It’s sport we want, not chummy cheerleaders

WE deserve better, of course. And, if the natural reaction to such a complaint is to shrug and remark that the BBC have, at the highest level, long since stopped caring about what sports fans want in exchange for their licence fee, it’s worth remembering that viewers are not the only victims.

The Olympics, as overblown and open to ridicule as they may be, deserve more than to be treated as some opportunity for a mildly jingoistic outside broadcast by the Beeb’s light-entertainment division.

Without ever veering too close to the sort of Americanised lachrymosity to be found on specialist sports channels behind the satellite paywall, there has to be some sense that sport at this level matters.

Some hint, too, that the cheerleaders and flag wavers fronting the coverage understand the major issues being played out before the watching world.

The opening weekend does not, alas, bode well. Armchair supporters may all deserve medals for enduring the next couple of weeks in front of a large, medium or small screen.

From snide remarks about an underperforming Chinese swimmer having ‘not had her Weetabix’ to the almost total lack of analysis of the Lizzie Armitstead doping case — and the universally-expressed belief that ‘Our Lizzie’ has obviously done nothing wrong — the coverage to date has been alternately both myopic and scattergun in its approach.

The Armitstead situation makes even the most blinkered of Team GB supporters uneasy. Not in Beebland, where some examples of unblinking loyalty to the cause would shame the most blatant propagandist.

Among the few bright spots to date has been the cool and calm presenting of Hazel Irvine, an old-school broadcaster who’d sooner pull the plug than put herself in the way of the story.

And the BBC should be proud of the fact they still employ some of the finest commentators in the business. Cycling and swimming have, so far, been enhanced by the professionals wielding the main microphone in each case.

Yet the easy professionalism of Irvine, in particular, has served only to expose the utter silliness of others asked to ‘front’ the programming on the main two TV channels.

Sweet mercy, if Clare Balding gets any more giddy, she may well faint. Warbling on about the apparent suddenness of the South American sunset, chirruping excitedly about locals out fishing — yes, fishing, how amazing! — in the surf of Rio, she sounds less like a professional broadcaster and more like a hyped-up gap-year traveller.

That seems to be a popular approach among many of the Beeb’s simpering, silly presenters and pundits, many of whom appear to have one eye on their phones, waiting for the agent to call with the big-break invitation to join the Strictly line-up.

The whole format of the BBC 1 and BBC 4 programming over the weekend, meanwhile, left dedicated sports fans wondering if there was actually much happening on days one and two.

Too often, we seemed to be presented with Clare — everybody loves Clare, honestly — or some other loon barrelling around the Olympic Park interviewing volunteers and rattling on about people lining up to have their photo taken with the famous five rings.

Yeah, very good. But you see those buildings behind you? They’ve got actual sport going on inside them.

So, instead of keying up a fourth repeat of some race completed six hours ago, or filling in time with a pre-prepared package that offers more artistically-shot froth than actual intelligent analysis, just go to the live feed from any one of those venues.

Sure, if you really try — and if the red-button service isn’t let down by the ropey Virgin Media system you’re locked into for the next 18 years — you can find what you’re looking for on your telly box. Or you could go online.

But it should be easier than this. It should be about the sport, rather than a flirtatious back-andforth between presenters teasing each other about who does or doesn’t have the legs to wear shorts in the sunshine of Rio.