Sky vs. BBC F1 review show
- This topic has 6 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 3 months ago by
.
- Posts
Just saw both Sky F1 and BBC review. What a stark difference in quality of content, the rhythm and overall presentation between Sky and BBC.
Where Sky kept repeating some “special” features they broadcasted during some races and giving those typical SLOW-MO shots of drivers, BBC was subtle and very interesting and analytical.
I couldn’t sustain Sky’s review for more than 20 mins while even an hour felt less for BBC.
What is this with those stupid slow mos?
What’s your take on both the shows?
Yes, the BBC one was very thoughtful and done well I thought, really adding something to a season analysis. Haven’t seen the Sky one yet.
Hello F1 Fanatics! I have had an account here for ages but have never really contributed my thoughts to the forum before, but after seeing this thread I wanted to say some stuff! I normally hang around the Codemasters Forum, but as that’s offline right now I have no where to chat about my favourite sport!!
Anyway, I watched both the review shows from Sky and BBC and I must say that the BBC review was far more gripping. The intro video from BBC was awesome with EJ doing the voice over, and as you guys have said, I am getting fed up with the constant slow motion shots from Sky. I also got bored watching the Sky review and skipped through lots of it, but the BBC one was super good. The BBC review seemed to have more shots of F1 personnel talking and more F1 footage, while the Sky one was just a chat in a living room with the odd footage. Maybe that is because Sky gave each team a 30 minute programme to themselves with a lot of chat from the team and a lot of footage.
I must be honest, I do prefer the Sky race coverage as a whole. I prefer the features they do, and obviously they have so much TV time at their disposal, so for me as an F1 fan it is great to have an hourly F1 show every week, and huge race programmes with big reviews. The F1 legends and architects of F1 programmes are fantastic to watch, and watching these has made me become even more interested in the history of F1.
I think the team of David Croft, Martin Brundle and Ted Kravitz works absolutely great, and I do prefer it to Ben Edwards, David Coulthard, Gary Anderson and Tom Clarkson, although I love Ben’s enthusiasm! For presenters, I wish Jake Humphrey was still here because he did a great job, and the trio of himself, DC and EJ worked so well. When Jake joined in 2009 everyone thought, who is this guy from kids TV? Turned out to be awesome. Simon Lazenby, I didn’t like him much at first, and I feel like he isn’t a huge huge fan of F1 (I think he used to present rugby?), similar to Suzi Perry (whose passion is in motorbikes really). I have grown to like Damon Hill as an analyst, while Johnny Herbert, I can take him or leave him. Brundle is of course good anywhere! DC and EJ are also very good analysts.
For a bit of fun, my ultimate F1 TV team would be:
Presenter: Lee McKenzie
Analyst 1: Eddie Jordan
Analyst 2: Damon Hill
Analyst 3: David Coulthard
Commentator 1: David Croft
Commentator 2: Martin Brundle
Pit Lane: Ted Kravitz
Sky Pad/Technical: Gary Anderson
Interview pen: Natalie PinkhamThe prospect of a full time F1 channel was a mouth watering prospect in itself but I really feel that BBC has more creative minds churning new creation and going in depth with analysis where as Sky seems to be stuck with more of skin and less of meat.
Ever since Sky F1 came into being, rarely their features have matched up to the level of BBC and this year’s review was no different. Firstly, they lifted the concept of meeting at Simon’s house which was made last year for BBC (2012) where they meet at EJ’s place. It always seems that they lift a few fundamental ideas from the BBC itself (the water ski at Monaco 2013 or the Sand Grand Prix or the Pit Stop Challenge)
Their review was truly painful to watch. Very hollow to say the least
I haven’t seen Sky’s season review, and have no desire to. Sky have had two years now to improve their coverage, and they’re still not up to the BBC’s standard. BBC’s 2011 coverage was brilliant: Brundle and Coulthard commentating, Jake Humphrey as anchor and EJ/DC for analysis. Despite losing Brundle to Sky and Jake to BT, and despite Sky’s no doubt enormous budget, their coverage still lacks depth and detail.
I think that the difference is most obvious during the post-race coverage. The BBC shows overtakes from multiple camera angles, discusses important events in detail and squeezes in as many interviews with drivers and team principles as they’re willing to do; Sky’s discussion is altogether less detailed and they’d rather show a montage of clips rather than discussing key events and attempting to draw a conclusion. From the comments above, it seems as if Sky have simply applied the same formula of superficial analysis, shiny graphics and music-filled montages to their review show.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.