# BBC reply re Hickstead Derby



## SJFAN (24 June 2010)

My message to BBC Sport on 17 June:
I was dismayed to learn that you will not be showing the Hickstead Derby this year. This is another "nail in the coffin" of your coverage of equestrian sport. My life-long interest in show jumping was largely fostered by your regular broadcasts of major national and international events. The same is true of many enthusiasts. It is so sad that the only show jumping you will be showing this year is Olympia, and I hope, the World Championship in Kentucky.  
I am only too aware that the number of top quality competitors in the Derby has declined in recent years, but it is still a major event in the calendar. Why do you provide more coverage of eventing than of show jumping? I hasten to add that I don't want you to reduce your coverage of eventing.

Today I received this reply: Thank you for your email.

We appreciate your comments and understand your concerns, however as a public service broadcaster it is not in our remit to provide equal coverage of all events, but rather to reflect the national public interest. 

Of course, we would like to cover many more sports like show jumping in much greater depth, but we simply don't have the resources available to do so. Having said that, we are constantly reviewing how best to spread our coverage, but we must always hold our commitment to use the majority of our limited resources on the sports which show the highest level of national interest.

I hope this helps.

Kind Regards,
BBC Sport Interactive


----------



## MotherOfChickens (24 June 2010)

hmm. personally I think the BBC should be covering the more niche sporting disciplines rather than the biggies.


----------



## teapot (24 June 2010)

They've had the scope and resources to cover the Hickstead Derby for the last numerous years so why not this year (or next year?)

Although think it's the first time in a long time that it clashes with both Wimbledon and the World Cup.


----------



## MistletoeMegan (24 June 2010)

"Hotter Than My Daughter" isn't exactly in the national interest and yet the BBC has the resources to produce that tripe.


----------



## TinselRider (24 June 2010)

I just think it's a great shame they have stopped coverage of this event! one of the best SJ dates in the calendar as far as I am concerned (Thanks god I have sky sports!)


----------



## perfect11s (24 June 2010)

Megan2006 said:



			"Hotter Than My Daughter" isn't exactly in the national interest and yet the BBC has the resources to produce that tripe.
		
Click to expand...

 yes I aggree Its high time the license fee was used  for public service  broadcasting  and not to compete with the comercial stations in a race to the bottom.....


----------



## Onyxia (24 June 2010)

teapot said:



			They've had the scope and resources to cover the Hickstead Derby for the last numerous years so why not this year (or next year?)

Although think it's the first time in a long time that it clashes with both Wimbledon and the World Cup.
		
Click to expand...

I hope it is simply a case of too many events to cover at one time-it owuld be great shame if the derby was gone form the BBC for good.
I have got Sky sports for a month to watch it and while I have to say the extra coverage looks to be good,it should not be the only way to watch top class jumping.


----------



## yeeharider (24 June 2010)

there is an announcement in NL that H&H will be providing a live written commentary as they did for Badmintom etc. Poor substitute I know but will keep those of us who dont have Sky Tv upto date with whats going on. Its also on FEI TV which has a small charge,about £10 for a month


----------



## monkeybum13 (24 June 2010)

What will be shown instead?
Let me guess -something like darts if you can even call that a "sport"


----------



## suzysparkle (25 June 2010)

It is ridiculous. We dropped the sports channels a while ago but have just added them back on. Is an extra £10 a month and you need to give a months notice to cancel. I think RIHS is also on sky sports so will wait a week then give a months notice. At least all of it is being shown in HD. I don't mind paying for sky but I do mind paying for TV licence seeing as the network signal here is rubbish and I only watch network via sky. We don't get cable here as we live in caves apparently. Or broadband from anyone but BT for that matter! 
You would think that they (BBC) would still broadcast the main SJ events. I do wonder if they still broadcast the main eventing due to the 'royal' entry?? That and the danger element. Let's face it the non horsey types (and many non horsey) watch for the falls, and there's generally more XC than there is SJ. Unpleasant as it is, it is a fact.


