Shocking, disastrous, awful, disgraceful… Lots of horrible adjectives Warner Bros Discovery might not have expected to see when announcing the news that Eurosport was to become the sole broadcaster of Tour de France from 2026 onwards, meaning that all those with free-to-air television would lose out on watching cycling’s biggest event on ITV.
Besides being a subscription-based service, this also means fans would have to be content with substituting Ned Boulting’s commentary with… erm, Carlton Kirby.
road.cc contacted ITV for an official statement, and a spokesperson got back saying: “Nothing for ITV to add on this one.”
> No Tour de France on ITV from 2026 as Eurosport becomes exclusive UK broadcaster
The announcement from this morning all but means a death knell for the channel’s coverage of the race, which tonnes of fans seemed to enjoy and cherish, despite the otherwise persistent groans about cuts to adverts about life insurances, donkey sanctuaries and funeral homes.
Here’s what road.cc readers and other cycling fans have had to say about the whole deal, and yes, it’s 99.99 per cent, let’s say, not positive.
james-o: Ah well.. there goes the last of my interest in racing. Won't be getting Eurosport just for this. I will miss the ITV coverage though, the commentary team were brilliant and part of the summer for me since the mid 80s. Maybe I'll plan a tour out to France to see it by the roadside.
Rendel Harris: Personally I'm happy to shell out my £6.99 a month for all three GTs, all the monuments and major stage races that you get with Eurosport/Discovery but I think it's a real mistake not to have a least a highlights package available on free to air. As I suspect many on here of my vintage did, I first got into cycle racing through seeing the Channel 4 highlights from 1984 (?) onwards and it formed the basis of a lifetime of devotion. My other two favourite sports, rugby union and cricket, have been severely damaged in terms of fanbase and encouraging young people to get involved by making shortsighted decisions to grab the cash and not have any free to air coverage, even highlights; sad to see cycling going the same way. So now any kids whose parents can't afford/don't want to pay for Eurosport will get to see cycle racing on TV once every couple of years at the Commonwealth Games and the Olympics?
Natrix: Wow, absolutely gutted with that news. I've watched every one of the tours on ITV (and lots previously on C4), really love the highlights programme. The comentators are a great bunch, was chatting with Ned a couple of days ago and he didn't mention this.
Some more comments from social media…
“Urgh, Eurosport highlights are utterly terrible. Less ‘highlights’, more ‘randomly show however many final kilometres fit into our run time’. This plus the loss of GCN+ is continued bad news for the viewing public.”
“ITV 4 commentary was by far better than Discovery but live coverage was ruined by constant advert breaks filled with hugely depressing ads for dying donkeys and funeral plans. However, the ITV4 highlights were basically unmissable and when I was working were my main access to Coverage.”
“Very sad news for the event, Eurosport highlights are absolute garbage.”
“That’s not good, should be on more than one channel so more people have access to view. Unfortunately the biggest cheque has won again!!”
“That’s that then. Won’t be able to watch the Tour after 2026. Can't afford Eurosport. Disappointing as really enjoy Ned Boulting and David Millar along with the rest of the ITV Cycling team.”
“That doubly sucks because ITV4's coverage elevates a sports programme well above the usual boring sports show by being witty, non-sycophantic and informative about the wider picture. Can’t bear to watch other cycling shows without the fantastic presenters + commentators on ITV4.”
“WTF!! So ITV Cycling is going to be done with by 2026?? This isn’t right, Sky have taken football away from free tv for the most part and a sport as small as cycling, begging for more views, which help sponsors and the sport in general is now behind a paywall?? What a joke!!”
“As much as I enjoy Eurosport’s coverage, having free to air on ITV is really important. I think this is a bad thing. I feel for everyone connected with ITV cycling and everything they have built.”
And finally on a lighter note, Lance Rossiter wrote: “Carlton Kirby laughing at his own jokes is worth the subscription!!!” I don’t know if I agree with that or not…
Add new comment
24 comments
Dave Walker
Very disappointed - how am I supposed to get angry over the lack of victim blaming ?!
Good morning South Yorkshire. How are you this #Friday? Don't forget that the clocks change this weekend which means we are heading into darker mornings & evenings. Have a look at our checklist to help you stay road safe: https://sysrp.co.uk/campaign/darknights
Watch the video on the linked webpage??...
When those dark nights roll in, it's time to put away the headphones!
What gets my goat every year when driving more in the dark is the number of drivers who use spot lamps, dazzling everyone else, even though it is illegal. I did write to Viz TopTips, but I'm not sure if they used it:
"Drivers, if you use spot lamps all the time when it's dark, could you please strap a 14" fluorescent pink dildo to the roof of your car so that we'll know in daylight too."
