Analysis: Let’s talk about TMC

Typically, sporting events take place in confined spaces, such as football, tennis, and cricket. Motor racing in unique in its nature, it is unlike any other sport. Vehicles, on both two and four wheels, race around a large perimeter under timed conditions in the name of sport.

The latter is a greater logistical challenge than the former, on all fronts, including broadcasting the event.

In stadium-based sports, it is near impossible for the television director to miss the key action. The trajectory of the football determines what the director does next, a rule that applies for every single football match irrespective of whether it is the biggest game in the world, or the local Sunday league game down the road.

When you break it down like that, directing the UEFA Champions League final between Liverpool and Real Madrid is no different to directing the League 2 play-off final between Exeter and Coventry (notwithstanding the commercial requirements for both events). Both contain largely the same parameters.

A freelancer could direct a football match one week and a three-hour tennis game the next, without having specialist knowledge of either event.

In contrast, motor racing requires cameras at every corner to track the cars or bikes around the circuit. A director needs specialist knowledge of the track, the series, and the battles likely to emerge, which is an attribute you are unlikely to learn overnight.

“With motor sport, once you’ve gone around one corner, the cameras have got to be ready to pick up on the next corner, and so on,” explains Richard Coventry, who is British Superbikes’ television director.

“If someone makes a mistake, or goes to the wrong bike, then we’ve got to correct it and pick up further down the line. Motor sport is more difficult I would say to cover than field sport, although on a football match you can have upwards of twenty cameras, but you wouldn’t use them all in the same way.”

“In football, you could stay on the same shot for three or four minutes, it’s impossible to do that at a motor racing circuit unless you place a camera high-up at Knockhill!”

From local hosts to centralisation
Formula 1 races were produced by the local television broadcaster of the time up until the mid-2000’s.

The BBC directed the British Grand Prix until 1996, with ITV taking over from 1997. The direction varied dramatically from race to race. ITV were ahead of its time, others focused on the home town stars further down the field, and some simply struggled to cope with the ever-changing F1 world.

2018 Monaco GP - new tunnel camera.png
Looking towards Mercedes driver Valterri Bottas from the new camera position towards the end of Monaco’s tunnel.

Standards improved as Formula One Management wrestled control away from local broadcasters, giving fans a consistent view of the product throughout the year. The Japanese Grand Prix was the penultimate race to fall out of local control, Fuji Television last produced the race in 2011. One race though has remained with the local broadcaster: the prestigious Monaco Grand Prix.

Tele Monte Carlo continues to produce the Monaco round of the championship, meaning that the level of expertise on-hand is lower than at the other twenty races in the calendar. This has always been an issue but has become exasperated in recent years as FOM have centralised production.

Is it no coincidence that some consider Monaco to be one of the worst races in the calendar for action? Without turning this into a piece about the racing: yes, Monaco does not feature as much overtaking as other races on the calendar, due to the nature of the street circuit, which has been the case for years.

But, when fans have called as race ‘boring’, you need to ask what draws them to that conclusion. Formula 1 attracts in excess 50 million viewers worldwide per race, all of them watching the same World Feed. Fans can only judge the race based upon the angles the producer chooses to air.

We assume that the production team have chosen the best angles, based on the expertise of those around them. Most of the time, FOM does the job well, because they have the experts there. TMC however do not cover the sport throughout the year in the same way FOM does, and therefore do not have as many experts on-hand.

For all the criticism I do give FOM, their direction generally feels well-defined, whereas TMC’s product throughout the years during the Monaco Grand Prix weekend is rough around the edges.

On their Fan Voice site (login required), FOM have outlined how the split between them and TMC works. TMC are responsible for “directing the world feed, choosing where the cameras and microphones are, selecting which subject to follow, doing all the replays.”

In turn, FOM are responsible for “onboard cameras and all [of the] trackside infrastructure are our bag, as is all the official timing, the graphics.” The site also talks about the barriers this presents, such as the inevitable language barrier.

The Monaco problem
The problems for TMC encompass the entire weekend. Starting with practice and qualifying, TMC missed crucial laps, with Daniel Ricciardo’s initial lap record omitted from the World Feed, commentators having to refer to the timing screens to try to build the excitement level.

Following qualifying, it was clear where the two main storylines sat heading into the race. The first: would Ricciardo hold on to claim the victory that slipped away from him in 2016; and secondly, how far would Ricciardo’s team-mate Max Verstappen climb through the field?

From the very first lap, the trajectory of the direction went south. The timing graphics displayed a yellow flag symbol, indicating danger, following a collision between a Force India car and Toro Rosso driver Brendon Hartley.

2018 Monaco GP - hairpin exit.png
Daniel Ricciardo tackles Monaco’s Loews hairpin. This shot is fine, but the camera angles before and after are the same long distance shots as yester-year, with a focus on the surrounding advertising.

The symbol remained on-screen for the duration of the first lap, but TMC did not switch away from the leading contingent (although team radio from Hartley was played into coverage). At any other event, FOM would have jumped on-board with Hartley to show the viewers the extent of the damage, but not here. TMC’s World Feed output also did not capture the damage initially, FOM choosing to show this footage on its pit lane channel following its absence from the main feed.

It felt like the director was reluctant to switch attention away from the front-runners and towards Verstappen, failing to capture his moves on Ericsson and Hartley live. The on-screen timing graphics falling over at several points during the Grand Prix did not help, although it is unclear whether the blame here lies with FOM or TMC. But either way, it added to the poor presentation of the race, as a fan, I found it frankly frustrating to watch.

