Do you think the BBC is impartial in it's coverage of Scottish football?

[PC Stamp]

Having a discussion with a chap who works for the Beeb and I stated that the BBC wouldn't know the meaning of impartial when it comes to Scottish football. His reply was "What a load of nonsense."

How do you feel ... a simple Yes or No

Please feel free to add any further comment to the thread.

[Calvin]

Yeah, every team gets quite a lot of online coverage and they cover the top story on the news whoever it's about.

There are a lot more Rangers and Celtic fans than the rest so I think that the coverage to fan ratio is roughly in proportion.

[Big Frank]

Having a discussion with a chap who works for the Beeb and I stated that the BBC wouldn't know the meaning of impartial when it comes to Scottish football. His reply was "What a load of nonsense."

How do you feel ... a simple Yes or No

Please feel free to add any further comment to the thread.

BBC scotland is disgusting bias toward the hun.

Its shocking.

[Baw187]

Yes. They have a wide variety of articles covering all teams on the BBC Sport website.

[Sylar]

It stands to reason that they're liable to be impartial to be honest. They do cover other aspects of football in Scotland, but their primary focus is the big 2 in Glasgow. Why? Because as an institution, their success is based on viewing/listening figures and there are (sadly) more Rangers and Celtic fans out there than any other clubs. Why wouldn't they primarily focus on those 2? To deny impartiality is to deny that they operate with an aim to maximise their audience, which is pure delusion.

This isn't limited to the BBC though - look at the ESPN/Sky Coverage - how many games as a % do they cover seasonally which involves 2 non-OF clubs? When do Sky Sports News talk about clubs outwith the OF unless a major story is breaking (manager being sacked, winning a competition, new signings, sales of players to "bigger" clubs). It's the same for the smaller English clubs down south though - Manchester United, Manchester City, Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea and recently Tottenham obtain most coverage down there, as they have the majority of the fanbase.

[PC Stamp]

I was thinking about the Beeb as an overall entity as opposed to just website coverage. Take broadcast media etc into account as well. Every club in the UK has it's own page on the BBC.

[Elephant Stone]

No. The website is excellent but if you listen to BBC Sport before the games it's all old firm, even when there is absolutely nothing significant to talk about they manage to spend the entirety of the show talking about how there is no news to report from Glasgow. The BBC coverage of the last round of the Scottish cup was a laugh- we had about two minutes for our game which had six goals to show, they ended the show with a lenghthy piece from Paisley in order to fit in a total of no goals whatsoever.

[Bookkeeper]

Online yes, on TV and radio no. The Beeb is still better than all other media though. Commercial media (TV, radio & newspapers) panders too much to the oldfirm, which I suppose is understandable sadly due to the supporter numbers. Hopefully their financial mess and our continuing improvement can alter the balance of coverage.

[MrSmith]

Yeah, every team gets quite a lot of online coverage and they cover the top story on the news whoever it's about.

There are a lot more Rangers and Celtic fans than the rest so I think that the coverage to fan ratio is roughly in proportion.

It is nothing to do with proportional representation. We all pay our telly license which covers BBC radio as well so coverage should be fair and representative of the telly paying public!

When did the weedgie begin paying their TV license?

makes me mad so it does!!

[Baldy Foghorn]

Having a discussion with a chap who works for the Beeb and I stated that the BBC wouldn't know the meaning of impartial when it comes to Scottish football. His reply was "What a load of nonsense."

How do you feel ... a simple Yes or No

Please feel free to add any further comment to the thread.

Definitely more biased towards Celtic and Rangers.....

[hibsboy90]

The weekend that we beat St Mirren and Celtic beat Hamilton, i got back to the car and was forced to listen to a 4/5m interview with celtics new signing Rasmussen. Surely this could have been broadcast a few hours beforehand after their match, and if airtime between the end of the celtic match and the 3pm KO was tight, stick the interview online.

The rest of the fans who attend games should maybe be entitled to hear an interview from their manager before a player who scored a tap in 2h beforehand. This interview was a lot longer than that of the other managers.

It was the same last weekend after we beat Montrose, got back to the car to hear an interview with a rangers player / manager.

Thats a prime example, alongside the lack of coverage in our highlights, 16 shots on target, yet 2 goals get the same amount of footage as Boyd entering the play at new Love street.

Online - it is there to find, but never prominant like 'uncle walters' latest thoughts.

It is to be expected by commercial broadcasters, but not the bbc as far as i am concerned.

[PC Stamp]

It stands to reason that they're liable to be impartial to be honest. They do cover other aspects of football in Scotland, but their primary focus is the big 2 in Glasgow. Why? Because as an institution, their success is based on viewing/listening figures and there are (sadly) more Rangers and Celtic fans out there than any other clubs. Why wouldn't they primarily focus on those 2? To deny impartiality is to deny that they operate with an aim to maximise their audience, which is pure delusion.

