The pros and cons of live TV
By TMX Archives on 3rd Dec 10
This week we look at the world trials and enduro champs on telly before moving on to a Forestry Commission furore...
WELL, the double-header 2011 World Indoor Trials/ Enduro Championships has been and gone and the good news is that the Genoa venue was packed to the rafters with 7,000 enthusiasts who took their chance to see not one but two World Championship events in one night.
And of course the rest of us got/ get the chance to see it through the magic of television. In the case of the trial the transmission of the final was live – and will be for the remainder of the series. The enduro will have to wait a few days although by the time you read this it will probably have already been broadcast.
I do wonder at the logic of transmitting the trial live though. Trials never was and never will be a mainstream spectator sport. It is too technical and of little interest to the casual viewer. Even dressed-up as X-Trial, which is of course pure marketing bollox, it doesn't hide the fact that it is a long, drawn-out competition of little interest to anyone except the true enthusiast.
Incidentally, it is mainly because of this insistence on live TV that the 2011 Sheffield Indoor is not a World Championship round. The Sheffield organisers simply don't want to be at the mercy of the rigid format and timescale. It could ruin what we know is going to be a brilliant event, so why compromise it.
Although the Indoor trial doesn't work for live TV it does work in the live arena, because a skilful commentator can build and lower and build tension while the spectators' own knowledge (the vast majority of live spectators are trials folk) and understanding of the sport make the event individually and collectively interesting to them.
Trials is actually the perfect sport for a really crisply edited highlights programme of, say, half-an-hour including ad breaks. You can pack a highlights programme with all the top action and make it appear like a high-speed adrenalin sport – which of course it isn't.
This would drastically increase your potential audience. I will watch a well-edited condensed programme on virtually any sport – but I sure as hell won't sit through two-hours of boredom interspersed with a few seconds of genuine action.
Surely you judge each sport on its strengths. Trials is not a sport for instant gratification.
Conversely the Indoor Enduro very definitely IS the stuff for live broadcast, and I say this without having seen the Genoa event. Why? Simple, it is a short, sharp adrenalin-fuelled RACE that once started effectively can't be stopped.
The tight confines of a stadium enhances the intensity of the racing while the nightime aspect, floodlights, spotlights, etc, all add to the drama. As a veteran of all of two Indoor Enduros, I maintain that they are the most dramatic of Indoor races, more intense and closely-fought than supercross. They are even better value live as you also see those riders further downfield showing exactly how difficult the courses actually are.
In a Supercross, the tail-enders merely go more slowly, which is like watching paint dry. In an Enduro they sometimes simply cannot even cope with the obstacles and spectators can atually rise to this and encourage the strugglers to keep at it. And of course the live element of the race adds to the tension – even when you are watching from the comfort of your armchair.
Can't help but think that the FIM have got this one completely the wrong way round.
I HAVE had some interesting correspondence recently from several people regarding the Government's new stance on the Forestry Commission having come-up with a ‘Consultation Document' (groan, we all know what that means) for the Commission to sell-off vast tracts of land to private ownership.
Don't really know why but the initial reaction would be to suspect it will be in order to raise more money to throw down the EU black hole or into some idiot ‘Climate Change' scheme.
Having said this, I understand that the savings are actually absolutely minimal so you will have to come up with your own theories as to why they are in such a rush to hand over a fantastic public asset into private hands. I'm sure you will have no difficulty with that one.
So, putting a few select individuals' private gain (Doh!) to one side, what does this have to do with us? You may well ask.
Well, the main thing it could do is drastically reduce the amount of land we have to use for off-road motorcycle sport. This is because, at the moment, the Forestry Commission is duty bound by the government to allow a wide-ranging group of people and activities to enjoy its benefits. So walkers, bird-watchers, butterfly catchers, etc., and even motorcylists are actually encouraged into the woods for organised activities. Enduros in particular benefit greatly from this most welcome and enlightened arrangement.
But does anyone realistically believe that this logical and happy state of affairs will continue once the land is in private ownership? Me neither.
So, I urge you to contact your MP with your views ASAP. If enough individuals do this it just might encourage him/ her to vote against the proposals...