I've watched very little of Euro 2012, mostly because I've always had something more important to do with my time. And I have no comment on England's performances, since I only saw part of their match against France, in which the French had plenty of possession but didn't seem to have any great ability to apply real pressure on the English goal.
(If I had to guess, I would say that England will probably go out against Italy; they might progress one further step, but I don't see them getting to the Final. Oh, and also, I don't accept the received wisdom that reaching the last 8 amounts to a success, at least at the Euros. If you're serious about being contenders, as England should be, then consistently getting to the semis should be the target. They may have done better than expected, but that's not the same as doing well.)
However, the thing that really bugs me about the Euros, and it's something I'm sure I've mentioned before: why do we persist in letting ITV cover them? They're awful! Between an unfunny host who sounds bored, a panel of 'experts' who are anything but, and commentators who try to walk that fine line between absurd arrogance and outright xenophobia (with intermittent success), watching is just not fun.
And it is specifically ITV that are really poor. The BBC are consistently better. Hell, for coverage of football generally, Sky are leagues ahead.
Please, can we get rid of ITV's coverage in time for the World Cup? Just give it to the BBC in its entirety.
(Of course, now that "Harry Hill's TV Burp" is gone, removing the football from ITV would remove the last reason for ever watching it. But then, is it truly worth having a channel just to watch mind-bogglingly awful coverage of football?)
No comments:
Post a Comment