US Open 2021

Addick Addict said:

AddicksAddict said:

Addick Addict said:

Chizz said:

Addick Addict said:

Wheresmeticket? said:

Addick Addict said:

AndyG said:

Addick Addict said:

Amazon Prime have agreed to share the rights to show the match with Channel 4

Wow that's a massive coup for channel 4. I would think this will smash their record viewing figures

And another reflection of where sport sits with the BBC - they had planned to show highlights of the match on Sunday morning but have now ditched that. Absolutely pathetic effort as usual.

Disregarding wall to wall coverage of Wimbledon for 2 weeks every year, plus qualifying, of course. Does that not count?

Is that the last of the great sporting events they have managed to hold onto? The BBC even used to cover the US Open live didn't they? They had the opportunity to show the only female to reach a Grand Slam Final for 44 years and were outbid by Channel 4. Then they pulled the plug on showing the highlights the following morning presumably in a fit of temper of being outbid for the live showing.

Would it be worth considering that C4's advertising revenue gives them an advantage over BBC?   And that deal negotiated between C4 and the rights holder (Amazon) has been structured so that C4 exclusivity runs longer than Sunday morning?  

And, anyway, why does it matter whether it's on BBC, if it's on C4? 

From the perspective of it being shown on terrestrial TV, absolutely nothing. But from the perspective of missing out on the opportunity to show something in British Ladies tennis that hasn't happened 44 years, they really have missed out. Instead of constantly facing criticism for the way that they have short changed licence fee payers on top sporting events (far too numerous to mention) and for the cost of covering a couple of hours of tennis they could have been showcasing and supporting someone who "I've never seen such a meteoric rise" (Navratilova) and "who makes us want to pick up our racket and play again" (Rusedski and Keothavong). Someone who, potentially, will inspire a nation of youngsters to start playing tennis.

"We did make a competitive bid for the rights to show the US Open final live". Not for the first time in sporting history the BBC executives bottled it. Their definition of "competitive" no doubt. The phrase "price and value" springs to mind. If and when she wins Sports Personality of the Year, instead of showing us footage from today's match, the BBC can show us her leaving the court at Wimbledon in tears. Because they covered that one in every minute detail. Why go to the wedding when you've already been to the funeral?

I do have Prime Video but I am watching it on C4. I just would have loved to have been doing so on a British Broadcasting Corporation channel.

And that is all I am saying on the subject because I want to enjoy the match and cheer her on. Go Emma!!!!

I do think you're talking a load of twaddle.  After years of the BBC providing coverage of many sports, the commercial channels have paid loads of dosh to take those away from the Beeb with the aim of making money from them.  The BBC has been hamstrung by having its budget attacked, for example having to find the money to give the over 75s free licences whereas that was previously paid out of general taxation, so they are even more restricted with how much they can pay.

Thanks for that. Must remember to use that turn pf phrase next time you have a point of you:

Are you seriously telling me that covering the following used to cost nothing:

Cricket including every single Test match and the John Player Cricket League every Sunday
Horse racing every Saturday and midweek including the Derby, Aintree and Cheltenham 
Boxing including world title fights
Rugby League every Saturday and the BBC 2 Floodit programme
Rugby Union including ALL of the Six Nations matches
Golf including the Open, the Masters and the Ryder Cup
Motor racing including every Grand Prix
Ski Sunday
Every major athletics meeting
Football including being the sole provider of FA Cup games

The peak viewing figures for the match was 9.2 million. But it actually reached 12.6 million people. For 44 years we've been talking about Viriginia Wade being the last of our women to do it and now an 18 year old had the opportunity to emulate that. How embarrassing for the British Broadcasting Corporation that even the Queen watched the tennis on C4 rather than Last Night of the Proms - but, there again, so did at least another 10 million plus people.

So I ask again. Given that all the above live events used to be (and simultaneously too) covered by the BBC, what do they now spend the Licence fee money on specifically in relation to sport? Wimbledon and.......................

It's not just the fact that they didn't show it. It's the fact that the BBC are so hypocritical as it pretends to cover sport and pretends to make serious bids to show it. They don't. They pay lip service to it now. How many times have we heard that "we made a competitive offer" for the rights? The team that loses every single match isn't "competitive" - is it? If they don't have the money then say "we don't have the money" because we have to give free Licence Fees to over 75s now. The very people who might never, by the way, see one of our tennis players win a Grand Slam again in their lifetime.

But here's some food for thought - 

• The 253 senior leaders at the BBC were paid £148,221 each on average, costing a total of £37.5 million
  
• Analysis shows the median salary of a BBC employee is 83 per cent higher than the median salary across the UK. 
  
