BBC BLOGS - Sport Editors
« Previous | Main | Next »

Live page issues

Post categories:

Ben Gallop Ben Gallop | 14:15 UK time, Monday, 13 February 2012

I'm sure regular users of the site will have noticed that we are having technical problems with the live text commentary pages.

These became apparent over the weekend and continue to affect our live text pages.

We are hard at work to resolve this, please bear with us while we do so.

In the meantime, Sportsday Live is being published via a page which requires users to hit 'refresh' for updates.

But to ensure we can still deliver frequent dynamic text and scores updates from the England cricket team's series with Pakistan we are using an older version of our auto-updating live pages.

We will revert to our new-look dynamic pages across the site as soon as the technical problems have been resolved.

Thank you for your patience.


  • Comment number 1.

    Also related to the new BBC Sport website, is there any reason why there's no longer a RSS feed on the BBC Football Gossip page? ( ) It used to be here ( ) but hasn't been updated since 1st February.

  • Comment number 2.

    "We will revert to our new-look dynamic pages across the site as soon as the technical problems have been resolved."

    Let's hope the problems are insoluble in that case; the cricket actually works now.

  • Comment number 3.

    I when saw the layout for the live update for the cricket scores today I let out a small cheer. came on to the editors blog to make a thank you comment. Now it is a slightly changed comment- please please keep it this way.

  • Comment number 4.

    "We will revert to our new-look dynamic pages across the site as soon as the technical problems have been resolved."

    In that case I hope the problems last forever and spread to all the other sports. The cricket page is a joy to read now its gone back to the old version.

  • Comment number 5.

    How long has it taken for you to realise what an awful mess you have made and then to revert back to normal with the Cricket is a godsend - revert the whole lot! Do you realise what you are putting all us sports fans through with your ill conceived site and it's total lack of useability. A deep meaning apology is warranted and for pity's sake let us have our beloved old format back NOW! Can you not at least say sorry for what you have done, waste of feepayers money. DISGUSTING..

  • Comment number 6.

    At 11:34 9th Feb 2012, Cait ORiordan wrote:
    @John Winfield (34) The old website was published on a different publishing system and it is not possible for us to run both the old and new sites in parallel.

    Ben Gallop | 14:15 UK time, Monday, 13 February 2012
    But to ensure we can still deliver frequent dynamic text and scores updates from the England cricket team's series with Pakistan we are using an older version of our auto-updating live pages.


    So which of the above is true? Clearly you can go back to the old site if you need to.

  • Comment number 7.

    Please, please, please do not revert to your 'new look dynamic pages'. It has been an absolute delight to once again see the clear, uncluttered and reliable old format.

    It proves you can revert to something that the vast majority of your licence-fee paying users want. Please do the same with the rest of the sports pages A.S.A.P.

  • Comment number 8.

    Hmmm, you have thought this problem might have shown up in testing, or perhaps have been mentioned by the mysterious 1600 (blind?) people who apparently loved the new site.

    Either way, it's clear that you've launched a site that is currently not fit for purpose.

    It seems there's no intention to listen to the overwhelming amount of requests to amend the site's terrible layout or (even better) return to the old site, but is there at least a chance of an apology?

  • Comment number 9.

    You're having problems with a lot more than the live text pages, and these problems have not only become apparent over the weekend. Have you not been reading the blog feedback?

    The live scores section for example is a massive retrograde step from the simple vidiprinter. This new feature now requires repeated clicking and page changes to stay on top of everything across all the football divisions and competitions, and this is just one example of the total mess that has been made of what was one of the best, if not the best, sports sites on the web. You should feel embarrassed.

  • Comment number 10.

    Another triumph for the new site!

  • Comment number 11.


    "We will revert to our new-look dynamic pages across the site as soon as the technical problems have been resolved."

    Please don't.

    No-one has spoken up in favour of the new messy page and many have spoken up for the old tidy page.

    Are you listening ?

  • Comment number 12.

    I believe on the 9th February you stated that "it is worth remembering that one of the main reasons for the relaunch was to make the site more dynamic"
    This I assume is not an example of the site being more dynamic
    Can you at least let the license fee payers know how much this new site has cost us and we can then determine whether the cost was justified.

  • Comment number 13.

    When will you accept that errors have been made? Why are you not admitting that things are not right? or are you trying to protect someone else? It is impossible to understand why you can not admit that errors have been made. What is it that is stopping you from doing so? There must be something big that you are not telling us!

