this guy is such an idoit!!!!

I'm not interested in air time that consists of some bloke that does'nt know one dog breed from another and which simply reinforces the public's perception that all dog exhibitors  are 'barking mad ' ! - lets face it - how much time do the BBC really dedicate for coverage of the showing - precious little - but a greater problem I think is that the Crufts committee collude in this  - year on year they have increased the number of 'additional' events that have gradually forced the exhibting of dogs to the periphery of what the show is all about - big dog firms like Pedigree are following suit - look at the way their focus is now on the rehoming of dogs rather than supporting  dog shows -

Yvonne

I think you are missing the point.  If the viewing figures aren't good enough then the show won't be televised.  The BBC are in the entertainment industry not minority hobbies, i.e. you didn't see the World Ice Cricket championships broadcast did you and yet we are this year's champions.  Think about the Olympics and all the sports that take place that we don't get to see at all.   

As far as Crufts is concerned, IMO it's up to those who show or breed who should be complaining to the KC about the type of show that is constructed for TV not the BBC who are only trying to keep the show on TV by appealing to as many as possible. 

I don't know after Crufts every year the man in the street that stops me to ask about the dogs asks why there is so little of the dogs seen on the programs, and complaining they never see any of their favourite breed.

In the 70's I remember seeing all the Obedience rounds the week after Crufts and also seeing dog judging several classes and the challenges in both smooth and rough collies, with someone explaining what the judge was looking for and quoting the relevant parts of the standard.  I was only about 10 at the time and it stayed with me so I had no trouble understanding what showing was about when I decided to get involved, though I showed small livestock first.

I think you are missing the point.  If the viewing figures aren't good enough then the show won't be televised.  The BBC are in the entertainment industry not minority hobbies

Cheryl: I dont think so, it's because they choose to show it live which necesitates it going out at peak time. As most of us are actually at Crufts I'm sure most exhibitors would prefer a serious, well presented programme aired at another time. There are certainly enough exhibitors and those who are interested in their pedigree dogs to warrant a programme at a more obscure time.
Dont forget the BEEB has BBC 1,  2,  3 and 4 now!!

He, he, Bishop, was he speaking?

>Cheryl: I dont think so, it's because they choose to show it live which necesitates it going out at peak time. As most of us are actually at Crufts I'm sure most exhibitors would prefer a serious, well presented programme aired at another time. There are certainly enough exhibitors and those who are interested in their pedigree dogs to warrant a programme at a more obscure time.

Dont forget the BEEB has BBC 1,  2,  3 and 4 now!!

Well, that's interesting because I thought there would be far more exhibitors that don't get to Crufts than those who do.  It's a much smaller world than I thought.

I think the rest of your statement is a discriminatory.

I think the rest of your statement is a discriminatory.

???? explain ????

Yvonne

>As most of us are actually at Crufts I'm sure most exhibitors would prefer a serious, well presented programme aired at another time. There are certainly enough exhibitors and those who are interested in their pedigree dogs to warrant a programme at a more obscure time.

This implies that only exhibitors and owners of pedigree dogs are interested in the serious showing side of Crufts.  This discriminates between those viewers who have pedigree dogs and those who don't have pedigrees dogs or indeed dogs. To put the programme on at an obscure time would deny many people (esp. children) with or without dogs, let alone pedigree dogs, the enjoyment of seeing the variety of breeds in competition. 

The BBC isn't putting the programme on for the benefit of the exhibitors, the programme is put on to entertain as many people with any interest in dogs as can be drawn to watch it.  Clearly the BBC doesn't think that purely showing with an unknown expert presenting attracts enough numbers. As I've already said, I can't see the logic is slating the BBC because they are in the business of racking up viewing numbers.  Besides, the accusations levelled at them re poor presenting can also be pointed towards any number of programmes that are a minority hobby/sport. 

As I've already said, it is the KC who should be lobbied.  I've said in the past that it should be they who promote what makes a good breeder and how the GP can find good breeders and well bred puppies.  Crufts could be an excellent platform in which to promote and advertise good practice but it just doesn't happen.  I can't for the life of me see how that's the BBC's responsibility.  It should be firmly at the front of anything that the KC does.  Remind me, where do they get their funding from?

>The BBC isn't putting the programme on for the benefit of the exhibitors, the programme is put on to entertain as many people with any interest in dogs as can be drawn to watch it.

