Our new website - next steps

Before I do that, a word on how we are communicating to you about these changes. Unfortunately it isn't practical to post comments in response to every individual message we receive

Ben you don't reply to any comments at all
just like with the whole formula 1 mess

Excellent that I can now access the videprinter again. As, I've said previously I would always use this site over Sky and day. Would visit 10/12 times a day and have the Videprinter running whilst either reading or watching tv. I didn't want to have to manually access different leagues to get the latest scores. So I'm at least happy on that score. In futute it would probably be better to introduce change gradually rather than radical wholesale changes in one go. Change is not always for the better Ben. But thanks anyway for the continued updates.

Reading this blog reminded me of the band on the Titanic.

Platitudes about fixing the bells and whistles that should have worked when the product was launched go nowhere toward addressing the fundamental issues that afflict the new site: poor design, poor implementation and a product that fails in its' basic premise, providing accurate, timely sports news and information to a paying audience.

It took Ford several years to realise its' mistake with the Edsel. Coca-Cola was much quicker with 'new' Coke. I hope the BBC will learn from lessons like these, but given its' unique monopolistic position and funding model I won't be holding my breath.

Glad to see the website is looking at being changed. The overall appearance is far, far too fussy and navigation is complicated.

In addition, the omission of the old-style Videprinter is a HUGE mistake, given that the instant updating of ALL goals as they go in, irrespective of division, is surely what the videprinter is all about.

The same goes for fixtures, which are now presented in a manner that is just baffling.

It's a shame, but I have since abandoned the BBC for Sky's updates, which at least give me that basic information.

Morning Ben.
Perhaps given the (what can only be described as) appalling deal that the BBC have saddled the F1 fans with this season, could you confirm that you won't be publishing any spoilers for the non-BBC-live F1 races this season on the website. That any results or significant events at those 10 races will be delayed until at least the start of the highlights program. Also that the news teams will also avoid the subject so as to not spoil the race result.

Also is anyone going to give us the courtesy of an answer to why the BBC will not be showing a full delayed re-runs as Bernie has confirmed that the BBC have the rights to ?

Many thanks.
BBC Licence payer.

WARNING - Negative feed back...


Got the link to this blog from twitter (I follow bbc sports twitter account).

I have stopped even bothering to look at the sports site any more.

How a site like this could be launched with so many bugs and mistakes is beyond me. It has left me feeling I can no longer trust this site, even if layout & colour scheme etc was improved. It just reeks of amateurism which can not be trusted.

I haven't yet discovered another site which fits my needs (something your old site did), but the BBC Sports site is no longer my preferred site.

It is a shame a top quality site has been reduced to an amateurish site.

Good luck on finishing the site but I'm sorry to say, you have lost this customer.

I find it interesting that the much maligned yellow banner which is garish and distracting is largely replaced on this with a colour overlaid across most of it which together with the headline makes it significantly less distracting and which would not be difficult to replicate in other areas of the site. Now if only the same rational approach can be taken to the higgledy piggledy look of the different sized headlines which cut through the pictures and the way the site is navigated we will start to see real progress.

This just saddens me. I used to feel a degree of ownership and loyalty to the BBC but too many unnecessary changes have spoilt what used to be good.

I have now switched to iGoogle as a homepage and added the Autosport F1 headline app to it.

I will only come back to BBC F1 page for live text updates but today even these are mixed in with football, rugby and swimming for some reason (presumably to show disregard for the CUSTOMER!)! I would have thought our nation's national broadcaster could have found an additional page to keep F1 text's and tweets on!

Disgruntled, Disillusioned, Disappearing!

I think the problems are wider than that Ben. The sports website is simply hideous. The first rule of any ICT development is user friendly interface. However the website looks like someone has thrown magnetic images against a fridge and took a snap shot of it. It's chaotic and vulgar.

It's good to know what the BBC cuts are being spent on though.