----------



## perfect11s (25 June 2010)

Perhaps horse and county /rural TV  are missing a trick here  maybe its time they got their 
cameras on the road a bit more    ???  ATM it's more like repeat tv!!!!


----------



## Pebble101 (25 June 2010)

suzysparkle said:



			.I do mind paying for TV licence seeing as the network signal here is rubbish and I only watch network via sky. We don't get cable here as we live in caves apparently. Or broadband from anyone but BT for that matter!
		
Click to expand...

Well I live just outside the M25.  We don't have cable, and we only have a poor broadband connection from BT so you are not alone.

Gutted about the Derby considering all the other rubbish they show.

They could divert some of their resources from football - nobody would ever notice considering the amount shown.


----------



## BBH (25 June 2010)

Its disappointing but I think the response is clearly a bog standard reply and I would have more sympathy for them if they weren't sending the world and his wife to the World Cup soccer at an astronomical cost.

I still do think the horse world has brought a lot of this on themselves though in that very few of the horsey owning population actually watch televised competition, and for those that do there are alternative viewing option ie Sky,FEitv etc etc.And when events have been shown there has been scathing reviews from us ie Hickstead last year citing dreadful poor quality commentary in the main and poor camera angles ( from what I remember ).  

Use it or lose it as they say.


----------



## ester (25 June 2010)

I have found it interesting that since I have had a horse I watch these things live much less..... mostly because at the weekend I am quite likely to be out a competition with my horse/at the yard/riding. hence it is recorded for later. 

As many other horse people would be in the same situ I have often wondered if that has a direct effect of viewing figures.


----------



## suzysparkle (25 June 2010)

With viewing figures does it count if you use sky+?? I very rarely watch things live but do sky+ a lot and watch later.


----------



## blackhorse09 (26 June 2010)

Yes they do take into account the recorded programmes when counting up viewing figures. I should think a lot of people record things these days!

I have to say I'm a bit disappointed with the BBC, I know they are covering both Wimbledon & the World Cup so resources must be stretched but they could easily have bought the Sky coverage [as I'm pretty sure they use footage from the French broadcasters during the Arc meeting]. At least then they could have offered a highlights show!

On a more positive note, I have been absolutely thrilled with Sky's coverage of Hickstead over the last few days and feel very lucky that we have SkySportsHD. It's a shame that Hickstead has been bumped to a premium service but at least the coverage has been worth it: brilliant camerawork [stunning HD shots], insightful commentary & features, very slick production. Well done Sky!


----------



## lannerch (26 June 2010)

If you could pay a one off fee to view hickstead I would be so bad.

We have sky but not sky sports and quite nearly all the other sports they show I have absolutely no interest in, so I am not going to pay 10 per month extra just for hickstead, and have all the bother of cancelling immediatly I pay the fee, if I could pay a one off fee to view hickstead only ( even £10 ) I would do it.

Though the post complaining we do get eventing televised , yes we do and no I do not think zara has anything to do with the fact, however we need to encourage the bbc to show any equestrian sport prefarably all, but definatly not bicker about which ones!
All is to be encouraged!


----------



## digitalangel (26 June 2010)

theyre covering glasto this weekend as well

( i used to work for them, please dont lynch me!! )


----------



## Double_choc_lab (26 June 2010)

Recorded the SJ on sky but had to fast forward 45 mins before any SJing happened.  Small amount of scurry driving and then endless drivelly interviews.  Longs for the old days of Dorian Williams and Raymond Brooks Ward.


----------



## HumBugsey (26 June 2010)

Ooo scurry! Cool

I've sent an email to h&c TV to ask them if they'll get to coverage at a later date. I do hope so! I have sky too but not sports. Have been looking all around the sky player hoping I could pay just to watch it but nope...