    Are you trying to hide the fact that the whole BBC site is going to change to this new format? Is that why you insist things will not change?

    Be open with us, you have asked for feed back and we have given you our thoughts and opinions, so we now ask the same from you, please give us full disclosure as to why the change and why the silence on our feed back

  • Comment number 14.

    Why have you started a new Blog is this to try and deflect all the negative feedback so you can try and justify a most appalling website you just do not seem to listen or are you trying to play GOD

  • Comment number 15.

    Too late, you've lost me with this shambolic excuse of a website. I have moved site to Yahoo Eurosport for my sports news

  • Comment number 16.

    What is it the football crowds say? Oh yes:

    "You don't know what you are doing."

    If the Chairman announces his full support for you, you should get very worried ...

    (Shamelessly cross-posted on all related BBC blogs; it wasn't my idea to fragment the discussion/feedback.)

  • Comment number 17.

    When are we going to get some proper anwers and some proper webpage just revert back to pre Feb 1ss and I think you will find that nearly all your complaints will go away

  • Comment number 18.

    ....In the meantime, Sportsday Live is being published via a page which requires users to hit 'refresh' for updates....

    I spent 10mins looking for Sportsday live this morning - and gave up.

  • Comment number 19.

    way to go Ben slowly bring us back the fabulous old site under the guise of technical problems. means we get a quality sports service back and you save face, keep going one page a day, you know you can do it. Maybe by the weekend it will all be be back to normal.

  • Comment number 20.

    You're using that word again, Ben, "dynamic". I'm not sure that you know what it means but, just in case I am wrong, please let us know what exactly is "dynamic" about the new site.

  • Comment number 21.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 22.

    Loved the cricket coverage today - gave the scores in the right order and everything unlike the weekend's football/rugby refresh roulette (is someone getting dynamic and dagnammit confused?)
    I hope the bugs are strong and fight off all efforts to remove them, meaning we have to keep the old style live text.

  • Comment number 23.

    From Ben Gallop on 13th Feb:
    "to ensure we can still deliver frequent dynamic text and scores updates from the England cricket team's series with Pakistan we are using an older version of our auto-updating live pages.

    We will revert to our new-look dynamic pages across the site as soon as the technical problems have been resolved.

    Thank you for your patience."

    From me: Our patience has been stretched beyond breaking point putting up with these 'new-look dynamic pages'

    Am I alone in now hoping the technical problems are never resolved and we have to live with the old pages that are readable and actually work?

    As someone said 'Don't make me think'. Ben, please read the web page design 'bible' by Steve Krug and then try to defend this site.

  • Comment number 24.

    5:26 Tuesday Feb 14th same Rubbish Web Site
    When I wake up I only wish that my old beloved sports pages had come back but NO, why cannot somebody from BBC read all the complaints and do something about them or are we dealing with a computerised system instead of HUMAN BEINGS please do let us all know.

  • Comment number 25.

    13.At 20:23 13th Feb 2012, Gringo200 wrote:
    When will you accept that errors have been made? Why are you not admitting that things are not right? or are you trying to protect someone else? It is impossible to understand why you can not admit that errors have been made. What is it that is stopping you from doing so? There must be something big that you are not telling us!

    Are you trying to hide the fact that the whole BBC site is going to change to this new format? Is that why you insist things will not change?

    Be open with us, you have asked for feed back and we have given you our thoughts and opinions, so we now ask the same from you, please give us full disclosure as to why the change and why the silence on our feed back

    Gringo, I could be wrong, but here's a thought to mull. Regarding the F1/$ly fiasco, someone posited the theory that the debacle was deliberate and Auntie would use the inevitable drop in ratings as an excuse to get out of F1 altogether. This would then leave more re$ource$ for themselves and their pet agendas. Live sport, I keep reminding myself, is the biggest draw globally. In every culture. Very big bucks to be made! This is well understood and Auntie is not particularly keen on sport (except for the jollies, rubbing elbows with the NON-SUBSET crowd). If the children were to be given a new coloring book and boxes of crayons, well, the result would cause a drop in viewers/page hits and a justification for dropping sport altogether. Sounds Machiavellian, I know, but what else explains the abortion that we are witnessing, in real time? And the obfuscation and tap-dance (from one blog to another)? George Orwell and Rod Serling (Twilight Zone), would appreciate this fiasco.

  • Comment number 26.


    I've now tried (and Bookmarked!) the Guardian and Sky football pages and although they are better than the Beeb upgrade disaster, they're still not as good as the previous BBC Football website.