This isn't limited to the BBC though - look at the ESPN/Sky Coverage - how many games as a % do they cover seasonally which involves 2 non-OF clubs? When do Sky Sports News talk about clubs outwith the OF unless a major story is breaking (manager being sacked, winning a competition, new signings, sales of players to "bigger" clubs). It's the same for the smaller English clubs down south though - Manchester United, Manchester City, Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea and recently Tottenham obtain most coverage down there, as they have the majority of the fanbase.

Valid points TSSF and I have no qualms with any organisation maximising it's potential for business purposes. To do so as you state means maximising coverage for those entities which have the largest share of followers. As a national broadcaster, not dependent on advertising income, but funded by everyone who pays their TV licence fee irrespective of whichever team they follow, is that acceptable? ESPN/SKY are funded by advertisers and voluntary subscribers. The BBC are not.

[MacBean]

No. The website is excellent but if you listen to BBC Sport before the games it's all old firm, even when there is absolutely nothing significant to talk about they manage to spend the entirety of the show talking about how there is no news to report from Glasgow. The BBC coverage of the last round of the Scottish cup was a laugh- we had about two minutes for our game which had six goals to show, they ended the show with a lenghthy piece from Paisley in order to fit in a total of no goals whatsoever.
:agree:

[hibsbollah]

Yes, its equally dismissive of every non-Old Firm side in Scotland:agree:

[Greenway]

Definitely more biased towards Celtic and Rangers.....

I'm not sure whether it's biased or not. Certainly 80% of there coverage is OF related, even when they're not actually playing. The BBC would say that this reflects their listeners preferences, and I suppose there are studies which would confirm at least 60% of Scottish SPL fans are the great unwashed.

Of course Celtic fans thing the BBC are bias towards Rangers, and vice a versa. So I'm not sure that it is anything other than fans views being clouded by their own point of view. Certainly Hibs seem to get a fair bit of positive press from the BBC which is good.

[PatHead]

The BBC is a public service broadcaster and as such should not be influenced by listener/viewing figures. That should be left to commercial broadcasters. If anything they should be weighted towards clubs not receiving adequate coverage such as the remainder of the spl, other divisions.

It is also ridiculous how often an "Old firm" match gets live coverage on tv and the radio. How often is a Hibs match not on the radio but you need to have internet access?

With regard to the internet look at the coverage of the draw today. Old Firm on front page. Why do 1st Division sides not get underdog coverage.

In short I hate the BBC for it's biased coverage. Rant over

[Broken Gnome]

The weekend that we beat St Mirren and Celtic beat Hamilton, i got back to the car and was forced to listen to a 4/5m interview with celtics new signing Rasmussen. Surely this could have been broadcast a few hours beforehand after their match, and if airtime between the end of the celtic match and the 3pm KO was tight, stick the interview online.

The rest of the fans who attend games should maybe be entitled to hear an interview from their manager before a player who scored a tap in 2h beforehand. This interview was a lot longer than that of the other managers.

It was the same last weekend after we beat Montrose, got back to the car to hear an interview with a rangers player / manager.

Thats a prime example, alongside the lack of coverage in our highlights, 16 shots on target, yet 2 goals get the same amount of footage as Boyd entering the play at new Love street.

Online - it is there to find, but never prominant like 'uncle walters' latest thoughts.

It is to be expected by commercial broadcasters, but not the bbc as far as i am concerned.

That annoyed tha @rse out of me. The Rangers game had finished at 2.15pm. There would have been not a single person tuning into Sportsound at 5pm expecting or demanding to hear what Walter Smith wanted to say about the game, given that 6 other games had just taken place. Then they obviously dominate the whole of Your Call (yes because they have more fans, but I'd reckon most non-OF have the sense or decency not to bother asking some plonker what he thinks of their team...). On that day, theres 12 teams that had just played Scottish Cup ties and whose supporters would've done well to hear anything about their game bar the scorers and the man of the match.

Also the way that if any interview with Hughes, McGhee etc can be spun into something of relevance to an Old Firm supporter, it will be.

[HIBEETILLIDIE]

Radio coverage on a Sat is a Joke. If an old firm game at 12.30 means non stop talking about the old firm from FT until five to 3 then at half time quick run around the other games, then back to old firm chat, then FT very quick summaries of other games then back to talk about the old firm until buffoon Traynor comes on at half five to discuss-yes you have guessed it-the old firm!

Non old firm derby weekends usually consist of 45% time devoted to talking about the huns and 45% about the tic with 10% rest of premier league .

Open all mic's-what a complete joke!

The BBC radio coverage-off the ball apart-is a complete joke!

[TheEastTerrace]

Off the Ball might as well be 'OF the Ball', given that trumpet Traynor takes pretty much 90% of calls from OF idiots.