----------



## suzysparkle (26 June 2010)

lannerch said:



			Though the post complaining we do get eventing televised , yes we do and no I do not think zara has anything to do with the fact, however we need to encourage the bbc to show any equestrian sport prefarably all, but definatly not bicker about which ones!
All is to be encouraged!
		
Click to expand...

I guess that was in reply to my post. I wasn't complaining at all about eventing being televised!! I watched the whole 6hrs of Badminton on the red button. My comment re Royal entry was simply saying a possible reason for them broadcasting more eventing than showjumping. She does get more interest from the press as we know. Was just a thought I'd had. 

I definately wasn't bickering and I'm sorry you feel I was.


----------



## MiJodsR2BlinkinTite (26 June 2010)

The reply from the BBC is totally c**p!! - if you want to know where all their "resources" are, then its easy .... they're all at Glastonbury - who do they think they're kidding?


----------



## HumBugsey (28 June 2010)

I got this reply from H&C tv


Dear Catherine,

Thank you for writing to Horse & Country TV.

Sky Sports have the exclusive rights to show programming from Hickstead this year and we were therefore unfortunately unable to secure any rights to bring our viewers any programming from Hickstead 2010.

Please feel free to write to Sky Sports, if you'd like to, to tell them that you'd like to be able to see this on other channels too.

Best regards,

H&C TV Team


Infers that they tried to get it! lol Maybe we should all harass sky sports! lol


----------



## Andalusianlover (28 June 2010)

Does the national public interest really want to watch Argentina v Mexico etc etc etc, I for one dont.


----------



## BBH (28 June 2010)

Andalusianlover said:



			Does the national public interest really want to watch Argentina v Mexico etc etc etc, I for one dont.
		
Click to expand...


LOL I think i'm even less inclined to watch England v anyone at the moment.

 I can't get sky as I live in the sticks and I wouldn't bother either cos of the cost for a few snippets of equestrian sport.


----------



## idl1975 (28 June 2010)

Andalusianlover said:



			Does the national public interest really want to watch Argentina v Mexico etc etc etc, I for one dont.
		
Click to expand...

The response doesn't make it clear, but quite possibly Auntie were simply outbid for the rights, rather than not being interested in covering Hickstead - and they may be unable or unwilling to say so.  To me, the late announcement re: no coverage suggests this is quite possibly the case.  So it might be more productive for people to write to Hickstead and ask on what basis the rights were awarded to Sky!  

It's been said before, but one major problem with the use of the licence fee these days is the culture of chasing ratings, not quality or public service, perhaps due to (justifiable) paranoia about government hostility to the BBC, perhaps simply due to decision makers within the organisation who come from a commercial background.   This isn't to say the BBC has a duty to be boring, but rather that, self-evidently, as a public broadcaster, it isn't obliged to chase audience share in every slot of the schedule to generate ad revenue.  It should be trying to serve the public as a whole, which will mean that some of the time it _should_ end up covering things of interest to only a small proportion of the fee payers.    

Whatever the reason, as a result, we have our licence fee used for coverage of sports and events which generate massive commercial revenues and don't need the public subsidy.   Quite apart from the sheer cost to the fee payers of securing rights, there's no meaningful public service justification for the Beeb putting on coverage of events which will have no trouble securing ample coverage from other terrestrial broadcasters (C4, ITV, C5 etc).   The football is a classic example, but the same could be said of golf, tennis, or Glastonbury.


----------



## humblepie (28 June 2010)

See from one of the replies above Sky showed some of the celebrity scurry - did they show the lap of honour for the ex racehorses as that was immediately before the scurry? 

Going back to the original post, show jumping seems to be generally dropping out of media coverage.  I know it was a very busy sport weekend with world cup, tennis, the grand prix (thankfully back on BBC without the advert breaks) but in the Telegraph sports section today a very small write up on the derby with no picture when once upon a time the Telegraph was big on show jumping.


