“Our” BBC? Really?

Does this happen in cricket, football too. They seem to be on all the time? The only sport I watch is tennis so I don’t take much notice of the others.
I was happy with the coverage of Queens but I do have iPlayer and didn’t give any thought to those who don’t have it.

Has Wimbledon even started?

Wimbledon 30th June

Streaming is the process of receiving digital images and sound. All TV is streamed whether it’s watched live or on demand and has been for the last 13 years.

Wimbledon coverage:

Monday 30 June

BBC1
Four hours coverage from 14:00 to 18:00.
Break for News.
Three hours coverage from 19:00 to 22:00.

BBC2
Eight and half hours of coverage from 10:30 to 19:00.
An hour of highlights from 23:55 to 0:55.

Sixteen and a half hours of coverage

Tuesday 1 July

BBC1
Four hours coverage from 14:00 to 18:00.
Break for News.
Three hours coverage from 19:00 to 22:00.

BBC2
Eight hours of coverage from 10:30 to 19:00.
An hour of highlights from 23:00 to 0:00.

Sixteen hours of coverage.

The News is bound to have some highlights too.

The online digital schedules don’t go beyond next Tuesday but I suspect it’s much of the same for two weeks.

Sixteen hours a day - a third of the output on the two main BBC channels. Continuous coverage from 10:30 in the morning to 22:00 at night plus highlights just an hour later is more than enough.

I'd rather have sport streamed as interrupt regular programmes so that people who watch them all year round have to find other ways to watch to accommodate a football match or whatever. Why shouldn't sports fans be the ones being inconvenienced?

Ideally, a BBC Sport channel that screened things live would be great, but I guess that's too expensive.

Silverbrooks

Streaming is the process of receiving digital images and sound. All TV is streamed whether it’s watched live or on demand and has been for the last 13 years.

Wimbledon coverage:

Monday 30 June

BBC1
Four hours coverage from 14:00 to 18:00.
Break for News.
Three hours coverage from 19:00 to 22:00.

BBC2
Eight and half hours of coverage from 10:30 to 19:00.
An hour of highlights from 23:55 to 0:55.

Sixteen and a half hours of coverage

Tuesday 1 July

BBC1
Four hours coverage from 14:00 to 18:00.
Break for News.
Three hours coverage from 19:00 to 22:00.

BBC2
Eight hours of coverage from 10:30 to 19:00.
An hour of highlights from 23:00 to 0:00.

Sixteen hours of coverage.

The News is bound to have some highlights too.

The online digital schedules don’t go beyond next Tuesday but I suspect it’s much of the same for two weeks.

Sixteen hours a day - a third of the output on the two main BBC channels. Continuous coverage from 10:30 in the morning to 22:00 at night plus highlights just an hour later is more than enough.

Seems plenty to me!

Streaming is the process of receiving digital images and sound. All TV is streamed whether it’s watched live or on demand and has been for the last 13 year.
You know what I mean so no need to be so dismissive
My point is that for those who may for whatever reason not be able to watch the tennis ‘live”, late at night is a pretty poor substitute when other less topical programmes are given superior billing.
It was also nothing to do with the number of hours of sports coverage.

But why should someone wanting to watch (eg) tennis take priority over someone who regularly watches (eg) Eastenders?

Both are just a viewing preference, and both people pay the same for their licence. It's slightly different on ITV where the regular viewers subsidise the sport by increasing viewing figures and bringing in advertisers all year round, but even there sport takes precedence. I don't understand the logic.

It is indeed a pretty poor substitute and I am not happy about it.

Grandmadinosaur

It is indeed a pretty poor substitute and I am not happy about it.

But why should your preference for watching live sport trump mine for watching something else?

And why shouldn’t mine for tennis that is only two weeks of the year? Cant please everyone. I watch very little TV anyway but look forward to Wimbledon.

It is only two weeks of the year not like soaps etc.

No reason why either of us should be prioritised over the other, but it is the sport that always takes precedence, and if you rarely watch TV you aren't providing the viewing figures for the commercial channels that pay (via ads) for the sport. As I said, that doesn't apply to BBC though.

Doodledog

No reason why either of us should be prioritised over the other, but it is the sport that always takes precedence, and if you rarely watch TV you aren't providing the viewing figures for the commercial channels that pay (via ads) for the sport. As I said, that doesn't apply to BBC though.