IMO, I have much better alternatives to Final Score, Sportscene, etc so don't watch them now on the BBC. The prat who presents Final Score versus Jeff Stelling on Soccer Saturday is a non-starter.

All in all, I find the output from the BBC pretty dire, so it's more this that switches me off to the BBC more than OF bias. However, that's not to say that I know it exists and I would be most likely in agreement with the OP if I didn't have Sky Sports, etc.

I also watch the highlights of the Hibs game online. Don't bother my erse with the others. Probably only good thing BBC is good for, the online stuff

[Moody Mulder]

Look folks the poor folks fae weegieville dinnae have anything and i mean anything in their poor lives except the fitba, let them have it

[Mary Hinge]

Definitely more biased towards Celtic and Rangers.....

Correct :agree: and Sky should be thinking about renaming itself as the Rangers Benevolent Society :wink:

[HIBEETILLIDIE]

Off the Ball might as well be 'OF the Ball', given that trumpet Traynor takes pretty much 90% of calls from OF idiots.

IMO, I have much better alternatives to Final Score, Sportscene, etc so don't watch them now on the BBC. The prat who presents Final Score versus Jeff Stelling on Soccer Saturday is a non-starter.

All in all, I find the output from the BBC pretty dire, so it's more this that switches me off to the BBC more than OF bias. However, that's not to say that I know it exists and I would be most likely in agreement with the OP if I didn't have Sky Sports, etc.

I also watch the highlights of the Hibs game online. Don't bother my erse with the others. Probably only good thing BBC is good for, the online stuff

Just to clarify the off the ball i was referring to was Tam Cowan and Stuart Cosgrove-i think its called that-apologies if its not.

[Removed]

I don't think the BBC are impartial on anything, including football.

Interesting debate though Cliff, it wasn't that long ago we were talking about 107 and their Hearts bias so it even happens in commercial radio.

I think with the BBC certain individuals easily wind us up - Chic Young, Traynor etc but there again we all like it when Pat Nevin talks us up on Sportscene or on the radio.

The bit that really is annoying is when have dicks like Preston covering our games. He is defo not impartial and we should not have to be subjected to his biased anti Hibs pish.

[Golden Bear]

Overall - yes I do think they provide coverage which is both fair & impartial.

They certainly provide a superior and more balanced coverage than the daily and weekend newspapers.

[ancienthibby]

Overall - yes I do think they provide coverage which is both fair & impartial.

They certainly provide a superior and more balanced coverage than the daily and weekend newspapers.

Garbage.

If you employ Jim Traynor and Billie Dodds then you cannot receive anything other than biased reporting and opinion.

Dodds just salivates Rankgers and Traynor has the OF tattooed on his brain.

(Oh and for the OP it's its :greengrin)

[KWJ]

What most have said really. It is impartial but not OTT I don't think.

Website is decent, what annoys me though is the gossip thing. I'm having to refresh still at half ten in the morning to see if the Scottish is up while the English has been there since about 8am.

As for sportsound the OF do dominate but I still enjoy the coverage and I particularly like Richard Gordon, brilliant anchor and chair. They all speak their mind and most of them allow their bias to show from time to time which is fine. Unfortunately most of that bias is towards the OF because that's who they support. Least we get to hear Preston greet nearly every just now.

As for Open all mics I think it's great and don't quite get the bad coverage it gets here. It is what it is which is an informal real time summary of what's going on everywhere with some Scottish fitbaw banter thrown in. I've listened to it a lot this season as I can't get just the Hibs commentary with being overseas. It can be irratating when we've got a tense game but it's pretty good fun and I don't believe I've seen anyone else doing a similar show. I heard the first one and they said if it gets positive feedback they'll keep doing it. I'd rather they did that than have to watch and refresh the internet for little snippets or keep checking .net.

Yeah BBC, could be better but it's not aw that bad.

Oh and HIBEEFORLIFE is correct, Off the ball with Tam & Stu is braw, I miss the way it used to be with on the ball before sportsound and then off the ball after but big Jim Trayners gone and spoiled it all.

[Littlest Hobo]

I think there is a balance to be struck between the old firm and the rest of us. It makes sense for them to get more coverage because they have huge supports. I'd say the Beeb do a decent enough job.:thumbsup:

[down-the-slope]

:faf::faf:

was it really worth a poll to answer one of the all time retorical questions :rolleyes:

Look at tonight cup 'front page' ....'
'Old Firm paired with SPL rivals in Scottish Cup draw '

Funny that...didn't think Rangers were through the last round yet:grr::grr:

[Calvin]

What most have said really. It is impartial but not OTT I don't think.

Website is decent, what annoys me though is the gossip thing. I'm having to refresh still at half ten in the morning to see if the Scottish is up while the English has been there since about 8am.