----------



## Megan_T (28 June 2010)

Sky sports did a bloody fantastic job and I told them so 

Sod the BBC. 

I do wonder whether this would have happened this year had the World Cup not been on.... hmmmm....


----------



## BBH (28 June 2010)

humblepie said:



			See from one of the replies above Sky showed some of the celebrity scurry - did they show the lap of honour for the ex racehorses as that was immediately before the scurry? 

Going back to the original post, show jumping seems to be generally dropping out of media coverage.  I know it was a very busy sport weekend with world cup, tennis, the grand prix (thankfully back on BBC without the advert breaks) but in the Telegraph sports section today a very small write up on the derby with no picture when once upon a time the Telegraph was big on show jumping.
		
Click to expand...


I saw that but inside they had a big article on all the major sports fixtures over the weekend and Hickstead didn't even get a mention. It seems like with wimbledon, soccer, motor racing SJing didn't feature at all on their radar despite being a big event in our calender


----------



## Kittykins (28 June 2010)

I wrote to the BBC a few years back about some event or other... Badminton, I think, and was given almost a carbon copy of your reply. 

It really angers me, because the whole _point_ of paying a licence fee is to ensure that the BBC can offer top quality entertainment / coverage without having to compete with the others. There was a time when the BBC would have seen it as their remit to ensure good quality, albeit slightly niche viewing, rather than pandering to the masses. 

I've actually been thinking about not paying my tv licence because of this - not just on equestrian sports, but across a whole range of issues. I think their drama production has dropped considerably too, and their news coverage is horribly biased. Watching Question Time makes me want to throw the telly out the window. I wouldn't pay for sky sports or films if i didn't rate their output, so i don't see why I should pay for the BBC's if I don't rate theirs.


----------



## Kittykins (28 June 2010)

That all said.. should the societies be doing more to promote their sports with the broadcasters? Surely the BSJA should help events promote themselves to television channels?


----------



## Onyxia (28 June 2010)

Kittykins said:



			That all said.. should the societies be doing more to promote their sports with the broadcasters? Surely the BSJA should help events promote themselves to television channels?
		
Click to expand...

Good god yes!
I don't see why shows should just be left to promote themselves to TV-they have a big enough job putting the show together and getting bums on seats.
The sports powers that be should really be pulling out all the guns to get some TV time-horse sports have been big news and there is no reason they should not be again.


----------



## Henbug (28 June 2010)

Megan_T said:



			Sky sports did a bloody fantastic job and I told them so 

Sod the BBC.
		
Click to expand...

^^^ Same here ^^^  Really enjoyed watching it and thought they did it well.


----------



## millitiger (29 June 2010)

i think it was unfortunate that Hickstead was on the same weekend as Wimbledon, Glastonbury, Formula 1 and the World Cup.

it is surely all about viewing figures and simply not enough people had watched the Derby in previous years compared to the events above.


----------



## GREYSMEADOW (29 June 2010)

I thought the reason why the Hickstead Derby Meeting was moved from August to June was because of TV coverage with the BBC due to too many other sports being televised in August and didnt have the resources. 

Im wondering now if the Derby Meeting will revert back to August around bank holiday time?


----------



## Miss.Geek (2 July 2010)

perfect11s said:



			yes I aggree Its high time the license fee was used  for public service  broadcasting  and not to compete with the comercial stations in a race to the bottom.....
		
Click to expand...

Fantastic comment, although I have never heard of the show!

Sky Sports showed the Derby, yes it was on several hours after the event but it was still broadcast and they will be at the Royal International meet in August. I also think that due to the World cup it never had a look in!


----------



## HumBugsey (2 July 2010)

Just an update, I have emailed sky sports to ask if they plan on selling any of what they broadcast to H&C. I want to watch it even more now, damn H&H called it a "vintage year"


----------



## GREYSMEADOW (2 July 2010)

Miss.Geek - The Royal International meeting is this month (28 July - 1 August) then the Schools Meeting 5th August.  Nothing at the end of August anymore.