There is a great deal wrong with the new BBC Sport website and I'm delighted to note that you have identified most of the concerns that have been expressed here and elsewhere.

The videoprinter is sorely missed, as is being able to access all latest scores from all divisions on one page. These have been identified.

What stops me from using the site though is the sheer confusion and higgledy-piggledy layout. It's just a huge mass of type - and you simply can't quickly find ANYTHING! Navigation is also very confusing.

I will check back regularly to see if it has changed for the better but in the meantime I will use other sources, which are much easier to read and navigate.

I have never done a survey on the BBC before until just a moment ago. This iste is awful now and I will go from visiting it 8/12 times a day to, SKY. It really isn't easy to navigate and is hoenstley a real mess from what used to be something I looked forward to daily. I will happily come back if you can accept that you maybe made a mistake on the redesign.

Some of these comments are absurd! you cant find 'ANYTHING'?! What is wrong with these people?!

The yellow has been reduced, if you don't like yellow, get over it, it's a web page not you're bedroom walls.

The videprinter is being added, I'm pretty sure they mentioned that last time, so if you can't cope with a week or two more without it, then please see a doctor.

A lot of the new things added to the page are great: the stats and graphs for comparing football teams, etc.

If you cannot navigate this site, you need to remember what it was like when you first got a computer - the thought of a right-click or having to scroll was baffling, but pretty quickly you realised it's laughably easy once you get the hang of it. That is the exact equivalent with this site.

Yes, the homepage is slightly chaotic for both Sport and individual sports such as Football - for instance the two pictures/stories that appear in the top right corner on the Football page; they seem to have no significance over any other stories but are put in a completely different place?

Other than one or two odd decisions there, I much prefer the new site Ben, its sharper and less dated than the previous.

The two stories in the top right that I refer to above are when the Sportsday Live link isn't there, on weekends for instance. Just to be clear.

That's great news Ben, some movement at last! Even a small apology about the live text, well done.
Well done too to all the posters highlighting the problems!
For those of you who want to keep up the pressure visit Facebook and search
BBC website, you'll find a group to join/share/like etc.

So your basically saying your going to ignore most of the major complaints about the site design and layout and how its poorly done etc and focus on little things like the vidiprinter cos thats an easy fix!?

On the old site I would find plenty to read throughout the day, on this new site I look at the page and find myself unable to find anything new! The point to of a news site is news, not videos, which as im at work or looking at on my phone I cant listen to or watch!

The site is too football centric, yes im a football fan but a fan if many sports from Rugby to F1 and most of these get shunted out the way or ignored, this central headline column is far too small and the video section far too large!

Also the fact you have to scroll down miles to see the gossip section with its humungous logo but tiny text is well daftm this should be above the fixtures with smaller logo.

Oh and im still waiting for the Rugby section to have the English Premiership fixtures etc matching the English Premier League football pages with fixtures and results together, how hard can that be???

i agree with you tappy, some good comments there

the navigation is really easy, its at the top of every page now not like the old site

i think some people are just moaning for the sake of moaning now

Ben - thanks for the updates. What is difficult to describe is how I just find the new site 'difficult' to read and navigate, compared to the old site which seemed straightforward from day 1. One of the reasons is the left indents on articles - very difficult on the eyes. But the sad thing is that a website that I really valued is now so unappealing. I think what a lot of us are now comparing it with is not just the old site but other sports sites (e.g. Guardian) which seem so much clearer. I know that going back to the old site just won't happen, because too much has been spent on the new one, but is there any chance of going back for a while pending a rethink? Regarding the yellow, one of the reasons I watch Sky rather than BBC TV sports is that I find the BBC studio colours and Final Score so garish. Why was yellow chosen at all? Why not green which is so much easier on the eye. Bright yellow is used to attract attention - it 'shouts' at you - that's why it doesn't work. Nobody wants to bash the BBC for the sake of it - I love the BBC news pages, but when the Home Page and now the Sports Pages get dumbed down, surely we have to speak out? Thank you.