The BBC takes the FA cup, or the Derby, or Wimbledon, or the Olympics, or the Open Golf seriously. Why make such a nonsense of Crufts?

How many people are involved with Darts, and what about snooker, that has always been shown seriously.

I don't agree.  The FA cup yes, the Derby yes, Wimbledon no, I think there is too much showing of silly people in the audience diminishing the seriousness of Wimbledon so no, I don't think Wimbledon is taken seriously enough.  I think the Olympics is taken seriously but we are only allowed to watch what the programmers want us to and the camera work in many sports is shameful so I don't think it is taken seriously enough.  What if you're serious about championship boxing, The Ashes or basketball and a host of other sports?  None of those are on the BBC.  When is the last time you saw World Badminton Championships, Judo, Gymnastics or ice skating?  There are plenty of sports that are not even shown so not taken the least bit seriously.

Anyway, I think Crufts is taken seriously, it's just BF that's got people upset and I think that's mountains and molehills.  PP is actually talking about the dogs when they go into the ring and I think he takes it all very seriously

>How many people are involved with Darts, and what about snooker, that has always been shown seriously.

Here are two sports where the commentators are professional players who have become popular personalities due to their years of success.  Clearly, this is an advantage because they do know their sports better than anyone.

>Here are two sports where the commentators are professional players who have become popular personalities due to their years of success. 

And what, exactly, is Ben Fogle's record in the 'serious' dog world? He makes a mockery of the thing.

Exactly if Darts can have serious presenters then so should we.

Like I've said before, I think having a pop at BF is barking up the wrong tree.  It's the KC you should be moaning at, they organise Crufts and they ultimately represent the breeders and exhibitors.  It's the KC who are making a mockery of the whole thing by not insisting on particular criteria that it's membership hold dear. Someone please remind me where do the KC get their funding from?

But surely it is the BBC who decide how they will cover the event not the KC.

The KC of course get their money from us as do the BBC, but of course plenty of people who are not interested in dogs contribute to the BBC.

If the Licence payer were to complain I would guess that most of them would say they don't want Crufts at all.  I would guess that most people without dogs are not particularly interested in Crufts and that would be a sound majority of the licence fee payers.  If Crufts the TV show became more technical and left out the fluffy bits and had professional exhibitors presenting who were unknown to the general public I guess you would lose another proportion of the licence fee payers.  The BBC's brief is to attract viewers not alienate them.

I would think that the BBC does decide how to cover the event but I think they are not so arrogant as to totally ignore reasonable suggestions by the body that runs the event, especially if it is for the good of those it is representing. 

>It's the KC you should be moaning at, they organise Crufts and they ultimately represent the breeders and exhibitors.

The KC organises and runs the show itself. The BBC run the TV presentation, and have sole control of the content of the programmes.

Well, be careful what you wish for.  The BBC may well take your complaints on board and hire experts such as VS and MM.  Perhaps the amiable BF would be better the devil you know.

What would be wrong with having the previous years group judges commenting on that group the following year.

With 7 million plus dogs in this country most of them having more than one human family member I think there would be sufficient viewers, certainly more than have a real interest in Darts or snooker.

Countryfile is on every Sunday, and how many people does that represent, but lots of us townies love to watch it. 

Found thsi about last years program "So the preview programme transmitted last night.........Over two million people tuned in"  More here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/birmingham/content/articles/2007/02/16/crufts_producer_blog_feature.shtml

Countryfile is on every Sunday, and how many people does that represent, but lots of us townies love to watch it. 

Well said Barbara.

With you on that Pauline loving the Aero advert man. I could stare at him all day! lol

Where were you yesterday you missed a nice show???

Well said???

>I'm sure most exhibitors would prefer a serious, well presented programme aired at another time. There are certainly enough exhibitors and those who are interested in their pedigree dogs to warrant a programme at a more obscure time

That tells us that you would prefer to exclude people

Barbara, I quite agree that it would be preferable for ex-judges or like to present.  I wonder why they don't?  I think that would be a valid question to ask the BBC.  It might be that there are no ex-judges that want to do it.  Presenting isn't as easy as it looks (I can hear the gasps of disbelief ) I've seen the wittiest and most articulate people turn into monotone zombies when faced with an audience.