----------



## Over2You (4 July 2010)

LHS said:



			I can't get sky as I live in the sticks and I wouldn't bother either cos of the cost for a few snippets of equestrian sport.
		
Click to expand...

The Hickstead Derby Meeting, the RIHS, Canter Banter, FEI Equestrian World, the Nations Cup, Arena UK, HOYS, the World Cup, International Jumping of France, Spruce Meadows, and various others. Plus they show some eventing, polo, and dressage events. I would hardly call those a "few snippets". 

I think Sky did a highly commendable job and am glad they have full rights for the next four years. The BBC have well and truly lost the plot. It took them something like a year-and-a-half to show just one season of All Saints (a brilliant Australian medical drama series), then dropped it completely without saying a word about doing so. Yet, it can put on endless repeats of Murder, She Wrote and Diagnosis Murder. It ruined the final season of Heroes by messing about with times and removing it to make way for sport. Now it has gone and slapped equestrian fans in the face by dropping Hickstead. They have only shown ONE equestrian event (Badminton) this year and that is an absolute disgrace. We pay our licence fees just the same as tennis, motor-sport, and football fans. They cater almost exclusively to the latter now and that should be motivation enough to boycott the licence fee. 

Would any of you be interested in signing a petition to Downing Street if I started one? It is high time the BBC were sorted out.


----------



## Over2You (4 July 2010)

humblepie said:



			See from one of the replies above Sky showed some of the celebrity scurry - did they show the lap of honour for the ex racehorses as that was immediately before the scurry? 
.
		
Click to expand...

I didn't see any celebrity scurrying, but I did enjoy seeing Flt Lt. Richard Griffiths winning with Mean and Keen.


----------



## Scheherezade (6 July 2010)

Andalusianlover said:



			Does the national public interest really want to watch Argentina v Mexico etc etc etc, I for one dont.
		
Click to expand...

This is the kind of 'argument' it is impossible to debate with logically, but I will try.

You don't like football, but lots of other people do. You like horses, but less people do. Therefore the majority wins. Bringing it down to "well I like it so it HAS to go" isn't helpful.

If the BBC cancelled coverage of the world cup, wimbledon or glastonbury (all of which are FAR more well-attended and watched than the Hickstead Derby on their own, let alone combined) then there would be national uproar - not just a few emails from HHo. They can only cover a finite number of events.

I think "a nail in the coffin" is a little melodramatic given how much I think coverage has increased in recent years - unfortunately this year there is a major clash.

You can please some people some of the time, and all that.


----------



## Chrissie (7 July 2010)

I'm not sure if someone has already mentioned this or not as I have not had chance to read all the replies

Why doesn't the BBC cover Equestrian Sports and just put them on the interactive red button? they use the red button to cover all the sports at the Olympics etc, so if they cannot use BBC1 to show Hickstead etc, then why can they not put this option on the red button instead? Everyone is being converted to digital tv, therefore this option would then be open to everyone. If they do it for the Olympics and often on sundays when the grand prix clashes with other sporting events, so why not with horsey sports as well?

It angers me that the BBC have slowly stopped showing top Equestrian events. I know loads of non-horsey people who say that their families used to watch them even though they weren't into horses. Have the BBC actually asked people what they want to watch???


----------



## BBH (7 July 2010)

Chrissie said:



			I'm not sure if someone has already mentioned this or not as I have not had chance to read all the replies

Why doesn't the BBC cover Equestrian Sports and just put them on the interactive red button? they use the red button to cover all the sports at the Olympics etc, so if they cannot use BBC1 to show Hickstead etc, then why can they not put this option on the red button instead? Everyone is being converted to digital tv, therefore this option would then be open to everyone. If they do it for the Olympics and often on sundays when the grand prix clashes with other sporting events, so why not with horsey sports as well?