I do have one other thing to add: Could we possibly have the top banner with the selection of sports etc at the top of the blogs? It's a little long-winded when you click on 'previous' and it takes you to a list of other blogs. That's probably the only thing I'd change and it's not even a factor of the new site haha!

Slightly disappointed that it is such a limited "To Do" list. No mention of the red / green colour blindness issue, for instance, mentioned by many and one which I would have thought would have been at the top of the priority list.

I hope the eventual revision of the upcoming football fixture format will be matched by enabling the results to be reviewed in the same way: at-a-glance, without further scrolling or updating to see all the games from the British leagues in one view. I am still scratching my head wondering how it was that the site was launched without this facility in the first place - can there be any other sports website in the world that doesn't include this as its default layout? It seems so very obvious that it leads me to think that the whole process of commissioning and testing was flawed to the point of being completely unprofessional. And why is this a change which is seemingly going to take months rather than minutes? It's been perfectly fine in every other version of the website you've ever launched. Surely the coding can't be that difficult to achieve?

It all seems a very long haul to debug a site which will still be pig ugly to look at and crippled by a non-intuitive menu system, but if it creeps towards some basic level of functionality I suppose we should show some gratitude.

Whilst I appreciate some of the more frequent complaints are being addressed, for me personally this is just scratching the surface of the site's issues.

The biggest issue for me is not the (admittedly hideous) colour scheme, lack of vidiprinter (sporting life do one anyway) and curious fixture list layout. These are mere drops in the ocean.

The biggest single issue for me is the cluttered, unclear and frankly ridiculously difficult to navigate layout.

Before change : Daily visit
Since Change : Hardly any visits.

I hope that clarifies the effect this change has had on me and I suspect many others.

At least we have some sanity the cricket has reverted back to working properly
CREDIT WERE CREDIT is due
Pity the rest of the site is not the same

I'd love to know which school of web design the creator of the new site went to - was it Picasso's?

I've never seen such a jumbled mess in all my life - even I could do something that was easier on the eye and easier to use.

This new site is simply rubbish. How anybody could put this together, hit the "go live" button, sit back and think "Yes, that's how a website should look" is beyond comprehension.

Rubbish, awful, waste of time and money - are we making ourselves clear?

"In terms of the on-going work to improve our web product, I need to reiterate that we do take account of all the feedback we receive - including every message on the blog. We treat audience research seriously and will continue to absorb the comments we receive and then take considered, strategic decisions based on the key priorities."

If this was true you would give us back the old site that we allloved and tweak that and not this disaster.

Will you reveal how much of our money you have wasted and how many viewers you have lost with this wonderful dynamic new site

Sorry, don't like the new site, for all the reasons already mentioned. I did the survey when it went live and said that i'd probably get used to it, i haven't. I find i'm visiting it about 20% of the time compared to the old site. I ended up going to sky website for the football last week out of frustration and was surprised to find it easier to use and more informative, so that went into my favourites. Shame really!

well nice to see that there is someone listening enough to at least post a new blog. Unfortunately, the major issues that are being complained about don't seem to be getting any purchase in the thought process of the developers.

a quote from one of the other blogs by scott
"Thank you for raising comments on accessibility. The site was independently tested before launch and no major accessibility issues were reported."

so thats that then? all those colour blind people(myself included) will just have to accept it. Reminds me of apple testing their iphone4 with only right handed users...

"Our technical teams are working hard to resolve the issues - and in the meantime we will continue to provide the best possible alternative, in the form of pages that require manual updating"
or just stick the '' or whatever self refresh function you used before back in. simples..

the majority of issues that i have seen/read are to do with the layout and colour scheme. Yes all the bugs need fixed, they should never have made it live, but if the only thing that is getting looked at is this and not the fundamental flaw with the site, then i expect this blog will end up the same as the rest. 700 odd unanswered comments before being shut.

