🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿

[otherclive]

Lighten up everyone.
View attachment 7227

I don’t think that we English have really been forgiven for Edward 1 actions in the north and west of this island 😱

 

[otherclive]

Some 24.2 million people (peak) and 22.3 million (average) watched the match across BBC and ITV across all device types, which considering the UK population is 67million is not an insignificant number.

 

[Buckman]

Some 24.2 million people (peak) and 22.3 million (average) watched the match across BBC and ITV across all device types, which considering the UK population is 67million is not an insignificant number.

Shame! Indicates that the majority have no interest in football.

 

[otherclive]

Shame! Indicates that the majority have no interest in football.

Have you discounted those not able to view football for whatever reason? 😂 More than watched the Coronation too.

 

[Buckman]

Have you discounted those not able to view football for whatever reason? 😂 More than watched the Coronation too.

Should be asking the question whether those figures discounted those that had no choice except to watch?

 

[JRT]

Shame! Indicates that the majority have no interest in football.

Why exactly does that matter?

Nobody has suggested that the programming should only go ahead if the majority of the population would watch it.

If that was the driver nothing would ever get shown on any TV channels.

 

[Dustydog]

Some 24.2 million people (peak) and 22.3 million (average) watched the match across BBC and ITV across all device types, which considering the UK population is 67million is not an insignificant number.

Far better than the number of people who elected 410 individuals two weeks ago🤪😉🙀

 

[woodsieboy]

Ref the BBC one word Glastonbury!

 

[otherclive]

Ref the BBC one word Glastonbury!

What about Glastonbury? Surely if you did not wish to watch there were multitudinous other channels, plus streaming services. I didn’t find Glastonbury any encroachment on our viewing as apart from other channels we also have a good number of interesting recordings to watch, and we can skip ads too from commercial channels.

Don’t worry you will soon be affected by the Olympics and para Olympics. Time to go abroad perhaps!

 

[otherclive]

Far better than the number of people who elected 410 individuals two weeks ago🤪😉🙀

All this time I thought we had 650 such individuals 😱

 

[Mr Plodd]

It always fascinates me how people who claim they show no interest in football yet feel the need to comment on it when it's discussed on internet forums. It's actually quite comical.

WE enjoy football, they are the English team WE (as in my family who were watching and enjoying the game together) are English hence I feel quite comfortable using that term.

If you really feel it's been rammed down your throat I would suggest you need to make use of the many channels that are available that don't cover it.

HTH.

If you care to read my post more carefully you will see that I did not make ANY comment about the football game itself,

What I did comment on, and find comical, was the fact you (like a lot of others tend to do) said "we" played well, when you clearly not part of the England team, and were not anywhere near the field of play so had nothing to do with the game whatsoever,
So what you should have said/meant was that the team (i.e. they) and not you (we) played well.

I do watch alternative channels, I just get a bit annoyed when "regular" programmes on mainstream TV get moved, or cancelled, to accommodate the footy, that a fair percentage of the population, such as me, are totally disinterested in.

I just question why sporting events cannot be shown on the "lesser" channels (BBC/ITV 3/4 that tend to have lower "mainstream" content, and therefore watchers.

 

[JRT]

If you care to read my post more carefully you will see that I did not make ANY comment about the football game itself,

What I did comment on, and find comical, was the fact you (like a lot of others tend to do) said "we" played well, when you clearly not part of the England team, and were not anywhere near the field of play so had nothing to do with the game whatsoever,
So what you should have said/meant was that the team (i.e. they) and not you (we) played well.

I do watch alternative channels, I just get a bit annoyed when "regular" programmes on mainstream TV get moved, or cancelled, to accommodate the footy, that a fair percentage of the population, such as me, are totally disinterested in.

I just question why sporting events cannot be shown on the "lesser" channels (BBC/ITV 3/4 that tend to have lower "mainstream" content, and therefore watchers.

You commented on the subject of football. If you find it so boring (as per your yawn) surely the best option would be just pass over the subject.

(I mentioned the game because that is what the thread is about).

As to your lesson in grammar? As I have already said I'm quite happy with my use of my chosen words. Last time I checked this wasn't a grammar forum so I feel no particular need to heed your lesson.

As to why the footy is on mainstream channels? Well the audience figures rather speak for themselves.

HTH.

 

[Hutch]

Don’t worry you will soon be affected by the Olympics and para Olympics. Time to go abroad perhaps!

Ah yes to watch the Tour De France🤘🚲🚲🚲.

 

[otherclive]

Ah yes to watch the Tour De France🤘🚲🚲🚲.

Better get a move on as it finishes on Sunday 🇫🇷🥖🐩🚴‍♀️

 

[Buckman]

I do watch alternative channels, I just get a bit annoyed when "regular" programmes on mainstream TV get moved, or cancelled, to accommodate the footy, that a fair percentage of the population, such as me, are totally disinterested in.

