning I’ve done already so I won’t go any further. But them saying they are trying to improve it doesn’t seem to go with what has happened so far.

    3. @stefmeister – very nice comment, illustrated with appropriate screenshots.

      I agree with the point about the battle graphic – the older one had more relevant info and looked high-tech at the same time. In the new one, I don’t understand the point of the steering angle, since two cars battling are obviously going to turn in a fraction of a second apart. Without any point of reference, it feels like a graphic added just for the sake of looking cool (unlike, say ERS, which would clearly indicate when a driver used a big burst to defend and is now a sitting duck).

      The size of the graphics is one area I’m torn – I agree that the size has increased, and it covers more of the screen, however the larger text size is a bit easier, and the SC/yellow flag signage is more apparent. That said…

      … the type face used for those graphics continues to be a mess, a clear case of form over function. Another area where I’ve found this font a disaster is the intro screen at the very start of the session (where they put up some stats about Azerbaijan/Spain), because while the white text is clearer to read, they use red text to emphasize key stats, and ironically, the red colour ends up making it harder!

      ‘Audio up’ – ah, so that’s why the commentators suddenly say “let’s be quiet for a bit and listen to this enhanced audio”. I would prefer they let the commentators do their thing, and leave the enhanced audio for the audio track without commentary (on the stream).

      1. Ben Rowe (@thegianthogweed)
        15th May 2018, 16:06


        I for one am against the size of the graphics, but I suppose it could be easier for some to read. But modern TVs are getting bigger and clearer so I don’t know why they are making the graphics bigger. To me they are just trying to hard to make things better and are ending up overemphasising things both in sound and size.

        1. @thegianthogweed – maybe its just that the current typeface is rubbish, so they needed to increase the size?

          If they went back to the old 2017 typeface, even at the current vertical height it would occupy less screen space, simply because the new typeface’s characters are unnecessarily wide.

          A big box on the left side of the screen showing all the drivers that takes up too much space.

          I really like this display, because it lets us quickly see positions of all drivers (e.g. when we have ad breaks, or are distracted) and relative gaps, as well as quickly giving context for relevant battles, instead of waiting for the ticker tape at the bottom. That said, I strongly agree that it can benefit from a very strict diet, right now it is a little too wide, no thanks to the typeface used (again!).

          1. Ben Rowe (@thegianthogweed)
            15th May 2018, 16:45

            I’m talking about 2016 and before actually, 2017 was about the same as it is now. If you look at this from 2015, this is an example of the graphics i prefer.

            I can agree, there is an advantage to being able to see them all at once, but it really does dominate the screen in comparison to the old one, which I still prefer. I just find it distracting that the cars constantly keep driving behind it.

          2. Ben Rowe (@thegianthogweed)
            15th May 2018, 16:47

            ok, this video was from 2014, but this style of graphics was used for a very long time, until it changed in 2017.

          3. I just find it distracting that the cars constantly keep driving behind it.

            @thegianthogweed – agree with this, I’ve noticed the same as well.

    1. agree that the new location of the microphone is very bad indeed. as you say does not sound very realistic, it sounds very fake & manufacturered and it also seems it has lost a lot of extra sounds like the car bottoming and running over the kerbing.

      the old locations and sound was more realistic, more organic and it picked up all the extra little details with cars hitting the floor and kerbing which added a lot.

      on f1tv maybe give us an option to use the prior microphone positions because with these new ones i just do not really enjoy listening to the onboard video anymore :(

    2. Ben Rowe (@thegianthogweed)
      15th May 2018, 15:44

      Well I record every race, so I’d actually checked this out and compared it with last year and as I said in my comment above, I do think it sounds totally wrong given where you are visualising the picture.

    3. New mic sound is closer to the exhaust so you hear the exhaust note which is what gets shot out of the car and is picked up by the track cameras. It is effectively the external sound of the car but heard from a position which is not moving relative to the car and hence sounds unnatural. It is the exact same sound you hear from the track cameras but you’re now hearing it whilst onboard.

      The old mic location seemed closer to the engine so is closer to what the driver actually hears.