As for sportsound the OF do dominate but I still enjoy the coverage and I particularly like Richard Gordon, brilliant anchor and chair. They all speak their mind and most of them allow their bias to show from time to time which is fine. Unfortunately most of that bias is towards the OF because that's who they support. Least we get to hear Preston greet nearly every just now.

As for Open all mics I think it's great and don't quite get the bad coverage it gets here. It is what it is which is an informal real time summary of what's going on everywhere with some Scottish fitbaw banter thrown in. I've listened to it a lot this season as I can't get just the Hibs commentary with being overseas. It can be irratating when we've got a tense game but it's pretty good fun and I don't believe I've seen anyone else doing a similar show. I heard the first one and they said if it gets positive feedback they'll keep doing it. I'd rather they did that than have to watch and refresh the internet for little snippets or keep checking .net.

Yeah BBC, could be better but it's not aw that bad.

Oh and HIBEEFORLIFE is correct, Off the ball with Tam & Stu is braw, I miss the way it used to be with on the ball before sportsound and then off the ball after but big Jim Trayners gone and spoiled it all.

Good post, sums it up nicely for me. I like Open All Mics as well, I like Off the Ball, I like Richard Gordon, I like the website too.

My only complaint is that they should cover what will likely be the most entertaining game, the rare occasion they televise a match, as opposed to the best OF game.

[PC Stamp]

:faf::faf:

was it really worth a poll to answer one of the all time retorical questions :rolleyes:

Look at tonight cup 'front page' ....'
'Old Firm paired with SPL rivals in Scottish Cup draw '

Funny that...didn't think Rangers were through the last round yet:grr::grr:

It was indeed, to prove my point to said Beeb man about what at least one set of non OF fans think of the Beeb's coverage. Prior to that it was just my own view he had. Now he has almost a hundred others agreeing with me! :wink:

[JoeT]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/scotland/8509735.stm

Celtic v Hearts

They show 27 Celtic attacks to Hearts none.

The only time they show hearts possession in Celtic's half are when they lose the ball leading to second Celtic goal and a corner that leads to a Robbie Keane counter attack.

Shockingly biased BBC highlights:faf::faf::faf:

[Part/Time Supporter]

If there is any imbalance in their coverage, it's between clubs in the bottom half of the SPL and the clubs in the top half of SFL1. There is no real difference between the fanbases of those clubs. Indeed, there are some historically bigger clubs in SFL1 (Dundee, Dunfermline) than the SPL (Hamilton, St. Johnstone). The amount of coverage of SFL1 clubs on tv and radio is minimal, yet if they get promoted to the SPL it multiplies up. I think I know why this happens, but it doesn't really make any sense.

[lapsedhibee]

Having a discussion with a chap who works for the Beeb and I stated that the BBC wouldn't know the meaning of impartial when it comes to Scottish football. His reply was "What a load of nonsense."

How do you feel ... a simple Yes or No

Please feel free to add any further comment to the thread.

Leaving aside that a couple of posters here don't know either, seeming to confuse it with "biased", here's the scores as displayed on the BBC Scotland TV news results table last night:

Celtic 2-0 Hearts
Motherwell 1-1 Rangers
Dundee Utd 0-2 Hamilton
Falkirk 0-1 Kilmarnock
Hibernian 2-2 Aberdeen
St Mirren 1-1 St Johnstone

Their OFixation even extends to redefining the alphabet now. ******.

[number9dream]

Sadly, the Beeb is under the same commercial strain as other media outlets, despite its unique public funding, therefore they go chasing the big hitters. ie Old Firm stories...
However, guys on the radio like Richard Gordon and Jim Spence are pretty good at steering things away from Glasgow.
Having online coverage of all SPL games is great, even if we have to listen to Mr Preston. He's usually on that Open All Mics, which is awful - a bunch of cronies trading bad in-jokes and not really telling us what's going on.
Website is good at covering whole SPL, although OF stories usually sit top.
They gave prominence to McGhee's rant against fans this week and highlighted Motherwell being robbed by the Huns last night.
And there is usually a 10 minute video epic of Yogi rambling away on the site each week.
English gossip is always up first but Scottish one has been better this year - someone must be setting their alarm clock a bit earlier.
BBC Scotland TV coverage is pretty poor. Surely, there is someone better than Dougie Donnelly out there???
It goes back to commercial pressure. More people will tune into a Celtic or Rangers game, so we get a crap 0-0 from St Mirren v Gers, when Raith v Aberdeen or St J v Dundee Utd might have looked like more entertaining games when getting second choice behind Sky - who always go for OF away from home.
Oh, and Spotscene always ends with a terrible tune...
Guys like Chick, Donnelly and Traynor should be put out to grass but overall I think the service is pretty good.
We'll all be complaining when the Tories slash their funding in the next few years...