I just question why sporting events cannot be shown on the "lesser" channels (BBC/ITV 3/4 that tend to have lower "mainstream" content, and therefore watchers.

I think you have got that wrong when you say a fair percentage of the population when possibly it should be the majority of the population have no interest in football. Again it is a minority that are in control. LOL!

 

[Dustydog]

Ironically hardly any football is shown on terrestrial TV. Most throughout the season features on Sky associated channels. Eg TNT, Sky Sports, etc.
BBC and ITV can’t compete on price.
Surely for a few weeks every four years it’s not worth getting upset over the Euros.🥲

 

[Buckman]

Ironically hardly any football is shown on terrestrial TV. Most throughout the season features on Sky associated channels. Eg TNT, Sky Sports, etc.
BBC and ITV can’t compete on price.
Surely for a few weeks every four years it’s not worth getting upset over the Euros.🥲

I think many of the posts are humorous wind ups and with tongue in the cheek comments? That is the way I took them and I also responded accordingly.

After all horse racing and tennis are other sports that get regular programs displaced. I have no interest in either of those sports. However there are a few Olympic sporting events that I enjoy watching, but I do not expect regular programs to be changed.

As suggested why cannot they use BBC3, BBC4, ITV2, ITV3 etc for broadcasting certain sport events that are of interest to a minority of the population?

 

[JRT]

I think many of the posts are humorous wind ups and with tongue in the cheek comments? That is the way I took them and I also responded accordingly.

After all horse racing and tennis are other sports that get regular programs displaced. I have no interest in either of those sports. However there are a few Olympic sporting events that I enjoy watching, but I do not expect regular programs to be changed.

As suggested why cannot they use BBC3, BBC4, ITV2, ITV3 etc for broadcasting certain sport events that are of interest to a minority of the population?

What you are still failing to grasp is that it doesn't require the majority of the population to dictate what is shown on the mainstream channels. It simply requires significant viewing numbers. In particular on ITV which depends on advertising revenue.

As I have already said if it required a population majority to dictate what was on TV nothing would get shown eg the majority of the the population don't watch the soaps, but yet they occupy prime TV slots.

 

[Buckman]

Having never watch any soaps on TV, I cannot comment on them, but other programs do not get cancelled or moved to accommodate a soap.

 

[Dustydog]

I think many of the posts are humorous wind ups and with tongue in the cheek comments? That is the way I took them and I also responded accordingly.

After all horse racing and tennis are other sports that get regular programs displaced. I have no interest in either of those sports. However there are a few Olympic sporting events that I enjoy watching, but I do not expect regular programs to be changed.

As suggested why cannot they use BBC3, BBC4, ITV2, ITV3 etc for broadcasting certain sport events that are of interest to a minority of the population?

Certainly some were tic but some were quite adversarial.
The only programs that were displaced were mostly the soaps. I don’t watch them. Plus I can’t think of one displaced program that I missed🤪 Hang on Dusty, you mean all the Political hustings leading up to the 4 th July🤪😆😆

 

[otherclive]

Having never watch any soaps on TV, I cannot comment on them, but other programs do not get cancelled or moved to accommodate a soap.

No but regular programmes like soap, news do get shuttled around to accommodate some sporting events. But I can live with that for what is really only a minor inconvenience for a small part of the year. We regularly record programmes and watch from the recorder. This accommodates the frequent and random phone calls from family during the evenings.

 

[JRT]

Having never watch any soaps on TV, I cannot comment on them, but other programs do not get cancelled or moved to accommodate a soap.

I don't watch them either. But that's not the issue. You argued that programs should only be shown if the majority of the population would watch them. Your argument simply doesn't hold water.

The reason other programs don't get moved to accomodate soaps is because there is normally no need to, because they run in series with regular slots.

Major sporting events do not.

 

[Buckman]

I don't watch them either. But that's not the issue. You argued that programs should only be shown if the majority of the population would watch them. Your argument simply doesn't hold water.

The reason other programs don't get moved to accomodate soaps is because there is normally no need to, because they run in series with regular slots.

Major sporting events do not.

At no time did I say that programs should only be shown if the majority watch them so not sure why you think that? Why can't the sporting events be held on the other BBC or ITV channels?

Doesn't really matter to us as we hardly ever watch BBC or ITV. However it is annoying when one particular sport dominates the news channels, but when other sports which consistently win internationals and world cups hardly get a mention!

 

[Sam Vimes]

I thought this thread was about the recent England Football game. Fred Drift seems to have come along and changed it to a discussion about TV Programming.

While I don't have problem with this it would be nice not to get into a He Said/I Said ping-pong match - to keep to the sports theme.

 

[JRT]

At no time did I say that programs should only be shown if the majority watch them so not sure why you think that?

I would respond but as a mod has intervened probably best not to.