      In the races I’ve heard on boards where both mic placements have been mixed. Perhaps they have two mics and overlay the outputs on top of each other. This is the better option imo

      1. Here is a mixed example. Left channel is new placement, right channel is old placement

  8. I agree with a lot of the points that have been mentioned already regarding the sounds and the graphics. To me a thing that bothers me a lot is also the Halo graphics. I know they are trying to make it invisible or whatever, but to me the way they are presented, especially with the speed and that blue glow above the Halo just distracts me from what I am trying to see, which is the car lapping the circuit from as close as possible to the drivers’ point of view. It just sort of stands in the way, more than just the Halo itself. I’d much rather have some modern graphics but placed at one of the corners/sides of the screen like they used to be.

    1. petebaldwin (@)
      16th May 2018, 20:04

      It’s weird – we were all told we’d “get used to the halo” so why are they trying to hide it? They should atleast pretend they aren’t embarassed by the design they prescribed!?

      Fair play to Brawn for putting a brave face on it but I’m sure when he took the role, he invisaged they’d achieve more than some really naff graphics and a streaming service that doesn’t work….

      Let’s see what happens with the next-gen cars… I hope is not another list of things “we’ll get used to.”

  9. Roth Man (@rdotquestionmark)
    15th May 2018, 15:20

    At least they’re having a proper go. Nothing but praise from me. This feels like a real revolution.

    1. I don’t think they deserve praise for ‘having a go’.

      The graphics rework, the interview format, the onboard mics, the broadcast music and AUDIO UP and ACTION ZONE feel like a failure, unneccesary cheap gimmicks. Why should they be praised for that?

      I appreciate the move to F1TV and increased online presence, but all in all the changes feel like they are coming from people heavily disconnected from the sport.

  10. Personally, I am unsure about the need for an overload of graphics. Do I really need to see a ‘full throttle’ graphic when the car is accelerating on a straight? Or vice versa, red braking graphic when entering a corner?

    1. Having said further up how I felt the idea of using the halo dead space as a graphic is great, I tend to agree with you, I’d rather have distance to car behind and lap delta on the sides. Plus the brake and acceleration tends to be all of nothing (when by sound it obviously isn’t)

      1. I think that’s down to how much data the broadcasters get.

        The throttle seems to be smooth, brake is on/off in the graphics (which it was last year as well), though drivers definitely don’t use the pedal like that and modulate the brake force.

  11. the halo graphics are ok but can we please go back to the graphics package used last season, they were indefinitely better in font, style, information & everything.

    it’s so great that f2 and gp3 are still using the old graphics but that also allows a comparison to f1 which just highlights how utterly terrible this years f1 graphics, font and such are.

    i’ve been watching f1 since the 80’s and have seen various different graphics introduced and have not had issues with any of them until now, i always found that i liked each new update but i just feel this years are the worst i’ve ever seen for f1. feel very american, style over substance and i am simply not a fan at all…. maybe give us an option on f1tv to use the old graphics instead!

    1. +1, except the end of your comment. Don’t give an option, just do it

  12. Jeroen Valkema
    15th May 2018, 15:42

    4k broadcasting

    1. Ben Rowe (@thegianthogweed)
      15th May 2018, 16:00

      Sky do this in the UK with SkyQ. But man it is expensive. The stupid thing is though, freeview on Channel 4HD in the UK has much better image quality than Sky’s cheapest F1 coverage option. Which is NowTV. And that is only 720p. I mean, 1080i and 1080p stuff was on freeview back in 2009 (nearly 10 years ago!!!) How on earth can sky charge so much for something that is a maximum of 720p and actually only 480p on most other devices. It’s the modern world sky, come on. We know you have 4k now so you must be capable of providing 1080p.

      The cheapest you can get a single pass from now TV’s official site is now £7.99 for 24 hours. That isn’t particularity good value given that freeview image quality is better.

      In 2019, as Freeview HD channels (which look better) will have been around 10 years by then. I think it will be extremely poor if Sky don’t bump up their image quality to 1080p for NOWTV. It is a modern streaming service. It seems out of date that they are this poor. It also buffers a lot which freeview never does. That is for obvious reasons though.

      I know that Sky do do a cable option, which is 1080p and will be very reliable. And they say they have an offer of just paying for the sports channel you love for £18 a month. When I heard this, I thought that given how bad the quality is on NowTV is, it may be a good option. As normally you would have to pay £33.99 a month to get the sports package and I’m only interested in F1. But then I found out that you must be a SkyTV customer. And even at a descound for being a new customer, that is nearly £20 a month. I don’t want all these other offers. I want to be able to watch F1 races. So this just ends up being way too expensive.