    Are there any other websites I could try? Thanks.

  • Comment number 27.

    So, when are you going to change back to the old site?

  • Comment number 28.

    My big business idea for today - buy the old site design from the BBC for a modest sum (they can't charge much, because it's rubbish and old-fashioned and non dynamic and stuff). Then relaunch it with a new name, put a bit of advertising in the white space, post the new address on every sports blog, and BINGO! Just watch the users roll in. Content might be an issue- I'll work on that today. Subject to that, I reckon I would be more popular than the new BBC Sport within a month (guaranteed), and a billionaire in 2 years (well maybe!)

  • Comment number 29.

    posted on old Blog 1 hour ago and seems the mods have gone home in support or theyve been put on short time to pay for the farce of the new dynamic web page what a joke

  • Comment number 30.

    What I dont get is that the BBC went on a rampant cuts exercise across its website over the las year, chiefly on 606 despite the majority of us members. it wanting it taken away.

    Fast forward and here we are with a huge (and presumably costly) redevelopment of the website presumably to handle the fast moving content for the Olympics (a 1 month event that attracts less viewers than our most popular other sports which are continual throughout the year)

    Before these ridiculous excersises were undertaken BBC sport was the most popular international sports website in the world and probably in terms of delivery the best

    Why oh why are management slowly eroding this?

    If it aint broke don't fix it, certainly don't try and revolutionise it!

    Yes the Olympics are coming but instead of trying to restructure everything around it set up something seperate create and independent site which is still linked to the BBC sport site but is on its own platform.

    This is a step too far it hasn't worked. will require an awful lot of time, money and supervision to get right and maintain right. if BBC don't either get it right fast or go back to how it was they will loose a huge share of the audience.

    But then in an organisation that has guaranteed income no matter what or how badly they perform and seems to be unanswerable to all of its shareholders I suppose it doesn't matter and they don't care!

  • Comment number 31.

    "But to ensure we can still deliver frequent dynamic text and scores updates from the England cricket team's series with Pakistan we are using an older version of our auto-updating live pages."

    Older and better. The only BBC Sport pages I've been viewing since the 'upgrade' are these blogs to see if there are any reponses from those in charge, and hopefully an admission that they have got it wrong.

    Currently, it seem that all feedback is being ignored and you are hoping people will give up complaining and keep viewing the site. They won't, they will give up complaining and find a better site to get their sports new from. If you Olympics coverage is anything like this website I think I'll just watch it on TV.

  • Comment number 32.

    Re-reading this blog makes me laugh.

    The polite informal of the teething problems as if it's a sticky door that needs a shove, no its a disaster the door has been replaced with a teleportation device, which is great but it just doesn't work!

    The reassurance that the team are working hard. I'm sure they are, stick me in a spurs shirt next to modric on a Saturday afternoon and i will work harder than any man on this planet doesn't change the fact that I'll be absolutely useless!

  • Comment number 33.

    Sportsday Live - breaking sports news

    still not fixed
    have they used the changing room team to come up with the colour scheme

  • Comment number 34.

    I can't stand how this blog talks as if the new site is largely great, but there are a few easy to fix issues the 'regular users' are experiencing that are just getting sorted, and then everything will be cool and people can get back to using the site, meanwhile it totally ignores the 1000s of comments under all the blogs (to spread them thinly) slaughtering the new site at the same time, as well as the points they have raised which are way more significant than a live text feature failing to refresh.

    Ben blatantly ignoring this b'ing obvious huge uproar below each of his blogs while giving people a polite thumbs up about quickly fixing a minor technical hitch is rather reminiscent of the Iraqi communications director who kept saying live on TV that all is OK, we have complete control of the airport, there are no allies here, as US and UK tanks were rolling along the airline strip behind him in the picture for all to see.

    The redesign is a farce, but so is the BBC's reaction to the feedback.

  • Comment number 35.

    This is an open invitation to one or all of the people who designed or sanctioned the new sports web page,come on line and anwser our grievences or just gives us some straight foreward and honest answers namely cost,why and justification.

  • Comment number 36.

    Creating more blogs won't make the complaints go away. Face up to reality the new site is a mess. The lack of the videprinter was the final straw. I found that Sky Sports offered the Championship scores and finding the national videprinter below was a bonus. Whilst that site has a worse look than your old site it is a hundred times better than your new one. The Eurosport site has some good features too but lacks related links in the reports.