• The highest earning executive in 2019-20 was former director general Tony Hall. He received a total of £471,000 in salary and taxable benefits, including a car and driver.

That's where the Licence Fee payers money is going. Paying Executives. The very people who say that the BBC doesn't have enough money to show a one off, once in a lifetime, sporting event that was guaranteed to be historic even if Raducanu had lost.

Now let's hear some of your "twaddle"

RickAddick said:

Addick Addict 

Thanks for that. Must remember to use that turn pf phrase next time you have a point of you:

Are you seriously telling me that covering the following used to cost nothing:

Cricket including every single Test match and the John Player Cricket League every Sunday
Horse racing every Saturday and midweek including the Derby, Aintree and Cheltenham 
Boxing including world title fights
Rugby League every Saturday and the BBC 2 Floodit programme
Rugby Union including ALL of the Six Nations matches
Golf including the Open, the Masters and the Ryder Cup
Motor racing including every Grand Prix
Ski Sunday
Every major athletics meeting
Football including being the sole provider of FA Cup games

The peak viewing figures for the match was 9.2 million. But it actually reached 12.6 million people. For 44 years we've been talking about Viriginia Wade being the last of our women to do it and now an 18 year old had the opportunity to emulate that. How embarrassing for the British Broadcasting Corporation that even the Queen watched the tennis on C4 rather than Last Night of the Proms - but, there again, so did at least another 10 million plus people.

So I ask again. Given that all the above live events used to be (and simultaneously too) covered by the BBC, what do they now spend the Licence fee money on specifically in relation to sport? Wimbledon and.......................

It's not just the fact that they didn't show it. It's the fact that the BBC are so hypocritical as it pretends to cover sport and pretends to make serious bids to show it. They don't. They pay lip service to it now. How many times have we heard that "we made a competitive offer" for the rights? The team that loses every single match isn't "competitive" - is it? If they don't have the money then say "we don't have the money" because we have to give free Licence Fees to over 75s now. The very people who might never, by the way, see one of our tennis players win a Grand Slam again in their lifetime.

But here's some food for thought - 

• The 253 senior leaders at the BBC were paid £148,221 each on average, costing a total of £37.5 million
  
• Analysis shows the median salary of a BBC employee is 83 per cent higher than the median salary across the UK. 
  
• The highest earning executive in 2019-20 was former director general Tony Hall. He received a total of £471,000 in salary and taxable benefits, including a car and driver.

That's where the Licence Fee payers money is going. Paying Executives. The very people who say that the BBC doesn't have enough money to show a one off, once in a lifetime, sporting event that was guaranteed to be historic even if Raducanu had lost.

Now let's hear some of your "twaddle"

I wonder what would happen to programme quality if the top salary for senior managers was reduced to say, 50k?
Never been convinced that the quality of a senior manager is proportional to their salary. A complete myth!
And the reputation of many exists due to the ability of those paid less below them to get the job done. 
I'm sure plenty of lower paid BBC staff could undertake a senior role just as well. Or even better. 

oohaahmortimer said:

LenGlover said:

I'm very impressed with Emma on and off the court. I just hope that she doesn't have an allegiance to Crystal Palace.

And the very reason you say that is she is from Bromley , a palace stronghold where people crave for an SE postcode and all the kudos of being from South East London ….such a palace thing really 

stop_shouting said:

PrincessFiona said:

McBobbin said:

Wondering if her panic attack in Wimbledon will be the making of Emma. It was early enough in her career that it could be addressed with a relatively low profile.compared to say Simone Biles where it was all over the news

It was completely understandable in the circumstances but how she moved on is nothing but remarkable. McEnroe could at least acknowledge that. I think Osaka and Biles dealt with their issues differently, but that's for a different thread

Think McEnroe got a lot of unnecessary crap from the outraged brigade. What he said was no more or no less patronising than what you’ve said above.

stop_shouting said:

PrincessFiona said:

McBobbin said:

Wondering if her panic attack in Wimbledon will be the making of Emma. It was early enough in her career that it could be addressed with a relatively low profile.compared to say Simone Biles where it was all over the news

It was completely understandable in the circumstances but how she moved on is nothing but remarkable. McEnroe could at least acknowledge that. I think Osaka and Biles dealt with their issues differently, but that's for a different thread

Think McEnroe got a lot of unnecessary crap from the outraged brigade. What he said was no more or no less patronising than what you’ve said above.

MrOneLung said:

I probably missed it over the last few days, but did Fernandez explain why she was so riled about the injury time out  ?
Did she not know there was bleeding ?

seth plum said:

I thought Ms Fernandez was upset about how often Emma Raducanu threw the ball up to serve but then changed her mind.
I interpreted her gestures as such.