The timing pages should guide the production team towards the next on-track action, but TMC were seemingly not using this as a basis, something that became increasingly apparent in the latter stages as they failed to show how the likes of Esteban Ocon closed on the front-runners with relative ease. TMC failed to portray the sense of jeopardy that Monaco is meant to present.

On a brighter note, TMC were on-board Charles Leclerc’s Sauber as his brakes failed, smashing into Hartley’s Toro Rosso; whilst the introduction of a camera angle towards the end of the tunnel provided fantastic shots throughout the race weekend.

However, the ‘now available for live’ camera on the inside of Loews hairpin, was poor. The actual camera angle is good, but in the context of the camera angles before and after, switching from a camera angle with a car predominately in shot, to another predominately on advertising was jarring.

A good motor racing director can turn an average race into something watchable and engaging. A bad director on the other hand can persuade viewers to turn off an average race, and there is no doubt in my mind that TMC leans into the latter category.

Compared with motor racing, there are less variables with directing a football or tennis game, which makes the job of directing a motor race more critical than other sporting events.

If Liberty Media wants Monaco to receive a better rapport from fans watching the show, one step it desperately needs to take is to wrestle control off TMC, and to bring control of the Monaco World Feed in-house.

Advertisements

8 thoughts on “Analysis: Let’s talk about TMC

  1. Monaco is a great test of skill for the drivers, particularly in qualifying, but as a race it’s been a borefest for as long as I can remember. There’s no doubt that the direction was poor, but the best directors in the world couldn’t make Monaco interesting in terms of racing.
    What dragged it down even further was Ocon stopping for a coffee to let Hamilton past, the most blatant inter-team shuffling I’ve seen for a long time.
    Then came James Allen describing the move as Hamilton just getting better traction going into the tunnel!
    I don’t know why there’s been so much criticism about last Sunday, it was just par for the course.

  2. The bigger issue unfortunately lies with the freedoms given to ACM in their archaic contract. It is ACM who choose TMC as their broadcast partner, and unless Liberty is somehow able to wrestle more control over the Monaco event as a whole, it is unlikely to see change for a while.

    Playing devil’s advocate for a moment, Monaco having it’s own TV production seperate from FOM makes sense logistically for the circuit. They also have the Historic (or Formula E) race two weeks prior, for which TV coverage is also required.

    Thus the solution in my view would be for TMC to continue to supply and manage the OB, but for FOM to staff the gallery when the F1 circus rolls in. This is a common practice, and allows more flexibilty without compromising the logistics.

  3. You’ve only got to look at some of the old F1 Digital+ footage from Monaco circa 2000, to see the difference between a TMC and FOM production.

  4. “A good motor racing director can turn an average race into something watchable and engaging. A bad director on the other hand can persuade viewers to turn off an average race, and there is no doubt in my mind that TMC leans into the latter category.”

    I agree and there’s no better example of that than back when we had 2 broadcast’s between 1997-2002, The locally produced world-feed & the F1 Digital+ service run by FOM.

    There were races back then where i’d watch the locally produced world-feed on ITV & find a race fairly dull yet watch a recording of the F1 Digital+ broadcast a few days later & find the race more enjoyable because of the way FOM directed the F1 Digital+ broadcast (Better camera angles, Focusing on the closest fight for position etc…).

  5. I agree so much with StefMeister’s last paragraph.

    With the exception of the Leclerc & Hartley collision, an incident would happen on-track, the “yellow flag” graphic would show and the director rarely showed what happened… even if some of the yellow flags were drivers simply misjudging their entry into Sainte Devote.

    One major irritant for me was the constant camera zooming to perfectly frame the circuit-side advertising [especially the camera following the cars from Turns 6-7 [Hotel Hairpin] and Turn 8 [Portier to Tunnel Entrance]

  6. I’m not sure any director could’ve saved the coverage of last weekend’s race – nevermind lack of passing, I don’t recall a single ATTEMPTED pass from anyone in the top six or even any of them weaving behind in an effort to distract someone in their mirrors.

    They simply weren’t close to each other at all at any point with the possible exception of Seb getting to around a second on Ricciardo for a spell when he experienced his loss of power. Channel 4’s commentary team of Edwards and Coulthard kept suggesting Vettel was saving his tyres for a late charge but that simply wasn’t the case and the attack didn’t come.

    As for the first lap incident with Hartley, I think most viewers would’ve been upset if they had cut away as the first couple of minutes was pretty much as close as Vettel was to Ricciardo at any point over the next 90 minutes. Even when FOM are in charge for the other races, it’s often three or four laps before they cut back to what’s already happened with the backmarkers.

    There was definitely room for improvement in the coverage, but the ‘race’ itself highlighted perfectly the insurmountable issues with Monaco as a track. Alonso, Hamilton and Jolyon Edwards in his BBC column weren’t basing their criticism of the race on the TV coverage.

  7. Small point; the camera in the tunnel referred to as ‘new’ is no such thing. It’s been there for years – it’s just had very little use.
    The jib camera in front of the Fairmont hotel (inside the hairpin below Mirabeau) was new, at least to the main feed. You could almost tell this from how the advertising hoardings weren’t well positioned for it (although they tried to address this ‘on the fly’ with an extra Johnnie Walker banner placed there after qualifying).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.