>Countryfile is on every Sunday, and how many people does that represent, but lots of us townies love to watch it.

I'm confused now, what is it that people want from the programme?  I thought it was BF that was the problem?

I think what some people are saying is that the audience for Crufts is too small and without dumbing it down with people like BF it would not attract enough viewers.

Also why not have all day 'relevant' coverage like the Golf and Wimbledon?  These programs are designed fro the hard core fans and the highlights programs and final for the mildly interested. 

The dog World contains a multitude of talents because it is a hobby, many raconteurs and after dinner speakers, as well as people who speak as part of their jobs.  Most senior judges are well used to public speaking in their careers giving seminars or after show speeches etc.

Mike Stockman (RIP) was always good and knowledgeable, with his veterinary background as well as show background.  I regret he was unable to fulfil his last Elkhound judging appointment at Crufts due to ill health.

>Presenting isn't as easy as it looks

As demonstrated amply by BF! He's okay with a script and a good editor, but he's rubbish at live commentary.

>what is it that people want from the programme?

Quite simply, the Dog Show! That's what it's all about - or what it's supposed to be all about! I'd like to see a whole class of the different breeds being judged - I'd like each breed judge going over their BoB and explaining what they were looking for and what they found, compared to others in the line-up. The best we can hope for is a brief pan shot of all the BoBs in the group, with a description of each and the history of each breed.

Instead, we're fobbed off with a dumbed-down shopping-channel show, with a passing giggle at the weirdos with their funny-looking dogs., then a quick look at the cut for the Group judging. Imagine the response if, for the FA cup final, there were just shots of the crowd, previously-recorded interviews with fans, and then five minutes of edited highlights of the action on the pitch!

At last we're getting somewhere.

This thread started with foot stamping and a flurry of complaints to the BBC about BF.  Petty, IMO.  Rather than complain about what you don't like, try appealing to the BBC about the constructive changes that could be made to improve the programme that you think would appeal to the general masses.  That's what the BBC wants - b*ms on seats!

Crufts could be much more informative and interesting if you had the things you suggest JG.  I would be glued if I thought I would see time dedicated to BoBs in the way you describe.  I think this would be difficult to do live though but something that would add value nevertheless.

Perhaps it's time to run a poll on here and see what people actually want from the programme rather than what they don't want.

>try appealing to the BBC about the constructive changes that could be made to improve the programme that you think would appeal to the general masses.

Erm ... I've been suggesting that programme layout to the BBC for about 8 years now! Perhaps if everyone could also contact them and make similar suggestions they might take more notice!

With the number of rings at Crufts (not huge) it should not be impossible to have enough camera to film the challenges, and then BOB for most breeds.

The ones that fitted into the live format could be shown as they happened with the rest aired later (after the live groups).

On other programs we get, and lets now go to, so it would be, now lets see the bitch challenge for such and such breed, watch the Challenge for BOB, and then move onto another breed showing the dog challenge, then just the BOB of another etc, so that a picture of how dogs were judges could be built up.

they seem able to do this for the flyball, showing a heat, then a semi, and final etc.  With Obedience they could show a sample round and then later the top few rounds and explain how the points are lost.  We used to get a whole program like that a few weeks after Crufts covering Obedience.

This might take away all this, ti must be fixed as how can the presenters predict possible winners.  the gen public don't realise the dogs have been shown all year and some dogs have risen consistently to the top in their breeds so are bound to be in with a good chance if on form.

I think most people must think the judging is like human Beauty pageants, entirely a matter of what a judge likes, without anyone understanding a standard.

Most people watching football know goals equals winning.  Ice skating is marked on technical merit (breed standard if you please) and artistic interpretation (performance, though this should only be like a tie break between good dogs in breed judging, but more relevant in groups and BIS.)

Do they reply?  If not, they probably won't reply to a number of individual suggestions.  This is why I think the KC should be lobbied and the suggestions come from them

I get the bog-standard "Thank you for your interest - your views are important to us" reply, as they scrumple my letter (yes, I use real paper and a stamp, because a computer can't send an automated reply so easily!).

Perhaps if we all lobby the BBC and the KC we might be listened to ...

