(Original post by Drewski)
OK, my answer was flippant and designed to be humourous, not to be taken seriously by the anti-humour brigade.
I didn't watch all the coverage, but that's only because I was at work. Are you a boring old fart? Only in that you're complaining so vociferously. Maybe I have an unfair bias in knowing a bit about how logistically nightmarish these activities are.
You want the real answer?
The BBC has an obligation to show things of public interest
. That means events like this have to presented in a way that makes them enjoyable for the majority of viewers. Complain all you want, but the majority of the British viewing population are simpering, small-minded, celebrity obsessed simpletons who need things explained in very simple terms of as few syllables as possible. This doesn't match your requirements. Not a lot the Beeb can do about that, they cater to tha majority, some people are always going to be left out.
Second. It's live tv. Things don't go flawlessly ever
. No matter how much practise, how much rehearsal or experience that may have built up these will never be without mistakes. That's half the fun, frankly.
Third. It's a known issue that the presenters are reading out from prepared scripts. "x is here from soandso, they did blah and are represnting whatshisname.." They've been told when they expect x to be on screen, but don't know
. So they say it anyway and hope the director can find the right picture at the right time. More often than not, they can't. The TV director has a fair few feeds coming in to pick between, they're not always going to have the right shot.
Finally, to your bit about pre-recorded segments, the Beeb got into a lot of [unjustified, imo] trouble when it did just that in other shows, why would it freely court negative press again just as a contingency?
Frankly, for all the faults the Beeb throws up at events like this, I'd far rather they be in charge than ITV who would no doubt cut to an ad just when things started happening.