    In my view you have gone from being a clear favourite to a distant third in the pecking order. Whilst listening to the football this weekend maybe I will find a better alternative.

  • Comment number 37.

    Why don't you put an on-line survey on your Sports front page (you can use Survey Monkey if you wish) asking users for their votes on the Old vs. the New pages? It is easy to make sure users only vote once, so it would be a simple solution and would have the benefit of beign democratic.

    Just a thought.

    I anticipate this won't happen.

  • Comment number 38.

    @ curleylarrymoe, post 25.

    You might be on to something there. BBC budget cuts yet they have to have an "out of this world" coverage of the Olympics, across all media forms. That is going to cost more than they will get in revenue selling the rights to foreign media (Does the BBC actually get any rights for foreign coverage?)

    I agree with you that sports in general are a big source of income but also the costs of showing such sports are ever increasing. As the BBC can not have advertisement, I imagine that the coverage of sports costs an increasing % of annual BBC total budget.

    Makes sense then that the BBC reduce coverage of expensive sports, and a way of doing this is to alienate their customers so numbers drop, giving them the perfect excuse to "exit stage left" (followed or not by a bear!)

    By making a hash job of these sports pages, the BBC is alienating more people, driving down their audience which gives them the perfect excuse to spend less.

    Call me cynical but stranger things have happened!

  • Comment number 39.

    #38 The BBC do have advertisements - for non-UK users. I access the site from work which goes through a server in Belgium and I am plagued with ads. There's revenue to be had there.

  • Comment number 40.

    Apparently these were the business objectives.....

    This redesign has concentrated on doing four main things:

    Creating a fresh website that better showcases the range of content we offer

    ...............FAILED, we can't find things now!

    Prominent promotion of our fantastic live coverage from across the BBC

    ...............FAILED, the live updates don't work!

    Making it easier for our users to talk about our sport coverage

    ...............ACHIEVED, by sending those that can be bothered to Twitter!

    Making it faster for our users to find our great content

    ...............FAILED, you really must be joking!

    I just hope the annual performance and appraisal reviews have these on the list of things to be considered whilst deciding who stays and who goes in the next round of 'savings'.

  • Comment number 41.

    12000 pages for the olympic competitors they can not get the few they have now right so if they carry on in this mode they will make the BBC a bigger laughing stock than what they are now

  • Comment number 42.

    The new website is awful. Such ahopeless clutter compared with the old one.
    Nothing to do with getting used to it - just terrible.

    Pointless gpoing into everything but just one minoe point. Where is the football scores updates which shows all levels of fottball on the same page?

    No chance of the BBC reverting to the previous site because someone will lose face.

  • Comment number 43.

    Right after wasting my time saturday searching for the vidiprinter and going through each league one by one to find the postponed games....
    tonight i find myself looking again for tuesdays fixtures, yes, just tuesdays, not games that are 1 or 2 week away, and also what do you expect me to do, look through every league to see if anybody has a game? i`m sorry but if there`s an easier way, i just cant be bothered wasting any more time trying to find out on here. sporting life have a good enough vidiprinter and oddschecker will do for the daily fixtures for now. by the way, we all know that folk hate change, but this is abysmal.. and if i wanted more pictures, i`d buy a comic.

  • Comment number 44.

    You are not listening.

    We do not want the new "dynamic" blah blah blah.... we want the old easy to use, comprehensive, and enjoyable site and pages returned.

    You now show that you can clearly do it if you wish, though you have said otherwise.

    Sports editor speak with forked tongue - and earplugs in.

  • Comment number 45.

    I am hoping and praying this issue continues forever, so we can have the old (far superior) Live Text! The new site is just abysmal.

    Ben on your other blog you have over 400 messages - 99.9% of them complaining about the new site, but you haven't responded to any. How about responding to a few on the old blog and this one. People aren't happy with the new site (putting it mildly) and they want answers.

  • Comment number 46.

    and great, almost forgot you`ve also gone colour colourcoded on the league tables, whats more simpler than the W-D-L method??

    yours sincerely,

    colourblind tyke :/

  • Comment number 47.

    In amongst all the comments about specifics, can I put some general criticisms:

    1) The colour scheme is appalling. Whoever agreed it must have been looking at a badly set projection image. The primary yellow drowns everything else out and many of the text lines (which is what users are trying to read!) are in insignificant pastels. There is even text in white out of yellow (the most unreadable combination possible) and some white out of black - also a very bad choice.