I find that autolights on cars have the head lights on when not needed. As soon as there is enough light to see the road surface ahead headlights only serve to dazzle other road users reducing safety. On narrow country roads when you have to pull over to pass very few drivers seem to realise that swithching to side lighs when stopped at night helps everyone. I guess this is another instance of 'auto' reducing brain engagement.
Re the pics of the van etc., I don't think that's a very good defence at all (if that's what they're supposed to be).
Ref Pogacar, Can you blame a rider for signing a big contract in a sport in which they have a limited career length? I would suggest that the teams along with the UCI need to do more to restructure the sport to make it fairer on the less fortunate. For every Pogacar or Evanapoel there is a rider busting their ass every day in support of them getting paid a mere fraction. Even some of the teams on the world tour have very limited budgets compared to UAE, Visma leaseabike or Ineos etc.
That needs dealing with along with more to encourage womens events which is ridiculously underfunded as with most womens sports.
Agree. Since when are athletes 'policemen' or moral judgers... if anything they could do the most for cycling safety. And non did.
GIVERNING BODY is the one responsible for this kind of matters. And as @tratnik..sth stated we should first clean infront of our own doors before judging others. This is one of the most ridiculous topics opened uo lately.
No it isn't.
To be fair, it did get brighter and drier here in Cardiff since I wrote that...
Why should the bike hire companies have to lease out parking spaces? It not like (permitted areas aside) drivers are having to pay for the storage space, so why should they? Just direct users to leave the bikes in a convenient space, if possible.
I disagree. Car drivers pay for parking, or at least should, in such busy areas, and I don't like the idea that these companies are freeloading on public space. Cafes etc have to pay to use the public space if they want to put tables on the pavement.
A small tariff paid to councils, plus strict rules on storing them on these docks, would be most welcome.
Well once they actually do, then maybe the lease argument would hold some water. But the point is (somewhat facetiously) highlighting the hypocrisy of people demanding that space for bikes should be paid for, while expecting to be able to just dump motor vehicles (including those being used for profit-making enterprises) in the same spaces for free.
Hmm... the comments about "what about cars on footways?" are on-point but this looks like a way to get bogged in unhelpful argument.
As always why not look at the future (hopefully): what are they doing in NL? Well, while they do have some hire companies there (e.g. here) the "big player" is ... a docked bike system, anchored on transport hubs (in fact state owned because the railways are nationalised).
But what about the cars? Well their philosophy has it the right way round - in most places you can only park where it's specifically marked rather than the UK "park anywhere unless specifically prohibited". (So no more thousands of miles of don't-entirely-mean-no-parking double yellows).
And "but what about the piles of bikes"? Well - NL does have a "problem of succcess" - there are a LOT of parked bikes. However a) people tend to take a little more care of things which are their private property - unlike hire machines and b) they're still adding capacity for excellent bike parking which gets bikes out of the way in the centre of towns.
But whatabout where we are now in the UK? Why not less of both? Fewer bikes OR cars abandoned on footways / other unhelpful places.
I'm not a dockless fan. (I think NotJustBikes' comment about this often being an attempted replacement for a lack of decent street-level public transport is about right). Do any large cycle hire systems actually make their money from the bikes? Or is it rather advertising, or venture capital speculation on market share (or selling users' data)? Even docked bike hire companies have strugged with damage / theft. Leaving "free moveable stuff" on the streets isn't really a good idea.
I have also wondered how profitable dockless bikes are, especially given they are apparently easy to hack.
Even stolen dockable bike users are visible in areas far distant from docking stations.
Lime was profitable in 2022, but I doubt they've made money overall. A lot of the startups lost money on every rental, but made it up in volume.
Why argue with others when you can do it yourself?
Those
TwitterX comments just demonstrate - again! - motonormativity. The people criticising the hire bikes dumped on the footway are, I imagine, genuinely blind to the problems caused by cars/vans (and literal rubbish) dumped on other footways…They're paying "road tax". What is Lime paying to use/block our footpaths?
Dividends?
To its delightful owners, which, I believe, include Uber and Alphabet. What's not to like?
Lime and all the other companies do pay the local authority to use bikes in the said authority. They do not get to operate for 'free'.
I believe that's not always the case, certainly in London: some boroughs have signed agreements with hire bike operators which gives them some revenue (quite a lot, e.g. Camden I believe is making northwards of £1 million a year) and some haven't. These agreements are voluntary, as the law stands at the moment operators don't need permission from the local authority to introduce their hire bikes to an area.