[Jon Wiggett]

Sam as I said before the R&A has global responsibility for the game outside USA & Mexico not just in Blighty. The opportunities to grow the game in South America and South East Asia are far greatly than in the UK. 

Mark,

I am afraid what you are pushing is not quite correct. Each country has its own golfing bodies who are responsible for the growth of the game in their territories not the R&A. Whilst the R&A has not a direct mandate to do so in the UK it derives most of its prestige and the bulk of their income from being based in the UK. Whilst it is good that the R&A offer its help (financial) and guidance to those bodies it certainly is not the R&As responsibility.

The Open Championship is a UK based tournament and it being shown on the BBC was the best way to advertise to non golfers there could be. The decision to sell the rights to a company who's customers are already golfers is a massive step back and a kick in the teeth to all the clubs and organisations who are working hard to get new people to enter the game.

It has been apparent that the R&A has very little interest in UK golf and this latest decision is just another example.

Mark, I am correct in thinking you are a member of said R&A or have I remembered wrongly.

Jon

[Brent Hutto]

Do people who otherwise would never have been interested really take up (and stick with) the game because they saw the Open on television?

Put another way does anyone with no interest in playing golf even watch golf on television, Open Championship or otherwise?

Before I took up the game at age 33, I doubt I'd watched a total of 3 hours of televised golf in my life.

[Mark Chaplin]

Jon I have a number of memberships but the R&A isn't one of them.

[Sam Krume]

Mark,
I do understand that the R&A's role is to grow the game globally, not just in blighty(as you say) but I do feel that to take it off terrestrial TV is a huge mistake. I have played this most wonderful of games for just over 30 years and it all started because of watching Seve win at lytham. If it wasn't on bbc who knows.....I just think and know that The Open can inspire and be there for all to see.

[David_Tepper]

"Do people who otherwise would never have been interested really take up (and stick with) the game because they saw the Open on television?"

Brent -

I believe Nick Faldo has said he was inspired to become a golfer while watching Nicklaus win the '86 Masters on TV. Prior to that he did not play much golf at all.

It can happen.

DT 

[Adam Lawrence]

"Do people who otherwise would never have been interested really take up (and stick with) the game because they saw the Open on television?"

Brent -

I believe Nick Faldo has said he was inspired to become a golfer while watching Nicklaus win the '86 Masters on TV. Prior to that he did not play much golf at all.

It can happen.

DT 

1971 Masters I believe. Faldo turned pro in 1976 and won the European Order of Merit for the first time in 1983.

[Mark Chaplin]

Sam I think it is a bad day as well, I don't have Sky so don't see live cricket and hardly any live football now. I doubt we'll ever know if the BBC are disappointed or pleased to have lost the contract, as has been said elsewhere it must have cost them a fortune to put on the Open especially as live sport is no longer a speciality.

[Ryan Coles]

Sam as I said before the R&A has global responsibility for the game outside USA & Mexico not just in Blighty. The opportunities to grow the game in South America and South East Asia are far greatly than in the UK. 

Mark,

I am afraid what you are pushing is not quite correct. Each country has its own golfing bodies who are responsible for the growth of the game in their territories not the R&A. Whilst the R&A has not a direct mandate to do so in the UK it derives most of its prestige and the bulk of their income from being based in the UK. Whilst it is good that the R&A offer its help (financial) and guidance to those bodies it certainly is not the R&As responsibility.

The Open Championship is a UK based tournament and it being shown on the BBC was the best way to advertise to non golfers there could be. The decision to sell the rights to a company who's customers are already golfers is a massive step back and a kick in the teeth to all the clubs and organisations who are working hard to get new people to enter the game.

It has been apparent that the R&A has very little interest in UK golf and this latest decision is just another example.

Mark, I am correct in thinking you are a member of said R&A or have I remembered wrongly.

Jon

Jon

Your stance is like blaming the husband when the wife has shot off with another bloke.

Of the 3, the only party not interested in the Open was the BBC - they didn't want it.

[David_Tepper]

Adam L. -

Thanks for the correction. My mistake (and a bad one at that!).

