BBC vs Sky - The Story so Far

[Bezza]

So, 9 races in, almost halfway, lets compare BBC v Sky.

First of all I must say it is absolutely fantastic that we have TWO channels with F1 here in the UK. I have Sky so it didn’t affect me as much as some others when the deal was announced last year.

Picture/Sound quality (HD): Sky > BBC. As Dave B has alluded to in another thread, the Silverstone roar was much more audible on Sky (and I was at the GP, it was loud!) whereas BBC you couldn’t quite hear it.
Special features: BBC > Sky. Quite a close one, but the BBC’s relaxed manner wins out, my fave being Jenson & Lewis trying to do their jobs!
Overall channel/additional input: Sky > BBC. A dedicated channel has been a godsend. Old races, season reviews, special features, support races, legends interviews, additional coverage and multiple chances to watch highlights give Sky a big thumbs up. The F1 forum is excellent and the BBC do a good job with what they have, but with the resources of a dedicated channel, Sky wins out.

On to the teams:

Humphrey vs Lazenby: BBC > Sky. Jake has a comfortable edge, Lazenby at times is cringeworthy such as in Barcelona when the pit fire happened, he was just reeling off speculative events “we’ve just heard that a man came out with his legs on fire” is something that should be not be said by a sports presenter. Decent effort from Sky, but Lazenby needs to improve.
DC/EJ vs DH/JH: BBC > Sky. Quite comfortably DC & EJ as the analysers to Jake, Damon is not bad but Johnny Herbert is poor and reminds me too much of Blundell. If I was Sky, I would work hard to persuade Jacques Villeneuve to come on permanently, as he is the “says what he thinks” character they need.
Croft vs Edwards Sky > BBC. I am surprised by this as I didn’t like Croft prior to this seasn, but he sounds more natural as lead commentator of F1 to me, Ben a close second, vast improvement over Legard /Allen!
Brundle vs Coulthard. Sky > BBC. Brundle makes me watch the Sky coverage during the race, he is still fantastic at his job. DC isn’t bad, but he just isn’t quick enough to read a race like Brundle does, with his dry wit along the way.
McKenzie vs Pinkham. BBC > Sky. Quite easily McKenzie. I like to see women in F1, but they need to not play up to a stereotype of “flirty attitude” towards F1 drivers. Lee McKenzie is fantastic at not doing that while still getting the information out of the drivers. Pinkham flirts uncomfortably, especially with Paul di Resta.
Anderson vs Kravitz. BBC > Sky. A close one, Kravtiz hasn’t done much wrong, but Anderson’s technical knowledge is second to none.

Georgie Thompson/Anthony Davidson – not real point in them being there, they do not add anything to the coverage. Davidson, along with McNish and Chandhok, represents a dedicedly average F1 driver judging much better drivers.

Overall then

BBC 5 Sky 4 - A very close call!

What does everybody else think?

[Dave B]

I'll take your points one at a time:

So, 9 races in, almost halfway, lets compare BBC v Sky.

Ok then

First of all I must say it is absolutely fantastic that we have TWO channels with F1 here in the UK. I have Sky so it didn’t affect me as much as some others when the deal was announced last year.

I agree, competition usually drives up standards. I already had Sky but had knocked the HD pack on the head, but I reinstated it (at a hefty discount!) to get the F1 channel.

Picture/Sound quality (HD): Sky > BBC. As Dave B has alluded to in another thread, the Silverstone roar was much more audible on Sky (and I was at the GP, it was loud!) whereas BBC you couldn’t quite hear it.

As you'd expect, I agree. Sky knocks the Beeb's quality out of the park, although the BBC have recently made some small improvements to their picture quality ready for the Olympics. The interactive features on Sky are head and shoulders above the BBC's, which in turn were far better than anything ITV ever attempted.

Special features: BBC > Sky. Quite a close one, but the BBC’s relaxed manner wins out, my fave being Jenson & Lewis trying to do their jobs!

