The full extent of Mercedes' television blackout in Sunday’s Japanese Grand Prix can be laid bare, with at least five times less coverage than in similar races, but Bernie Ecclestone has denied it was a deliberate act of revenge.

Ecclestone’s FOM (Formula One Management), which controls the international television feed, showed very few shots of race-winner Lewis Hamilton and his team-mate Nico Rosberg in Suzuka, even critical pit stops. It prompted suspicions that the 84-year-old had ordered the cutback in retaliation for Mercedes' failure to supply engines to Red Bull for next season.

Niki Lauda, the Mercedes chairman, met Ecclestone in his Kensington offices on Tuesday morning and said F1’s supremo had admitted going “over the top”. But Ecclestone denied any “manipulation”.

Broadcasters were also angry with the skewed coverage and are likely to raise their concerns with Ecclestone.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/motorsport/formulaone/mercedes/11900119/Revealed-Mercedes-on-TV-for-just-six-minutes-in-Japan-but-Bernie-Ecclestone-denies-blackout-claim.html

 

 

There are 10 teams; an entirely even distribution over a typical race duration would still only be ~9 minutes each.

 

Personally, I'd sooner watch 2 Vermilion Male Bovines, an Enstone and a Force India disputing, say, 6th to 9th inclusive than a Mercedes tooling around in solitary splendour.

Basically, what he said^.

 

There's a great bit in Eddie Jordan's autobiography where he's talking to a marketing man. Who says the best way to get coverage is to do well occasionally, and when you aren't winning, make sure you're in the thick of it. That way, you get maximum exposure.

 

Basically, don't dominate, because that becomes boring.

That's about it, I think Lewis is great, but the interesting stuff often happens further back.

Well since Ferrari didn't do a deal that RBR fancied either is that why they weren't seen on TV much (like Mercedes)?

 

Very boring watching the 90 minutes of the Hondas chuggging about even more slowly than the front runners do.

I find not having 'old style coverage' makes it difficult knowing what's going on. I noticed there was a change a few years ago, before the bbc bailed out of their full live coverage deal ? To start with I put it down to the TV director having a bad day but as more races were shown it became obvious there was a new method to the madness ? which I assumed was spreading air time more equally across the whole field. The only way to see how the front runners are doing now, relative to each other, is watch the timings on the screen. With cricket coverage the TV cameras do not spend all the time watching random fielders. Football matches do not show half an hour of the linesman walking up and down. But as far as I am concerned this is what's going on with F1.     :sun:  

There are 10 teams; an entirely even distribution over a typical race duration would still only be ~9 minutes each.

 

Personally, I'd sooner watch 2 Vermilion Male Bovines, an Enstone and a Force India disputing, say, 6th to 9th inclusive than a Mercedes tooling around in solitary splendour.

But you're forgetting that more than one team can be in camera shot, and indeed that's where they tend to focus to get overtakes, so you'd expect more than 9 minutes on average.

Still, as you say a solitary car leading is dull so you often get very little of a runaway leader.

I find not having 'old style coverage' makes it difficult knowing what's going on. I noticed there was a change a few years ago, before the bbc bailed out of their full live coverage deal ? To start with I put it down to the TV director having a bad day but as more races were shown it became obvious there was a new method to the madness ? which I assumed was spreading air time more equally across the whole field. The only way to see how the front runners are doing now, relative to each other, is watch the timings on the screen. With cricket coverage the TV cameras do not spend all the time watching random fielders. Football matches do not show half an hour of the linesman walking up and down. But as far as I am concerned this is what's going on with F1.     :sun:  

Apples and chalk

 

With Wendyball (and rugby) most of the action occurs near the ball. With cricket there's a predictable transition from bowler to wicket to batsman to ball to fielder(s) with most deliveries.

 

OTOH with a motor race, there are 0 or more places on track and knots of cars where overtaking may occur. About the only thing that is predictable is that any car that is separated from its nearest rival(s) by 5s or more will not be an action point unless/until the driver makes a mistake or the car has a mechanical failure. Actual motor racing fans (rather than "fans of winning") understand this.

But you're forgetting that more than one team can be in camera shot, and indeed that's where they tend to focus to get overtakes, so you'd expect more than 9 minutes on average.

Still, as you say a solitary car leading is dull so you often get very little of a runaway leader.

See my #8. My analysis may have been simplistic, but its base point still stands.

What is old style coverage?

 

Half an hour of Murray screaming late on Sunday night on BBC2? 

 

Or even none at all because the BBC don't want sponsors like Durex to be seen on national TV. (c. 1976)

 

I'd rather have what we've got now.

What is old style coverage?

 

Half an hour of Murray screaming late on Sunday night on BBC2? 

 

Or even none at all because the BBC don't want sponsors like Durex to be seen on national TV. (c. 1976)

 

I'd rather have what we've got now.

Or moronically following the leader because "people like winners"?

It does suprise me that, given smart TV's and everything, we can't pick which camera we're watching.

It does suprise me that, given smart TV's and everything, we can't pick which camera we're watching.

 

Doesn't Sky Red button give you some choice?

What is old style coverage?

 

 

 

It is when the leaders are followed regularly and pit stops and overtaking, from the last half of the field, are shown by inserting clips into the live race, this way all the action is shown and what's happening at the front can be followed. It is possibly less important at the start of the season but as fewer drivers have the chance of winning the championship I don't want to watch a battle for 16th place. :sun:      

It is when the leaders are followed regularly and pit stops and overtaking, from the last half of the field, are shown by inserting clips into the live race, this way all the action is shown and what's happening at the front can be followed. It is possibly less important at the start of the season but as fewer drivers have the chance of winning the championship I don't want to watch a battle for 16th place. :sun:      

 

I really thought that's exactly what we have now. 

 

Unless Mercedes and Ferrari are on Bernie's naughty step, as they are at this moment.

 

And struggling Honda needed a boost in their own country.

Edited 8 October, 201510 yr by camelspyyder

It does suprise me that, given smart TV's and everything, we can't pick which camera we're watching.

 

Bernie wanted to launch his own F1 coverage with all cameras at track and on cars being selectable by the viewer but it was pay to view channel and no one wanted to pay, so it went nowhere in the end.