It angers me that the BBC have slowly stopped showing top Equestrian events. I know loads of non-horsey people who say that their families used to watch them even though they weren't into horses. Have the BBC actually asked people what they want to watch???
		
Click to expand...

I think the viewing figures will be a clue as to who wants to watch equestrian sport.

I would imagine the production costs of Red Button are no different than to being given ' air time' so unless people are viewing there's no point wasting money. I remember my non horsey Dad watching but only because he wanted to see if a certain Mr Harvey Smith did anymore V signs. There were characters in those days.


----------



## Kittykins (7 July 2010)

BrambleandMonty said:



			You don't like football, but lots of other people do. You like horses, but less people do. Therefore the majority wins. Bringing it down to "well I like it so it HAS to go" isn't helpful.

You can please some people some of the time, and all that.
		
Click to expand...

But the whole point of a Public Service Broadcaster is to cater for minority groups. Our license fee is paid in order to ensure that they don't have to compete with commercial organisations for majority viewing figures. Currently they're taking taxpayers (for that's what the license has become) for a ride. 



Over2You said:



			Would any of you be interested in signing a petition to Downing Street if I started one? It is high time the BBC were sorted out.
		
Click to expand...

I would, and not only for their shoddy equestrian coverage and general abandonment of minority sports - also for their incredibly biased and frankly infuriating news coverage. Plus, their output of quality drama has diminished severely over the last few years. 

The world service is the only part of the BBC that does a stirling job - and it's been hacked away at over the recent years in order to pay Jonathan Ross an obscene salary.


----------



## millitiger (7 July 2010)

Kittykins said:



			But the whole point of a Public Service Broadcaster is to cater for minority groups. Our license fee is paid in order to ensure that they don't have to compete with commercial organisations for majority viewing figures. Currently they're taking taxpayers (for that's what the license has become) for a ride.
		
Click to expand...

is that the point of the BBC though?

i would have thought that as the license fee is compulsory if you own a TV, that the BBC have a moral responsibility to broadcast whatever makes the majority happy.

it all comes down to viewing figures and simply put, not enough people watch equestrian events to warrant the coverage.

usually they put it on the red button if BBC1 and 2 are full but as i said before the Derby weekend clashed with 5 or 6 other events, not one or two.

(and i for one would like to say thank goodness they got the World Cup coverage as the ITV pundits are appalling and i am also so glad that F1 is not ruined by ad breaks anymore!)


----------



## Over2You (9 July 2010)

Kittykins said:



			But the whole point of a Public Service Broadcaster is to cater for minority groups. Our license fee is paid in order to ensure that they don't have to compete with commercial organisations for majority viewing figures. Currently they're taking taxpayers (for that's what the license has become) for a ride. 



I would, and not only for their shoddy equestrian coverage and general abandonment of minority sports - also for their incredibly biased and frankly infuriating news coverage. Plus, their output of quality drama has diminished severely over the last few years. 

The world service is the only part of the BBC that does a stirling job - and it's been hacked away at over the recent years in order to pay Jonathan Ross an obscene salary.
		
Click to expand...

Excellent! That is at least one signature guaranteed. I'm still working on a draft, but it will hopefully be online soon.

You are right about Jonathan Ross and his like. They are vastly over-paid, over-hyped non-entities in my opinion.  

The role of the BBC (as far as I have heard) is to cater to ALL its licence fee payers. Those Bloody British Channels fail to do so time and time and time again. I strongly resent my licence going towards sporting events I never watch, being used to make mindless, god awful soaps, and mediocre game shows. If you have the audacity to send as much as a mild criticism their way, you get treated like a second rate citizen and don't get anything that resembles an explanation for their actions (as proven on this thread). They are clearly unwilling to change their agenda, and will go doing exactly what they please. That is exactly why a higher power must step-in and give viewers a voice. 

Please sign my petition when it is finished. Thanks.


----------