I tend to agree. Sky's build-ups, while massively long, often contain a lot of filler. The Beeb's experience in this - and programme making in general - shows.

Overall channel/additional input: Sky > BBC. A dedicated channel has been a godsend. Old races, season reviews, special features, support races, legends interviews, additional coverage and multiple chances to watch highlights give Sky a big thumbs up. The F1 forum is excellent and the BBC do a good job with what they have, but with the resources of a dedicated channel, Sky wins out.

Again agreed. That said the BBC's Silverstone forum was simply phenomenal.

On to the teams:

Humphrey vs Lazenby: BBC > Sky. Jake has a comfortable edge, Lazenby at times is cringeworthy such as in Barcelona when the pit fire happened, he was just reeling off speculative events “we’ve just heard that a man came out with his legs on fire” is something that should be not be said by a sports presenter. Decent effort from Sky, but Lazenby needs to improve.

Or indeed his poor attempt at a Princess Grace joke in Monaco, or the panic in his eyes when they go off-plan. Jake is one of the best presenters the BBC has got, full stop, and his experience with live telly (including kids') is an obvious asset.

DC/EJ vs DH/JH: BBC > Sky. Quite comfortably DC & EJ as the analysers to Jake, Damon is not bad but Johnny Herbert is poor and reminds me too much of Blundell. If I was Sky, I would work hard to persuade Jacques Villeneuve to come on permanently, as he is the “says what he thinks” character they need.

I disagree on that one, I think that while Coulthard has relaxed into the job EJ is becoming more of a knobhead. Hill was wooden as the New Forest when he started but now has a natural rhythm on camera, and guests like Herbert or Allan McNish have proven inspired choices.

Croft vs Edwards Sky > BBC. I am surprised by this as I didn’t like Croft prior to this seasn, but he sounds more natural as lead commentator of F1 to me, Ben a close second, vast improvement over Legard /Allen!

I worshiped Ben's touring car commentary but for me he doesn't seem to have brought that quiet confidence with him to F1. I know he's called it before, but there seem to be a few too many basic errors and he does occasionally get a bit flustered during busy periods such as the start. He's still phenomenally good, a country mile better than Legard, but Croft just about edges it for me.

Brundle vs Coulthard. Sky > BBC. Brundle makes me watch the Sky coverage during the race, he is still fantastic at his job. DC isn’t bad, but he just isn’t quick enough to read a race like Brundle does, with his dry wit along the way.

Agreed again. DC has really stepped up but Brundle is authoritative, precise, and notices tiny details that many others miss.

McKenzie vs Pinkham. BBC > Sky. Quite easily McKenzie. I like to see women in F1, but they need to not play up to a stereotype of “flirty attitude” towards F1 drivers. Lee McKenzie is fantastic at not doing that while still getting the information out of the drivers. Pinkham flirts uncomfortably, especially with Paul di Resta.

Pinkham is simply awful. I keep expecting questions like "what's your star sign" and "what's your favourite colour". It appears from what we see on screen that the drivers repect McKenzie a lot more - she's been a motorsport journo for years and has earned her stripes in less glamorous formulae, meeting many of the drivers on the way.

Anderson vs Kravitz. BBC > Sky. A close one, Kravtiz hasn’t done much wrong, but Anderson’s technical knowledge is second to none.

Apples and oranges. Kravitz is superb at analysis and tactics, Anderson is superb at technical detail. It's a shame we can't merge them and make one supernerd!

Georgie Thompson/Anthony Davidson – not real point in them being there, they do not add anything to the coverage. Davidson, along with McNish and Chandhok, represents a dedicedly average F1 driver judging much better drivers.

I like Ant, but the whole SkyPad idea is a little daft. They'd be better off getting the paddock guys to talk about the action rather than relying on gimmickry. That said, some of the "Hawkeye" style views give a good insight into incidents. Thompson herself adds nothing of value to any programme she's ever been on, and to be honest it jars a little that they've given the F1 gig to someone still serving a ban for drink-driving.

Overall then

BBC 5 Sky 4 - A very close call!