    Colour variation would aid accesssibility as well - why do all the colour panels have to be one colour? Strategic use of a wider palette which perhaps was content related would be a massive improvement

    2) The type face is very poor - there are so many excellent 'high readability' ones now (e.g Verdana, Calibri) why on earth use Arial??

    3) There is absolutely no need to use three type sizes in stories (Headline, sub-headline and body text) - headline can be larger and bold, sub-headline in same size as body text but bold then body text

    4) The layout means the body text column is narrower, increasing the amount of scrolling to read a story. This seems to be dictated by quotes and comments boxed alongside. In the main news site these are just indented into the body and in a reduced type size to minimise intrusion. And they don't need the 'pundit pics' - the words are what matter, not seeing the mouth they are being attributed to.

  • Comment number 48.

    Today's 3rd headline "Chelsea stars still text Mourinho ". Wow !

    Right next to a video clip "Cuthbert starts Wel try rush". What ?

    Olympic News: the text occupies a small column of the screen, down the middle, but the pictures still break it up - making reading hard on both the eyes and the mouse finger.

    A newspaper Sports Sub-editor would be heading for the door by now . . .

  • Comment number 49.

    Please do not "revert to our new-look dynamic pages".

    I only return here to read the saga of the website defenders and those that comment upon them. ALL my football info I get elsewhere now.

    Come on BBC. Give us the data, in the right order, clear and simple. You used to be good at this.

  • Comment number 50.

    I've just been trying to watch the live Tuesday football with the Championship latest scores. It's totally frustrating, the page needs to be manually refreshed, then you get the Champion League latest scores instead, so then you have to click the 'show me' and scroll all the way up to the championship and even when you click on that you still have to click on update to get to see the scores you want. Then if you are stupid enough to stay on the BBC site you have to repeat the process! Please follow the precident of the cricket and restore the old football working, usable and clear live update!

  • Comment number 51.

    Christ if it isn't bad enough trying to find who's playing tonight and not in two weeks time I now find I have to click individually through the leagues to get updated scores. Once I'd found "Live Scores" of course. Ill thought out and totally user unfriendly.

    First time I've complained about any of the bbc's website. What an absolute mess!

  • Comment number 52.

    #45 GCham82

    Actually the number of negative posts across Bens blogs since this fiasco started is now almost 2000. Add those to the negative posts on other blogs and you get well in excess of 2000.

    I suspect the only way to get to Beeb to take notice of this is if another media organisation starts to make some noise regarding the number of complaints.

  • Comment number 53.

    As the Live scores are not working tonight and you have to manual update, why oh why have you not done the decent thing and like with cricket yesterday used the old version. it is a disgrace that an organisation like BBC can not get basics right.

  • Comment number 54.

  • Comment number 55.

    What does 'Bodin goal undefined undefined Hereford' mean on live scores?? How can a high profile size like this still be live and untested!???

    Even when I tried to post the comment above the first time I got a message saying 'we're having some problems posting your comment at the moment. Sorry. We're doing our best to fix it.' Is anything working properly???

    Why not create a test site, test it thoroughly, fix the bugs, re-test it, and then when happy go live? A radical thought I know

  • Comment number 56.

    Just out of interest, how much has this re-design cost? (rhetorical question as I know not even freedom of info act will get an answer)

    Back in Jan 2011 you stated that there was going to be a 25% cut in funding to the on-line budget of the BBC. It strikes me as odd (to say the least) that at a time of budget cuts, you go on a "spending spree", changing a perfectly functional site into a site that not only doesn't work correctly (live scores for example), but is badly designed (too much yellow, text overlay on graphics, etc..), inconsistent (F1 different colour scheme to the rest) and is upsetting so many users you are getting more hits per blog on the subject than you have ever had before!

    A complete and total disaster which shouldn't have even be given the go ahead to think about it let alone actually do it!

  • Comment number 57.

    When you are looking at the live updates for a division (aside from the fact you want to look for all divs/comps at the same time) and then you decide to briefly click on 'Go to match' to see who's playing etc, and then click on the back button to return to the view you had, it all resets and says 'there are no fixtures for the chosen competition', and you then have to start again re the chosen div/comp and click update.

    This new site is continually adding in extra unnecessary little clicks and steps that weren't previously required!!

  • Comment number 58.

    @16 At 21:15 13th Feb 2012, I wrote:

    "You don't know what you are doing."