"Today at Wimbledon" is NOT live sport ,but a look back at or summary of the day's play.
Like Match of the Day or Test Match Special are or were. Is it really unfair to prioritise a repeat of eg Upstart Crow over something topical?

no need to be so dismissive

I was not. I was stating fact. You asked:

Is this part of a brave new world future where the only tv is streamed I wonder.

I merely pointed out that all TV is streamed and has been since 2012. It isn’t the future nor is it dystopian.

From next Monday between BBC1 and BBC there is non stop Wimbledon coverage from ten thirty in the morning until ten at night and then more just one hour later.

Unless some rivetting live play is still going on at ten in the evening, the coverage up to that time is likely to include highlights from the day’s play anyway.

It really is enough to give a third of the combined BBC1 and BBC2 schedules for two weeks to an event that doesn’t interest everybody and, moreover, inconveniences those who see their favourite regular programmes moved.

What about those people who may not have access to on-demand services?

Hopefully, anyone desperate to watch the highlights who cannot or does not want to stay up that late and doesn’t have access to on-demand services will have some kind of recording device e.g. a Humax box they can set.

Well that’s all right then.
Your understanding is noted.

I wish they d have a darned sports channel for all the various sport lovers and leave the rest of us to watch our drivel

BlueBelle - can we start a club for people who think like we do?? I am sick to death of constant sport, fed up to the back teeth of my favourite soaps etc being moved to suit the powers that be. They don’t give a toss about the viewers, and never will.
My tv broke down recently and I had no tv for a week. I hate watching on my iPad, so I didn’t bother. To my surprise, I found I didn’t miss it at all.
I think that is why I, and a lot of others are giving up on tv and finding other things to do instead.

The BBC doesn’t have enough rights to sporting events to fill a channel.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sports_broadcasting_contracts_in_the_United_Kingdom#cite_note-25

BlueBelle

I wish they d have a darned sports channel for all the various sport lovers and leave the rest of us to watch our drivel

I'm in the club. Regular viewers are sidelined every time. I've nothing against people watching sport, but don't think it should always be prioritised. As I say, on commercial channels it is the regulars who bring in the advertising revenue that pays for the programmes, including sport.

I don't actually watch much live TV as I prefer to binge back to back when I watch; but it's maddening when I sit down to see something only to find that it's been moved.

This was in Metro:

metro.co.uk/2025/06/10/andrew-castle-urges-bbc-keep-wimbledon-tv-rights-tnt-sports-23375735/

Andrew Castle has urged the BBC to keep their Wimbledon TV rights.

The BBC have been showing Wimbledon in the UK since 1937 but TNT Sports have become the secondary broadcaster for 2025.

(TNT was formerly BT Sports and can be watched though BT, Sky and Virgin).

TNT Sports have taken over the daily 90-minute highlights show, aired at the end of each day’s play, and will also be showing the singles finals along with the BBC, with viewers able to watch those matches on either channel.

As things stand, Wimbledon singles finals are a Category A event under Ofcom, meaning that live coverage must be made available on free-to-air channels like the BBC.

TNT Sports have not signalled interest in being the main broadcaster.

Wimbledon reportedly costs the BBC around £60m a year and a deal is currently in place to keep them as the principal broadcaster until 2027.

TNT Sports meanwhile, have the UK rights to show the Australian Open and French Open. The US Open rights are owned by Sky Sports in the UK.

I found that my news programme on a Sunday morning on BBC 1 had been moved to BBC2 for Match of the Day going over matches from the previous day.
Surely current news should be more important than yesterday's football.
Why can't that go on BBC2.
Bah humbug!

I confess, I am so cross when football is shown at a time I usually watch tv, but tennis ? yes please

And I thought this was such an innocuous topic, safe even.
GN is not the friendly environment it once was- stimulating ,plenty of lively discussion but not patronising, sneering or openly confrontational.
This is NOT aimed at any particular poster (especially not whoever immediately precedes my post) but when you have to take a deep breath and put your big girl pants on before opening your mouth... well its no longer for me.

RosieandherMaw

And I thought this was such an innocuous topic, safe even.
GN is not the friendly environment it once was- stimulating ,plenty of lively discussion but not patronising, sneering or openly confrontational.
This is NOT aimed at any particular poster (especially not whoever immediately precedes my post) but when you have to take a deep breath and put your big girl pants on before opening your mouth... well its no longer for me.

In that case I wish I had joined earlier than a couple of years ago🤔
There do seem to be many cross patches around.
I can’t comment about tennis as I never watch it but the Beeb isn’t as it used to be that’s for sure.