      1. RTL have been testing an Ultra HD channel & 4K F1 broadcast’s have been a part of it.

      2. How on earth can sky charge so much…?

        Because people are willing pay them. If you stop paying them they will go away, like last time they had F1. The answer to getting ripped off is so easy. Don’t give them money.

        1. If you stop paying them they will go away, like last time they had F1.

          Sky have never had F1 before now.

          If your referring to the F1 Digital+ channel from 2002, Sky weren’t involved in that. That service was been run by FOM & had been in Europe since 1997. In 2002 they brought an EPG slot to run the service in the UK & ran the service from there Biggin Hill base. Sky had no involvement apart from selling them the EPG slot which is why there was no Sky branding on that service.

          1. My point still stands. SKY cancer only exists because people pay them. Nobody, including F1 drivers need to be paid tens of millions to drive a car. No footballer is worth that cash either. What enables those salaries is PPV schemes. IT takes something from everyone and makes it exclusive to those with deep pockets. In the long term it will kill the sport as there will be no new viewers. In the short term it’s trebles all round as profits grow. If the few are willing to stump up, F1 will just be minor paragraph in the paper and nobody will know or care who is world champion. Just like boxing. Still Formula E is growing better by the second, it’s accessible to all… Until greed takes it down the path of Formula One.

  13. They’re copying IndyCar.

    1. Especially with their double flag symbols, which are certainly not an F1 thing

  14. Halo graphics are LESS intrusive?? even more of the track is now blocked with a stupid kph number. Good grief stop trying to sell me on this abomination!!

    Halo sucks!

  15. What’s stopping them from using microphones that pick up engine sounds how humans hear them.

    The microphones are supposedly designed to pick up the full range of sound (volume, pitch, etc.), beyond what human ears hear, hence why they can get damaged by the noise.

    The sound that is broadcasted is converted into something audible, and therefore sounds different

  16. A good idea (IMHO) is to have a mic in the crowd to get those cheers and boos. The problem is that it make take a heavy load of sound engineers to make it work.

  17. Why is he explaining TV coverage, like the fat kid who put his fingers in everybody else`s pie?

  18. If control mission room were not banned, some of their information could be released into the broadcasting.

  19. A lot of the fancy graphics I have neither a positive or negative view about, all that new halo stuff, etc., I’ll take it or leave it. But here are my issues with the new graphics, mainly during qualifying…

    Firstly stupidly highlighting just the person in 15th (in Q1) taking up a massive space with a picture and everything, it distorts the way you look at the list and toward the end of session with it changing all the time it makes it really hard to follow. Its a far to simplistic view, we all know that there can be 10+ cars all at risk of dropping into the bottom 5 once the times start tumbling and its irrelivant just focusing on who is in 15th. Highlight the bottom 5 or none at all.

    And the next thing I seem to struggle with is in mainly Q3 when they are running for pole, the split second when they cross the finish line it just doesn’t seem as clear to me as it used to. The clock graphic seems slow and not quite in sync when the driver crosses the line it tends to carry on running past the actual time they’ve set, and on top of that it doesnt show their lap time just a relative + or – to another driver. I’d like to know if other people have similar problems following it, i certainly feel like I took for granted how clear the previous graphics were.

    And then in the race the list on the left always shows the intervals between the cars rather than the distance to the leader, this is not a new problem it has been creeping in for a number of years now but it’s a real annoyance for me. It’s impossible to work out how far the field is spread out with intervals whereas a list with everyone’s distance to the leader it is possible to work out the intervals between the cars yourself.

    Any way that’s my little rant, sorry it’s long!

  20. I’m surprised to read about microphones to improve the sound for the TV coverage. I watched the Spanish GP via Ft TV Pro and the engine sound was noticeably quieter than usual. It detracted from the viewing experience. Another sound issue on that broadcast: the commentators consistently talked over almost of the radio communications. This doesn’t usually happen on Sky and I assume there was timing problem with the notifications that the commentators were receiving. Nevertheless, it was annoying.

  21. Here’s something I noticed: I recently watched the McLaren video that documented their 2017 campaign. The videos that McLaren took of their cars on track were using different camera angles and gave a noticeably greater impression of their speed compared to what we get via the F1 world feed over the GP weekends. Specifically, the were using some cameras that weren’t following the cars one by for the entire length of the shot.

  22. Does anyone else thing that the new font that F1 is using for the text graphics on the word feed are horrible? The 2 looks like a Z and it just generally looks squashed and amateurish, IMO.

Comments are closed.