[Archived] Motd

[rovgers]

What made me angry about the MOTD coverage was when Big ears said "there was an element of off-side" about the winning goal but didn't bother backing that up with any evidence or even a replay!

[Guest bluerovers]

The commentator for the Liverpool match seemed to think Torres' goal wasn't offside when the line was almost identical to our second goal. Inconsistent commentating and analysis.

Shouldn't we be more worried about inconsistent refereeing then? If Emo and Torres were both in the same state of offside-ness and Torres had his goal disallowed, doesn't that prove Rovers are actually favoured over big teams (by Ref's anyway)?

[Exiled_Rover]

Ahh ok thx, just thought it would have been nice to maybe have seen it myself to make my own judgement, maybe I will just discuss with my dog how many yards wide Vaughn's shot was that was shown was instead.

Exactly. It's an incident in the game that many fans want to see. Why wouldn't you show it?

We see EVERYTHING that happens in a Chelsea/Liverpool/Man U/Arsenal game. I'm sick of not knowing what happens in the other games.

[Amo]

I must have been the only one who expected them to skip our disallowed goal.

[Tim Southampton Rover]

If Sunderland v Man Utd isn't on last today after a dismal 0-0 draw then it is proof that MOTD are officially biased

Personally I hope we're last after yet another rubbish performance.

[roversfan99]

Man Utd are first on match choice.

[Amo]

The running order for each programme is determined by the day's big stories, talking points and most entertaining games. There is certainly no perceived bias against or in favour of certain teams. Each match takes its place in the running order on its own merit. And it is precisely for that reason that we send a commentator to every Premier League game on Saturdays and Sundays.

Which is why United's 0-0 bore draw was the second featured game, where the only talking point was a flooded dressing room?

[magicalmortensleftpeg]

If a lower midtable team holds one of the big 4, it warrants attention. If we had held Man Utd at home and played as well as Sunderland seemed to play, im pretty damn sure you'd expect MOTD to put us high on the running order. Also, there wasnt a single other game worth putting ahead of it.

[Inta Beaver]

I love how Motd have highlighted us to be a dirty team by showing the two tackles from Nzonzi, and Givet, they didn't show Huths tackle on Pederson did they!

[Mattyblue]

If a lower midtable team holds one of the big 4, it warrants attention. If we had held Man Utd at home and played as well as Sunderland seemed to play, im pretty damn sure you'd expect MOTD to put us high on the running order. Also, there wasnt a single other game worth putting ahead of it.

Not having that, Man United must be in the first 3 in the running order EVERY week, good game or @#/? game, whoever the oposition is.

The BBC are simply playing to the gallery- namely United's hordes of armchair 'fans'.

[Hughesy]

IF Stoke & Rovers ended 5-5, we still wouldnt have been on before United or Spurs.

[Paul]

The BBC are simply playing to the gallery- namely United's hordes of armchair 'fans'.

Of course they are, it's all about ratings. I'm a Rovers fan and didn't bother to watch MOTD, read the paper instead, the BBC are going to put on the game which will attract the most viewers. It's a simple as that. As Hughesy says we could have drawn 5-5 and still be on last, well may be second or third!!

[Stuart]

Of course they are, it's all about ratings. I'm a Rovers fan and didn't bother to watch MOTD, read the paper instead, the BBC are going to put on the game which will attract the most viewers. It's a simple as that. As Hughesy says we could have drawn 5-5 and still be on last, well may be second or third!!

By that logic, and I'm not saying you're wrong, rating must dwindle to almost nothing long before the programme finishes.

I wonder if ratings are calculated by the peak number or some kind of average?

[Beta Ray Bill]

Overnight ratings are based on averages of either 15min chunks (these come out around 0930 and are the ones you often see in news stories) or are refined in 5 mins later in day. However, these overnights are based on planned timeslots rather than actual, eg 2230-2340 instead of 2236-2337.

The final ratings take into account the exact programme duration averaged out, and all unique viewing within first 7 days by vcr, dvd, sky+, virgin+ etc. but not player, those are collated separately.

Obviously this is all based on samples rather than every household but its believed to be pretty reflective.

But keeping a big match til the end would probably keep viewers .

[magicalmortensleftpeg]

Not having that, Man United must be in the first 3 in the running order EVERY week, good game or @#/? game, whoever the oposition is.

The BBC are simply playing to the gallery- namely United's hordes of armchair 'fans'.

So if it had been a choice of West Brom v Birmingham or Sunderland v Man Utd which one would you have rather watched? If there had been any better games then im pretty sure United's game would have been lower. Yesterday wasnt a good example in any case as none of the games were worth watching.

[Yorick]

The BBC are simply playing to the gallery- namely United's hordes of armchair 'fans'.

Doesn't make sense if ratings are so important. Boxing, athletics etc tend to show the lesser contests first and keep the blue riband events until last to keep the viewer hooked. MoTD works in completely the opposite manner.

[Mattyblue]

So if it had been a choice of West Brom v Birmingham or Sunderland v Man Utd which one would you have rather watched? If there had been any better games then im pretty sure United's game would have been lower. Yesterday wasnt a good example in any case as none of the games were worth watching.

May shock you, but I don't give a monkeys about the 'big clubs'. I would much rather see a hard fought derby between Birmingham and WBA, a game that really matters to both fans than just another episode of the Man Yoo roadshow.

The national football show of the state broadcaster should take a similar approach.

[trueblue]

Good grief! after years of watching MOTD, have you lot not yet cottoned on... it's 10 mins each of highlights for the 'Big 4' then 30 seconds each for the rest.. MOTD will NEVER change!

[grizfoot]

Good grief! after years of watching MOTD, have you lot not yet cottoned on... it's 10 mins each of highlights for the 'Big 4' then 30 seconds each for the rest.. MOTD will NEVER change!

Very true I don't watch MOTD anymore, I simply record the extended highlights on Football First and watch every game like that and that way I don't have to suffer MOTD and their awful highlights coverage and punditry.

[Amo]

So Chelsea's win over Arsenal comes before Blackpool's heroic win at Anfield?

Laaaaaaaame.

[1864roverite]

MOTD is finished as a footyball entertainment production.

Listening to Linekar, hansen and the preston puff over the last few yrs has really put me off. it is not an interesting show any longer.

Its no longer an unbiased view it is simply lets honour the big teams and dis the lesser lights.

I switched off and prefer like others the football first effort and goals on sunday on sky.

[brian_gallagher85]

MOTD2 raises two questions:

a) Is Murray the most biased presenter on the planet?

and

B ) What Liverpool has Hansen been watching of late when he made the comment that he thought that Liverpool would win 3 or 4 nil?

[EnglishChris]

B ) What Liverpool has Hansen been watching of late when he made the comment that he thought that Liverpool would win 3 or 4 nil?

He no doubt thought that as Arsenal and Chelsea beat them by more than 4 his beloved Liverpool ( no matter how bad there playing) would at least do the same to little old blackpool

[Tom]

Typical MOTD tonight, there was a 3-2 in the league yet the first game is a awful 0-0 which they feel the need to analyse. I thought it was about the entertainment value of the games not the competitors.

[cravenblue]

Yet again match of day dont give a true reflection of the game