    I posted the same comment on Cait's blog a few minutes later - I made a small typo, and posted a correction as soon as the site let me. Today, at 3:10 pm, the mods on that blog deleted both because they were "abusive, disruptive or offensive". Yet it's still on here, and was pre-moderated here last night. "You don't know what you are doing." applies to blog moderators as well.

    Goodbye, BBC Sport website. I give up - I would have done so ages ago, but I am legally compelled to pay for you. I hope you all enjoy wallowing in your self-congratulation. Can I have a rebate on my BBC Tax?

  • Comment number 59.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 60.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 61.

    @55. At 21:22 14th Feb 2012, Red White and Black wrote:

    Even when I tried to post the comment above the first time I got a message saying 'we're having some problems posting your comment at the moment. Sorry. We're doing our best to fix it.' Is anything working properly???

    Do NOT be put off - most of mine get that too - just click the Post button again until you've rammed it down the throat of the blog engine

    What gets me is when I click on a story and I get "waiting for" (or something similar) and wait ... and wait .... and - sod it, click the button again and it loads almost immediately. Methinks either DNS or load-balancing is sharing across some uncooperative systems. Something needs a good booting, not sure if it's one of the systems...

  • Comment number 62.

    What a dreadful mess your new Sports web-site is. It used to be so easy to follow the football scores each evening but now all I get are results from several weeks ago. To find tonight's scores takes about ten minutes. This really is a mess. Sort it out !

  • Comment number 63.

    only tried to find the Blackpool result what a joke the way you have to go to get any result,just like the people on the managment of the BBC.

  • Comment number 64.

    Navigation around the new site remains extremely tiresome and awkward. I was just talking about this with two friends at my local pub quiz. PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE address this matter forthwith. For example, when I came back from the pub, there was no way of clicking to check tonight's results. Instead I had trawl through various recent results and keep an eye on the match dates. Really not good enough. The previous internet football coverage was much more user friendly. Come on BBC, you can do better than this!

  • Comment number 65.

    You have done it again, messing with the BBC Homepage has visiting it made it a no no, now the same treatment has been given to the sports pages.
    The motto seems to be, why use one click when 2 or more clicks with plenty of scrolling to view the required information will do. How unproductive is that, you just do not get it, if it is not broke do not fix it. What is needed is simpler surfing not this over elaborate software geek embellishments, you are worse than microsoft.
    If it is not made user friendly I will not visiting long

  • Comment number 66.

    1. The old-style live page made a brief comeback while the new-style one wasn't working and I have to say the old style was much easier on the eye and easier to follow. I know your design team have to earn their money, but sometimes text is best.

    2. Before, only leagues that were in action on a particular day were shown on the top right-hand side, and all you had to do was click on a league to see the scores. Now every league on god's earth is listed whether it's in action or not, so you have to keep clicking various leagues to find out what games are on. Also, perhaps because someone couldn't work out how to write the code properly, you now have to click "confirm", which is pointless. It's not as if I'm making a payment!

    3. Where have the lists of detailed results gone? i.e. the lists that included the goal scorers and goal times. This was a useful quick way of seeing what had happened in the games, without having to go to individual webpages of different matches.


  • Comment number 67.

    #64 you say "Come on BBC, you can do better than this!".

    I wish I shared your confidence in the BBC. From what I've seen over the years, whenever they move to develop their sites they get a significant number of protests, which are largely ignored and batted back with claims of positive research results. Sure, they respond (eventually) to some of the concerns on the blogs, but unless it's a bug-fix or an obvious error nothing really changes.

    If my company ignored consumers in this way we'd be out of business in no time. I still cling on to the hope of someone senior there realising the situation, but it's only a very slim hope.

    There is absolutely no hope of them admitting their mistake and changing back I'm afraid. It's all about face-saving now.

  • Comment number 68.

    I really dont care what colour it is, but please go back the old format, the new one is too crowded, too busy, too difficult to find what you want. Appalling all round.

  • Comment number 69.

    Ben we see two of your colleagues have put up very detailed(long winded) explanations of the new site which goes to prove enough real world user testing was not done. Please please give us back the old site until you have a product is fit for purpose.

    I expect that this will be moderated off as myself and others have been on the other two blogs and we have complained about the moderation also.

  • Comment number 70.

    Saturday, 4.30pm, BBC One. Final Score with Mark Chapman

    "Hello, and welcome to Final Score.
    Here on BBC One, you'll only see the results coming in for FA Cup matches.
    For the Championship results, turn over to BBC Two.
    Or, if you want to see details on today's League One games, BBC Three is the channel.
    Results coming in for League Two are on BBC Four, whilst the Scottish Premier League Final Score is on the Red Button.
    No Premier League games today, but in future, those results will be shown on
    Can't think why you would, but if you want to see all the results, from every game, on the same screen at the same time, tune in to Soccer Saturday on Sky."