Such arrogance from the BBC.
I consider myself to be a strong BBC supporter, but this website is a disgrace.
It hurts the eyes, would you consider playing loud white noise throughout a radio music show.... ? because this is the visual equivalent.
It's one of the worst sites on the whole web, what's wrong with you Ben, just clear it out and revert to the one which worked.

Like almost everyone else, I've moved away, in my case to Sky and Google. If you had to rely on advertisers your revenue would now be zero, and you would have to listen to your customers. Everyone is telling you that this site is fundamentally bad, and users are leaving it in droves.
You're playing into the hands of the privatise brigade - stop tinkering, stop being so smug and defensive, admit that this is a disaster, and do something about it.

I've been faithful to the site for as long as BBC Sports has been online. This new low has me scrambling to seek alternatives. You might at least have left a few of the reference sections alone. I've a daily passion for reviewing the day's fixtures at a glance. Can't do this anymore. Just one example, since I don't want to go on when others are doing such a fine job already in listing the site's new weaknesses.
Most of us like to use a site like this for a quick reference. I'm not doing that on your site any longer.

"But I will stress what I said in my original blog post about this relaunch - which is that we will not be making knee-jerk changes". If something is a disaster you change it. Believe me any change you make Ben has got to be an improvement over this.
Here are some tips to be going on with. Easy to read, nice to look at, Simple to use.

Seeing as the BBC is hard up I will not charge you for this design advice

Well the cricket looks fine using the previous layout. I won,t say old as that seems to be the problem Old =bad, new = good. Was no mention at all made during testing about the issue about results and fixtures or the videprinter I find it hard to accept that if the site was tested on current users of the site that this wasn,t an issue

With respect to Ben Gallop this whole matter should go way higher than him.

Somebody not previously involved in the redesign from higher management, or a new well qualified and experienced external project manager should be drafted in to oversee and realign ongoing strategy.

The people in place have failed to prove their competence - new faces required.

Mr Gallop, destroyer of BBC sports and accompanying websites.

Congratulations, you must be so proud.

One minor point that has annoyed me with the new site - we do we need to click "Update" when using the live scores or tables bit? It's an extra click, one that wasn't needed on the old site.

I find changing division on the fixtures bit a bit awkward too, as it lists everything. If there are no fixtures for a division, don't display it.

And on the Homepage, do we need to see Past and Future fixtures/results? The homepage should be about now, and those two bits just add room when they could be replaced by live scores for other sports - although I appreciate this may be something that isn't possible just yet due to the ongoing rollout.

I'm also still not convinced about the article pages where the extra content half-overlaps with the written content. It just doesn't look right in my opinion.

But on the whole, I'm looking forward to the continued improvement of the new site.

If the problems with the live text commentary are "not actually related to the relaunch of the site", what are they related to?

Russ

Ironic that I stumbled across this blog by accident when trying to locate a 6 nations blog! This site is not user friendly, I'm seriously contemplating Sky Sports as my home page, they're words I never thought I would say.

Oooh! Just remembered a major issue I had with the Football site last week... wanted to see what games were scheduled for that day... clicked on fixtures... games already played had a score next to them!!! SPOILERS!!!
Let's get this clear. A FIXTURES list should not become a RESULTS list, that's what the RESULTS section is for. Think of it rather like NOT keeping raisins in a jar marked 'Chocolate Chips'.

Following the cricket, just perfect in the old format!
Please join the facebook group to register your frustration. BBC very conscious of social media these days so if the group grows they'll be more likely to listen!
Facebook search BBC website d ... you'll find it

The new website is absolutely horrible to read on a smartphone; in my case the iPhone. It appears that not 1 minute of testing to see how easy it is to use on anything over than a laptop or PC screen. It wouldn't be so bad if the BBC had brought out the BBC Sport iPhone app which was supposed to follow the BBC News one.

The only positive thing I can comment on is that the Football Gossip page is now a static page. Well done on this, but otherwise you have totally ruined what was my favourite sport website.