Addick Addict said:

I suspect that Fernandez was simply upset because she felt that the momentum had shifted and that Raducanu was using it to her advantage. In doing so, she allowed the situation to envelop her to the extent that she was virtually in tears about it. The fact that there was blood and the game had to be stopped because of that probably didn't enter her head. She focused on what she perceived to be an unfair situation rather than how she was going to use the time to stay focussed on winning the set. 

In the end Fernandez did lose the set but, in the same way as Raducanu reaped the benefit of her Wimbledon experience, I'm sure she will do so from these circumstances too. We shouldn't forget that there is only a matter of  a couple of months difference in age between the two as Fernandez was only 19 last week and Raducanu becomes the same age in November,

seth plum said:

I thought Ms Fernandez was upset about how often Emma Raducanu threw the ball up to serve but then changed her mind.
I interpreted her gestures as such.

Lincsaddick said:

contrast in style at the 'Met Gala' (2 of the VERY least garish and ridiculous outfits .. still, all done for 'charity')

Osaka and Radacanu

stop_shouting said:

PrincessFiona said:

stop_shouting said:

PrincessFiona said:

McBobbin said:

Wondering if her panic attack in Wimbledon will be the making of Emma. It was early enough in her career that it could be addressed with a relatively low profile.compared to say Simone Biles where it was all over the news

It was completely understandable in the circumstances but how she moved on is nothing but remarkable. McEnroe could at least acknowledge that. I think Osaka and Biles dealt with their issues differently, but that's for a different thread

Think McEnroe got a lot of unnecessary crap from the outraged brigade. What he said was no more or no less patronising than what you’ve said above.

I didn't say what he said was wrong - what I said  was he has not acknowledged her remarkable success and that she has moved on from what happened.

How is saying someone dealt with something 'differently' in anyway patronising? I made no judgement about whether it was better or not, just 'different'. - you couldn't be misrepresenting what I said, could you?

I’m not sure why McEnroe needs to say anything about her remarkable success though I imagine like 100% of people he’d acknowledge it’s remarkable.

his comment that “it all got a bit much for her” and your comment that “it was completely understandable in the circumstances” do not appear to be patronising to me but clearly would to someone else. That was the point I was trying to 
make.

PrincessFiona said:

Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:

blackpool72 said:

seth plum said:

I thought Ms Fernandez was upset about how often Emma Raducanu threw the ball up to serve but then changed her mind.
I interpreted her gestures as such.

You may well be correct. 
I saw it as time wasting. 
Unless she says something we will never really know. 

I don't agree.
I reckon Emma is one of those people who aborts her serve if the toss isn't perfect.
Ginny Wade was notorious for it.
Andy Murray guilty too to occasionally.
I suspect Fernandez was just frustrated at having her momentum checked at a crucial stage and suspected some gamesmanship despite the bleeding evidence to the contrary.
Once she accepted that the evidence was indisputable she eventually accepted it and didn't pursue it after the match. 
So in the end she showed some class.
Just my opinion

I see it that she is so disciplined she won't continue with a bad toss - something I had noticed

Chippycafc said:

There's loads do it, how many times do you see a tennis player bounce the ball hundred times before he then serves it into the net. Then repeats. I got fed up watching it for that reason, and then how many aces and lack of rally's were involved. Yes i know its all part of the game but entertaining it isn't.

Chippycafc said:

PrincessFiona said:

Six-a-bag-of-nuts said:

blackpool72 said:

seth plum said:

I thought Ms Fernandez was upset about how often Emma Raducanu threw the ball up to serve but then changed her mind.
I interpreted her gestures as such.

You may well be correct. 
I saw it as time wasting. 
Unless she says something we will never really know. 

I don't agree.
I reckon Emma is one of those people who aborts her serve if the toss isn't perfect.
Ginny Wade was notorious for it.
Andy Murray guilty too to occasionally.
I suspect Fernandez was just frustrated at having her momentum checked at a crucial stage and suspected some gamesmanship despite the bleeding evidence to the contrary.
Once she accepted that the evidence was indisputable she eventually accepted it and didn't pursue it after the match. 
So in the end she showed some class.
Just my opinion

I see it that she is so disciplined she won't continue with a bad toss - something I had noticed

There's loads do it, how many times do you see a tennis player bounce the ball hundred times before he then serves it into the net. Then repeats. I got fed up watching it for that reason, and then how many aces and lack of rally's were involved. Yes i know its all part of the game but entertaining it isn't.