What does everybody else think?

I think you've pretty much nailed it except that I'd put the scores the other way round with Sky marginally ahead of the BBC.

[wedge]

Depending how fussy you are over sound/picture quality then BBC wins it on presentation alone.

I'm surprised how awful Natalie Pinkham is because she was solid on 5Live as pit reporter. She's become more Beverly Turner than Louise Goodman - at Sky's behest it seems.

DC feels too gangly and awkward during the grid walks especially as he struggles for ad hoc interviews. Brundle was the uber professional: time to scrape the barrel with the likes of D-list celebs to fill time.

[AndyL]

PS: I also think this forum is a lot quieter than is used to be and I think this deal has gasd a lot to do with that. Posters like 'Sonic' have walked away from F1 and haven't been seen for nearly a year now and most of the threads are made up of 5 or 6 posters when they used to up to 20 posters debating at once. Just an observation.

I think the split from motorsport.com has also made a difference to the level of forum activity.

[christophulus]

I haven't watched a minute of the Sky coverage this year, and haven't really felt like I've missed out. I think that says it all, 9-0 to the BBC in my eyes!

[rjbetty]

Yeah I agree about Lee MacKenzie. There's something about the way she DOESN'T flirt that makes her classy. She also doesn't overcompensate and become too anal and serious (like I feel Karren Brady on the Apprentice does a little bit, incidentally, but anyway...)
- in short she is perfect, so much respect to her. And yes, she does also happen to be very attractive. The fact she doesn't seem to "know" this or use it in any way is very worthy of respect.

Jake is just brilliant - very talented and makes it look easy. Whatever curve-ball situation is thrown at him, he always handles it naturally and brilliantly. I didn't really know who he was before seeing him on F1, but I hear that maybe he was maybe trying to overcompensate in the beginning to lose the tag of kids presenter (i.e. not serious enough). I think he's just fine as he is.

DC has done very well and for me shows improvement all the time. He does just fine in the commentary box and I don't feel he's out of place at all. Yeah I admit the grid walks are maybe a little more awkward than Brundle's (I've only seen one!) but this can come. All in all, if someone had told me 10 years ago that Coulthard would be doing a central commentary and pundit role, and be doing so very competently, I would have been shocked, for during his McLaren days, he always seemed very uptight, wooden and monotonous.

I now blame much of this on Ron Dennis and his neurotic ways, cos when David moved to Red Bull, he seemed to become a new man and loosened up brilliantly.

I like EJ, especially when he questions team bosses, especially Christian Horner. It's always a laugh. OMGosh when he suggested to Christian Horner he was being insincere when he congratulated Mark Webber for winning Silverstone 2010, that was a priceless moment. The sad thing is, I never SAW that...

[Zico]

Usually watch it on Sky but have watched a couple of races on the Beeb. I've thoroughly enjoyed both and found them pretty closely matched with Sky maybe just edging it thanks to Brundles excellent input.

[BDunnell]

Davidson, along with McNish and Chandhok, represents a dedicedly average F1 driver judging much better drivers.

This is the only point with which I'd take issue. It's very unlikely that a broadcaster is going to find a really good F1 driver who can broadcast well. I don't think it matters a jot — after all, I don't have a problem with you or anyone else judging the abilities of the respective Sky and BBC broadcasters without being a broadcaster yourself.

[DexDexter]

I've watched quite of lot of Sky coverage this year (don't ask me how) and the thing that strikes me is that Johnny Herbert and Damon Hill really have nothing to say. They seem to search for words all the time and don't bring anything to the broadcasts.

[BDunnell]

I've watched quite of lot of Sky coverage this year (don't ask me how) and the thing that strikes me is that Johnny Herbert and Damon Hill really have nothing to say. They seem to search for words all the time and don't bring anything to the broadcasts.

I haven't seen Sky's coverage at all yet, but it does surprise me how anyone could think of Johnny Herbert as a broadcaster. It was the same with Mark Blundell. Hill's apparent lack of success in his role surprises me far more.