    Not very practical is it? Can you imagine all that flicking around on your TV? How annoying would that get?

    Exactly. Please sort it. Why you ever thought grouping fixtures by competition was a good idea in the first place is beyond me.

  • Comment number 71.

    I see that Maxwell's Silver Hammer has come down on the two blogs from boffins on the Internet Blog site. The Great One has decided that his colleagues are too important to be criticised. They never responded to a single post anyway so it's not a great loss. It's just the Beeb's way of being responsive.
    It's up to you now, Ben. I know you must be on sick leave/ holiday or something because I am sure that a person of your sensitivity would not willingly ignore the comments over all your blogs. First of all Claire was struck dumb, then Cait, now you. It must be an awful virus going around the office. I wish you well.

  • Comment number 72.

    71 Posts and no response. That's just rude. Is Ben even reading these any more? He probably sees it as a place for us to vent our frustrations, hoping we'll go away.

  • Comment number 73.

    Please say something QUICK before the men in white coats come from the extreme VIRUS dept.
    They might have ways of making you better and advising you give us our old site back.

  • Comment number 74.

    Just seen the 'new' football league tables. What is your policy on designing web pages to take account of the 10% of the male population who are colour blind? None I am guessing!

    The use of colour on the new sites is obviously subjective and open to personal preference, but (as an example) the use of the colours for showing recent form for each team in the league tables is objective. Red/Green colour blindness is the most common form and for me, and thousands like me, the chosen colours (I am guessing red, green and amber) are indistinguishable.

    Finally, can I add my voice to those who are complaining about the 'new' site - more and more I am finding that it is a triumph of style over substance and I am starting to move away from the BBC for my web content. Please accept that it has not been a success (to say the least), go back to what it was and take time to think again on a new 'new look' which builds on the original and puts content rather than style first.

  • Comment number 75.

    Like others here, I'm getting frustrated by the lack of response to many relevant, and intelligently expressed concerns.
    The new blog, explaining the concepts, tests and trials of this new website, raises so many issues that need airing; like how could all that 'good' preparatory work generate the disastrous new site that we have now? Closing that blog down doesn't help the discussion process.
    In an attempt to have this whole business discussed and, hopefully, rectified/improved, I have written to the BBC Trust, BBC Complaints, 5Live and Steve Hewlett's Media Show. I'll post again if I have any replies.
    Has anyone else had any useful response from other BBC or outside bodies that might help us get the main issues debated 'out in the open'? I'm beginning to feel trapped on these blogs. It's like being in the Village. Portmeirion, not Olympic.

  • Comment number 76.

    Maybe we should complain to Watchdog! - get Anne Robinson on the case!

  • Comment number 77.

    I love the new website.

    The graphics are great. The layout of the homepage is perfect. The interactive football tables and scores are my favourite update - I can't wait to see them rolled out within other sports.

    Surely, I cannot be the only one who is looking forward to the return of the dynamic live text page? And Finally, I am certain that the site's Olympics coverage will be excellent and will be spending hours and hours online during the summer.

    Keep it up BBC.

  • Comment number 78.

    @77 - Sometimes sarcasm says it better than straight forward criticism even can. Made me laugh :-)

  • Comment number 79.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 80.

    "I'm sure regular users of the site will have noticed that we are having technical problems with the live text commentary pages.:

    Ben you dont have any regular users any more. you have made them find alternative websites for the sake of their sanity.

  • Comment number 81.

    Ben. I think he has gone outside for some fresh air. Have sent a quick email to Richard Littlejohn at the Daily Mail about the site, and the BBC,s response. I would hope he would jump at the chance to give his opinion about customer satisfaction currently being enjoyed by users of these blogs

  • Comment number 82.

    Just been watching Live Cricket Page this morning, suddenly thought "There's not much wrong with this, they must have done something" Then realised its the old style page, have they seen sense and its back for good? Hope so.

  • Comment number 83.

    And you thought the old Cricket page was OK ? Well they've managed to mess that up too, and its not just the public who are struggling with it:

    "47 overs
    Eng 228-3
    Bizarrely, the live text seems to have jumped forward to the 46th over. I promise I wrote stuff about the 43rd, 44th and 45th, although there wasn't a great deal to write home about - no boundaries, for instance."