As most people have digital why don't they do as at Wimbledon - pick which match/ring you want to watch via the 'red button'.  They always have about 4 or 5 tennis matches on at any particular time in the early rounds, with the 'main' match being on the BB1 or BB2.  I see no reason why this couldn't be applied to Crufts (unless it something to do with viewing figures etc etc)

Red buttons - that is a great idea because it must be a nightmare trying to synchronize the various events within the larger event what with one running a bit early and another a bit late etc. The red buttons would seem to be a good solution.

The guy is a fool!

I did say when he started to give him a break and see how he got on later on. So far he is still clueless and has made to sign of improving anytime soon.

I hold no brief at all for BF, and I agree he is not the best choice to present Crufts, however, amongst other things, on this thread he has been referred to as an idiot and a fool. May I respectfully say, I suspect he is not, mis-guided  definately, but not a fool!!
He most certainly makes a very nice income from his various TV programs.

Best wishes.

I would say he is a fool. Anyone that takes up any job, should know what they are doing/saying. Now if you can't do this you are not mis-guided you are just incompetent and should be sacked. If you don't get the sack and get an other shot at it, you should do what ever it takes to keep that job. Now after more chances you would be classed as fool. This is after all a job, thus making him an incompetent fool!!

Surely, in this instance, the employer is the fool!! BF is laughing all the way to the bank.

Yes, you would be correct. But as he is the man that we see we would be correct to call him a fool, as well as the BBC

But was he employed to be a dog expert? I suspect not, he must be fulfilling his contract or else they would have replaced him by now.

If he gives out false information and doesn't correct it even when his mistake is pointed out, then he's truly an ass.

It isnt that he isnt a dog expert thats the problem though.. Matt Baker isnt any more of a dog expert than Ben Fogle... (they ought be pretty even really, MB being from a farming background and BF with his dad being a vet)..

The difference is, Matt Baker is very comfortable with live tv and presenting, Ben Fogle is absolutely NOT comfortable or good at live tv or presenting - so despite neither of them being particularly dog expert-ish... Matt comes across relaxed and if he DOES make a gaffe, he sorts it out... when Ben does he flusters and cant dig himself out of a hole.

Thats what i dont like about BF.. its just not pleasant to watch him stumbling and falling all over himself, not being able to read the auto cue, not knowing if its his turn to speak or which camera to look at. Makes me cringe!

Yes, Matt Baker's years of presenting Blue Peter have made him very relaxed in front of the cameras, and able to cope with anything that comes his way. BF is good with a learned script and an good editor, but simply hopeless when he has to wing it.

Check out the link below, seems BF and the favourite at the moment, I voted for Matt! Was going to vote for W&G lol!

http://www.crufts.org.uk/cgi-bin/quiz.cgi?quiz_id=5&page=result

Lets not foget that MB IS a presenter. BF was just a guy who appeared on a reality TV programme and got lucky. He's not bad at presenting for an amatuer and someone whos had no training.

>He's not bad at presenting for an amatuer and someone whos had no training.

He's been doing TV presenting for about 6 years now - mainly daytime TV so many people don't realise it! How much training does he need?

Its not professional training tho is it? Matt went to stage school

'On the job' training is supposed to be better than theoretical.

'On the job' training is supposed to be better than theoretical.

This I guess depends on what you are training at.

Acting and presenting training will be mostly roleplaying, doing plays, small productions etc  which allows for continual guidenace, correction and repeated practice, it also invoice massive amounts of confidence boosting training which I think Ben lacks a little at times in his presenting.  I think training as an actor or presenter and more so from a young age is very important to the persons success and confidence. 

He is however a fairly nice guy and a dog lover

He did well on the show were he dragged a load of people over the desert whatever it was called

Or even guidance. Wished the edit button lasted a bit longer

Trevor

I felt sick when I read this

same with Pedigree, look at the way their focus is now on the rehoming of dogs rather than supporting  dog shows -

You saying its bad to help rehome sheltered dogs rather then advertise a show which is already known internationally and attracts thousands upon thousands of people a year? Sorry to bring this statement up so late after it was posted but I was pretty horrified by what he had said as its a very selfish remark saying pedigree are doing bad by sponsering the rehoming dogs rather then advertise dog shows???

And I think that the bloke on Crufts gives some much needed fun and energy to the points where they are sitting just talking on the sofa, i love ben fogle being in it, he makes it alot more fun if you are learning.

Edited to add - You never see the SBT's showing, my breed never get any air time!