DT

[Jon Wiggett]

Do people who otherwise would never have been interested really take up (and stick with) the game because they saw the Open on television?

Put another way does anyone with no interest in playing golf even watch golf on television, Open Championship or otherwise?

Before I took up the game at age 33, I doubt I'd watched a total of 3 hours of televised golf in my life.

Brett,

That's how I got into golf watching Tom Watson winning the '75 Open Championship.

Mark,

Sorry, my memory is not so good. Still, I think I would prefer Deal to the R&A

Ryan,

certainly that is not the official BBC stance as they were very interested in keeping the Open.

[Ryan Coles]

Jon

Their efforts in recent years belies that.

They'll sit back and let the R&A take the flack whilst playing the plucky underdog outbid again by Sky. They aren't interested in golf. The new deal in real terms, brings not much more to the R&A than the existing one and if the BBC showed any sort of ambition to cover the sport, I'm sure they would still have the contract.

You cannot look at golf in isolation. The corporation has all but walked away from Sport.

[Jon Wiggett]

Ryan,

well if you call 40% more not much then I guess you are right. There is no way the BBC could have justified the amount paid for football or cricket to the license fee payer. Clearly the European Tour has no reason to favour the BBC but the R&A certainly had.

[Ryan Coles]

Jon

A 13.5% increase on the 2010 to 2016 deal.

[Jon Wiggett]

Jon

A 13.5% increase on the 2010 to 2016 deal.

According to the reports I have read Sky are going to pay £10M per year which will bring the R&A an extra £3M in revenue which makes it 42.86% if you want to go into decimal places so over 3 times what you state.

Jon

[Tom Kelly]

Do people who otherwise would never have been interested really take up (and stick with) the game because they saw the Open on television?

Put another way does anyone with no interest in playing golf even watch golf on television, Open Championship or otherwise?

Before I took up the game at age 33, I doubt I'd watched a total of 3 hours of televised golf in my life.

My Dad took me down to the range as a little kid because I'm told I used to love watching golf on the TV. If The Open had been on Sky at the time I would have never watched any golf.

I have played golf for over 20 years now as has my Dad who probably wouldn't have played if I didn't and I now work in the Golf industry. My life would have been very different.

[Ryan Coles]

Jon

A 13.5% increase on the 2010 to 2016 deal.

According to the reports I have read Sky are going to pay £10M per year which will bring the R&A an extra £3M in revenue which makes it 42.86% if you want to go into decimal places so over 3 times what you state.

Jon

Jon

On the figures at least, you're correct - I misread the article and the 13.5% was the MOTD deal.

On the harm or otherwise to the game, I don't see much cycling on BBC.

[Sean_A]

I have no idea of the retention rate, but I would think a significant percentage of golfers either watched golf then got into the game or watching golf reinforced their enjoyment of the game.  Not having golf on the Beeb will certainly effect this aspect of reinforcing golf...I bet SKY isn't in more than 40% of UK homes. 

Ciao

[Ed Tilley]

On the harm or otherwise to the game, I don't see much cycling on BBC.

The tour de france is on Channel 4 every evening at 7pm. Full live coverage is available on Eurosport which is available on freeview. The Giro d'Italia is also live on Eurosport. Cycling is massively covered on free to air TV.

Also, cycling has benefitted hugely from coverage at the Olympics - and obviously the dominance of UK cyclists provides great, and highly visible, role models for youngsters.

Cricket is really the one to look at as numbers are falling despite massive investment in grassroots by the ECB, and a largely successful England team with colourful and entertaining players. They also have Test highlights on Channel 5 at 7pm every evening.

[Tom Kelly]

To be honest I find golf on Sky to be dreary and dull. It is on so often that all the events seem to merge into one and just drone on, the majors just slot into this constant homogeneous procession. The coverage on the BBC has it flaws but it is made to feel like a special event without the stupid over the top razzamatazz that Sky persist to put on. The BBC coverage is far more enjoyable viewing for me.

It also has the added bonus of being a Monty free zone.