Thanks for the update Ben, it's good to know the complaints aren't falling on deaf ears.

I do think you're being a little naughty though when you say "unfortunately it isn't practical to post comments in response to every individual message we receive".

Of course it isn't. That wasn't what everyone was saying they wanted.

Some might describe this as deliberately misrepresenting the arguments being used against you. But surely only politicians are guilty of that?

All we want is rather more frequent communication from you - and some sense we're involved in a dialogue about the site rather than having to put up with whatever the BBC allows us to have. We are serious sport fans with serious issues about the site and we want to be taken seriously.

So next time please don't leave it so long...

Just a quickie, but I've just counted the home page and there are 54, yes 54, stories in one form or another.

No wonder you can't find anything or that very little stands out!

My problem with the BBC is that I'm forever finding myself using their services less and less. It looks like the BBC website (including sports) is another service the BBC provides that I can find better elsewhere.

I very rarely watch any TV on the BBC channels and I would be happy not watching anything on the BBC at all in the future as I can watch similar and better programmes on other channels.

With all other services I subscribe to I can walk away and stop being charged if I want to terminate my custom. But no, not with the BBC. I need to pay the BBC even if I no longer want to use their services. If I want to stop paying the BBC for services I have lost interest in and no longer want to use I can be fined up to £1000. And if I don't pay that fine I can be imprisoned by the court. What a free commerical world we leave in.

The BBC website was one of the last remaining BBC services I valued and wanted to use. But once again the BBC have decided to spend their unique funding in unique ways. And there's nothing I can do about it other than post feedback to the BBC via a blog that will mean nothing to those who have already made decisions that they refuse to go back on.

Money well spent all around.

"Our number one priority at times like this has always been to make sure the site continues to function properly - so to that end, much of our energy has been directed at resolving the technical problems we have encountered in the past week or so with our dynamically updating live pages." I read that as basically as long as the pages work it doesn't matter if they are user friendly or not, we don't care.

"Formatting of results and fixtures - we know there has been some frustration with the way our pages that display up-coming football matches are laid out. In particular there have been calls to still see all the fixtures in all divisions on any given day. We're sorry this facility isn't currently available - but I want to assure you we are working to bring it back as a priority. I can't yet say when the issue will be resolved, as it represents a significant technical deployment - but it is being looked at."…How about saying sorry? Just for once I wish someone involved in this would have the guts to admit that you have got several things wrong with this site.

I am also disappointed that Ben has chosen not to address the accessibility issues raised whereby people, me included, cannot make sense of the colour coded W/D/L bars on the football league tables. Surely this is important according the BBC’s own accessibility rules?

No doubt in a week or so this blog will be closed and another started say how they are listening to our comments but "we will not be making knee-jerk changes". It been 3 weeks, how about making some "required" and "justified" changes?

The Guardian must be laughing their socks off; they are getting increased traffic without even trying.

The fundamental problem for most of us is that the new site is just so awful to look at. Not (just) the colours, but the layout. Why do you persist in overwriting parts of photos with headlines, almost always a part where there is something of interest and leaving an odd bit of background exposed alongside. And the layout of text is very difficult to read comfortably, with article text zigzagging around indents on both sides. Just horrible I'm afraid. (And "headlines" implies prominence....)

With all due respect Ben, why is the BBC going against everything we are paying for?!?!? I remember when BBC talked of the Sky deal in relations to F1 we'd still be able to watch the full race a few hours later..... why extended highlights?!?!?!? why do we continually have to pay £145 a year for tv licences when all the best shows and sports are continuously being taken away from us? well done on continually marketising sport so the normal person who cannot afford to pay the extravagant price of sky is left to look on the bbc sport page which does not even refresh or update itself with new news, learn from other sport websites.... eugh

Hi Ben, how have you been?
It feels like months since I heard from you last but it's good to know that you're getting back to people on the issues they are experiencing with the new look site.
I have to say that after a few weeks I'm slowly getting used to it and news that some features will be returning is most certainly welcomed.
I imagine you must have been inundated with feedback on the new look because you seem to have found time to address this query whislt I and some 5000 other posters still await clarification on the why and hows of the Sky F1 deal.
Nevermind now you've got this issue off your desk I'm positive it will be the next thing down on your 'to-do' list.
We look forward to hearing from you in due course.

