Not quite sure if it’s worth its own follow-up post to the original S1 one, but the first of two Sport Relief specials airs this evening from 8:30pm. I don’t know if S2 proper is following straight after this mini-run or what. As we’ve said previously, as a 30 minute light shoulder-peak snack it was surprisingly quite good, whether it will work in a slightly longer slot in the middle of primetime remains to be seen.
Iconic One Theme | Powered by Wordpress
Catchpoint for sports relief is actually a 2 part mini-series. continues next Sat at 8:45 with Graeme Swann & Rachel Parris vs Sam Quek & Mark Watson.
Also interestingly this edition is apparently being hosted by Greg James.
The description for next week’s Catchpoint on the BBC programme page says it’s Paddy McGuinness, but the credits say it’s Greg James. More likely that Greg James will be presenting a Sport Relief insert within Catchpoint.
Surely Paddy must be hosting as these must of been recorded back to back. but then if you look at the credits for ep 1 it does say Presenter Paddy McGuinness so either the description has been written wrong which can be possible or the credits are wrong.
This edition is woefully cast and miscast. Who can catch a ball better: an England netball player or Susan Calman?
The format tweaks are appreciated, but it’d be nice if they could get the format right before it hits the air, hmm?
To be fair, that a game can come down to basically who knew more rather than catching ability in the end is probably to its credit.
I think the show starts off better with the first two catches, but Double Catch really gnaws at me – feels extremely bitty and slow, and I’m not sure it’s quite fair if the correct answers are basically on complete opposite ends of the studio – I get that you can fudge the questions so this wouldn’t be the case, but it ought to be a *possible* use of the question space. Otherwise it’s mainly Paddy listing a load of things then the team taking twice as long to discuss the question, feels like it goes on forever.
Quick Catch remains fun and I like the new mechanic even if it really means that the losing team only ever has to catch one or two more balls than the winning ones to win the whole thing. I think it would be funner and more panicky if, on a missed catch, it just ran straight on to the next question with the same person, the clock only stopping when a ball gets caught.
I like the way the new endgame uses the stakes (even if it’s just Double Catch again), I just can’t help but think all the Double questions throughout ought to have them both catching simultaneously although I’m not sure how you’d film and edit that.
Just noticed a post of mine in the S1 thread that I’d forgotten about:
“I was thinking if the endgame would be better with a fundamental redesign. One thing that bothered me last week is that they’ve got two players but only one actually participates in the climax; what if they ditched the whole ‘removing answers’ stuff and instead asked two questions on the same board, so each player will have one ball to catch. Give ’em a minute to discuss and get into position, with the balls dropping on zero. No balls caught, half prize awarded; one ball, you win your pot, both balls, you win the jackpot. It means both players get to participate in the final, and crucially, it actually gives the final a distinguishing feature compared to the previous rounds.”
…I’ll assume the cheque’s in the post, right?