[Mark Pearce]

Actually, although ECB figures for occasional cricketers show a decline the most recent Sport England numbers for "committed cricketers" (those who participate at least once a week in season) show a 13% increase in the past year, which reflects other team sports.  This reverses the trend towards individual participation sports (cycling, swimming etc.) which followed the Olympics.  Cricket could do with an increase in participation but the picture is not as simple as some paint it.

As for the Open not being on the BBC it's very disappointing but the BBC does appear to have lost its enthusiasm for sport and I for one won't miss Peter Allis' meanderings.

[Jon Wiggett]

Actually, although ECB figures for occasional cricketers show a decline the most recent Sport England numbers for "committed cricketers" (those who participate at least once a week in season) show a 13% increase in the past year, which reflects other team sports.  This reverses the trend towards individual participation sports (cycling, swimming etc.) which followed the Olympics.  Cricket could do with an increase in participation but the picture is not as simple as some paint it.

As for the Open not being on the BBC it's very disappointing but the BBC does appear to have lost its enthusiasm for sport and I for one won't miss Peter Allis' meanderings.

But the relevant number for non players being introduced is declining possibly through people becoming more frequent players which is good on the one side but it should be worrying for cricket that the numbers of new players is not being replenished and is in decline. Yes there is a lot less sport on the BBC these days but is this not down to the price needed to keep them? Over £200M  just for the football highlights in English top league.

Jon

[Mark Pearce]

Jon,

I'm not sure you're right.  Very few players become committed cricketers by starting off trying the game out.  The vast majority start as juniors and most juniors go straight from "I think I'll give that a go" to participating at least once a week by going to a local club.    Most "occasionals" tend to be players who were regular juniors or committed cricketers but don't have the time anymore.  There is *some* purely social cricket but far, far less than 20 years ago and it exists alongside the league club cricket which virtually all "committed cricketers" participate in.  It's a very different model from golf.

[Niall C]

I think Mark C has it about right. The R&A look to have made a very hard but what was increasingly inevitable decision to go with the one UK broadcaster who is actually committed to golf. The Open is by far, and perhaps only money earner and with that money they pay for their administration costs in running the game outwith the US and Mexico. By that I'm referring to their rules division. They also spend a considerable amount on trying to develop the game around the globe as Mark says. I'm guessing that to overseas viewers there probably won't be much difference if any.

As for the BBC, I don't feel sorry for them and I very much doubt they are upset by it. There performance in recent years has been rubbish. An increasingly out of touch relic in Peter Allis doing the commentary and a mix of retired footballer and feminist activist fronting the programme. No wonder the R&A told them to stuff it. The BBC put much more effort in to building up the Masters than they do the Open which is not only the home event but also the most historic and for most UK viewers the best.

Niall

 

[Ally Mcintosh]

I honestly don't see why the BBC coverage is seen as "rubbish", Niall.

Personally, the coverage without ad breaks, the comic asides, the moments of silence (pictures but no commentary), the connections to British club golf, are what make it such a pleasurable viewing experience. The same way as watching a Test match used to be.

Who needs the endless noise, stats flashing across the screen and ad breaks that Sky provides?

Usually, I'd say this was another example of my traditional, anti-technology leanings (by the way, when did "technology" start to just mean computer tech stuff and neglect real science and innovation?). But almost all the regular, young, non-GCA, anti-establishment, into equipment, technique and clothing hotshots I have spoken to are bemoaning the loss of BCC coverage as well.

Test matches, The Open, Wimbledon, Ski Sunday. The coverage of those on the BBC is why I play the respective sports

[David Stamm]

Do people who otherwise would never have been interested really take up (and stick with) the game because they saw the Open on television?

Put another way does anyone with no interest in playing golf even watch golf on television, Open Championship or otherwise?

Before I took up the game at age 33, I doubt I'd watched a total of 3 hours of televised golf in my life.

My Dad took me down to the range as a little kid because I'm told I used to love watching golf on the TV. If The Open had been on Sky at the time I would have never watched any golf.

I have played golf for over 20 years now as has my Dad who probably wouldn't have played if I didn't and I now work in the Golf industry. My life would have been very different.

It will be intersting to see, if this is a fairly common scenario, what long term negative effect this television decision has.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()