  • Comment number 84.

    Both old and new now broken - useless

  • Comment number 85.

    1510 Commentary
    I'm afraid even the "retro" live text system has gone on the blink - if you're reading this and you want to follow the Pakistan innings, please follow this link to the replacement page.

    Well, apart from things cracking up (we knew that already) its such a retrograde, disappointing step to go be pushed back to the "dynamic" page.

    Let's just stick to basics - I go to web pages to read things. To succeed, I need good navigation, a clean layout and clear text - the new page has none of these.

    Instead I get arcane navigation, an immensely jumbled layout and a silly choice of font (even this Blog's font is better).

    End of story.

  • Comment number 86.

    Total fail on the cricket both new and old not working.

  • Comment number 87.

    Who came up the ridiculously annoying idea of changing the standard format of the league table? Moving the goal difference and points columns to the left of the table goes against every other published table on the planet that I'm aware of. Why do it???

  • Comment number 88.

    OK, you win, you can have it as yellow as you like, just give us back a site that WORKS- just like the old one (but yellow).

  • Comment number 89.

    I work for a large multi national and have witnessed the progress of many IT projects over the years. After a while the customer’s needs nearly always get forgotten, whilst the IT gurus deliver whatever watered down promises that their abilities (and egos) will allow.

    After posting on the first blog and completing the customer opinion survey, I submitted a complaint to the BBC’s Complaints Website. I share most people’s frustrations with the revamped Sports site, but I made my complaint quite specific about one particular issue I have with the new site (time taken to access all British football results data).

    But even when you take the time to explain a real and specific issue with the new site, they just fob you off and send you a bog standard generic response that makes no mention of the specific issue I raised.

    I perceive Ben, Cait et al are in the bunker now and prepared for the long haul, until (hopefully) people have run out of steam and stop posting on the many blogs about the changes (Armageddon) to what was previously a really good well laid out (if older) site.

    This is simply unacceptable BBC. I would withdraw my subscription, but can’t because you’d put me in prison, so you leave me no alternative other than to fight fight fight.

    I’ll be back.

  • Comment number 90.

    The blinding yellow kiddie style layout is not for me and I won't be browsing the site for any sports news in future which is sadly my loss as the BBC provides excellent content. But how can anyone have messed up so badly the format for displaying the football results/scores?
    All the football results/fixtures by date in one place without the need to select from masses of drop down options--how hard is that to do?

  • Comment number 91.

    I have been following intensely the issues highlighted with the new BBC sport website. I agree with 99% of everyones complaints, that must be around 2000 by now, and can't believe that the sport editors "bosses" do not force the likes of Cait, Ben and the rest of the team to answer the comments posted on all 5 bloggs.
    They can't really believe this will just fizzle out if they pretend we are not here! We all pay our licence fee, we deserve answers, even if its not what we want to hear! I can only assume they are embarrassed by their original answers saying "we will be collating and assessing feedback to help us inform the decisions we take on how best to fine tune the new-look site" only then to ignore us!
    Back then I suspect they didn't realise how badly wrong they had got it.

  • Comment number 92.

    Why is there a blog on the home page that is closed to comments when you go to it and read it? If it's too old to be commented on it can't be important and relevant enough to have on your home page!!

    Every time I try and persevere with this retrograde step of a new site I find more problems.

  • Comment number 93.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 94.

    Hi Moderators!

    I'm addressing this to you as it appears that you, at least, are still there and active. If you are, please could you let us know what's going on, and when we can expect some sort of response from Ben, Cait, or anyone concerned with this BBC Sport website re-launch?

    Hopefully that action will involve ditching the new lay-out, as it's in absolutely no doubt that it's gone down disastrously badly with almost everyone who has bothered to comment. But it would be nice just to receive some sort of acknowledgement from Ben, Cait, or whoever that they are still taking note of all this feedback on all these blogs.

    So, Mods, please can you let us know what's going on, and when we can expect some sort of response from Ben, Cait, or whoever?


  • Comment number 95.

    Sorry, Comment posting is not available at the moment.

  • Comment number 96.

    Can anyone tell me what has happened to the Vidiprinter? It seems to have gone and you only get the scores for each league respectively which is rubbish.

    When you are at a live match, you don't want to be faffing around with each league, you just want the vidiprinter to see what is happening quickly.

    Bring it back, the previous site was easier to navigate around and this one just seems more complicated.


BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.