Welcome to the forum Mendipper. I would be annoyed but im at work and viewing on the website live page rolling text (video is blocked =/). I suppose you could do it that way. The BBC should of not got rid of the 2nd red button channel (302)
I'm stuck in the US all weekend and facing the prospect of watching the whole race via the iPad live timing app :-( Can't get a single proxy to work for iPlayer. Just hope Speed TV streaming works and it's just the offices firewall thats blocking it.
In the South West here it was showing as tennis being on so did not even try it, but watched it on the website.
I guess Tennis is not as popular in the 'Sebs Finger' Region so they had f1 on instead ...does that sound wrong
Look but don't stare! Cheers Bergkamp Other problem I have is can I justify having a beer at 8 in the morning?
Awesome! Never heard of that site before, somehow though they are showing the German GP qualifying and race this weekend according to their schedule ;-)
No FP2 relates to viewers with Freeview rather than digital satellite. Will not be repeated on red button even though Wimbledon's matches are all having a rain delay. *grump*
Well, thats the BBC for you, senior types don't appreciate such things as 'motor racing' it's not tennis you know ! Its obvious by the way F1 fan's were treated and moderated on BBC606
It's not really that bad. Why not be grateful for the things you can watch without paying through the nose like you will be if you have to watch F1 with Sky in the near future? Does the fact that FP2 was replaced with live tennis from the most famous tennis tournament in the world mean that the BBC do not give a damn about F1? Does the fact that FP2 was missed once in a season mean that ITV's (utterly ****) coverage was 17 times worse than the BBC's, seeing as they showed zero practices?
I can count on my fingers the number of times I have watched any ITV channel without being coerced in the last three years. The BBC's F1 coverage isn't bad, but they're idiotic in the way that they agree to carry sporting events. This isn't a football forum, but it is relevant. I remember when Watford played QPR last season, it was on BBC TV, Five Live, BBC London, BBC Three Counties, and online via Five Live. On top of that, the match report actually had a name on it, meaning that they sent one of their most expensive journalists to cover it. And for one of only two times all season, guess which Hertfordshire club's match was featured first on Crimewatch with Steve Claridge, which incidentally was replayed all weekend on the red button? I love Watford, but did we really need three radio stations with three commentary teams, a noticeable amount of bandwith for live streaming, and to waste one of our token top of the bill slots, for a match that TV and five live were covering? With the money they could have saved, they would almost have been able to afford Alan Green's breakfast. It's the same with tennis, and it's the same with snooker. I've got time for both, but when they overdo it, they waste collossal amounts of money AND manage to annoy millions of would-be viewers of sports events THEY ACTUALLY HAVE THE RIGHTS TO SHOW.
I think they showed FP1 and FP2 online, never FP3 for some reason. Not as good as the BBC's red button broadcast, admittedly, but not utterly ****. NNW's right about the duplication of effort. You can argue that Radio 5Live provides coverage to an audience with no immediate access to TV and online provides it to people who have neither TV nor radio, but if an event is being covered on the national network there's no need to duplicate it on a local basis.