I used to use the BBC's services because they were a notch above the competition in terms of quality. Now I use them only to avoid being bombarded with advertising messages.

For a number of years now the BBC's direction seems to have been "lets appeal to the lowest side of people with dumbed-down content in a misguided attempt to attract the highest audience figures to justify our charter".

The strategy should be "lets strive to continuously improve the quality of our services and depth of information provided, and thereby facilitate the raising the educational level and conciousness of the British people, giving them content to enjoy and empower them".

In the latter case the audience and charter would look after themselves.

The whole site is a mess, hard to navigate, hard to find the news stories, hard to look at, easy to walk away from, what a **** up, the most amazing thing is the response from the team is worse than the site, now that is some achievement!

@725. At 12:17 21st Feb 2012 on more on our new website, 606 Sport Hosts wrote:

This entry is now closed to comments. Ben has written a new blog responding to some of the more recent feedback. It can be found here

Part of the problem isn't that Ben has responded to some of the more recent feedback, it's that he doesn't respond to the older feedback that he's had more time to think about.

Before I do that, a word on how we are communicating to you about these changes.

But you're not communicating - you're ignoring then lecturing us as to how we're all wrong

I hope you understand that it makes more sense to provide broader updates like this one on a regular basis

It's regular or otherwise - the word we'd like to see in its place is FREQUENT

we are at least able to reach a larger proportion of the audience and can address the widest range of questions and concerns.

but you're not - your fiddling around the edges of the questions and concerns

But on to the matter at hand. We have been through a number of major changes since we first launched the BBC Sport website, back in 2000. Every time we have done so, it has involved enormous upheaval for everyone and some major design, editorial and technical challenges.

You may have missed the point - you may even have missed it on purpose - but it's not the changes from 2000-2011 that's the issue, it's the 2012 changes. You may have previously gone through "enormous upheaval" but you got it right. What happened this time?

Our number one priority at times like this has always been to make sure the site continues to function properly

It's a matter of semantics - but an important one - you can't make sure a site CONTINUES to function properly whilst admitting that it was launched broken

It's now nearly three weeks since we relaunched the BBC Sport website ..... resolving the technical problems we have encountered in the past week or so

Well, either you think the problems appeared after 2 weeks OR that they were there and you didn't encounter them. Based on the blogs you claim to have listened to the feedback. how can you not have known the problems were there from day 1?

and will continue to absorb the comments we receive and then take considered, strategic decisions based on the key priorities

Once you've finished "absorbing" when can we expect some decisions?

We know that many of you just want to scan the headlines of the big sports stories of the day - and that is one of the reasons we have introduced a new flexible, image-heavy section at the top of the homepage

Did I miss something? We want to scan headlines so you have an image-heavy section at the top?!

which is that we will not be making knee-jerk changes.

Is that why it's taken 3 weeks to fix 2 things?

We have already implemented immediate (but not knee-jerk) fixes to mend 'broken' elements on the site (including the 'flashing' banner and video which automatically played on certain pages)

Why have you used quote marks around broken? Do you still not accept that it was launched with broken, untested items?

that does not mean we are ignoring any issues that you have raised

It seems what does mean you are ignoring us is the lack of response. Is it 3 or 4 posts (i.e. blogs) in 3 weeks?

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

Ben,
Your post could only have been written by someone who works for an organisation which has guaranteed income irrespective of its number of customers. Your tone suggests you and your team want to be left alone to build the site you want, rather than the site your customers want.
If we didn't care so much about the BBC we wouldn't be here complaining. Unfortunately your predecessors delivered a site to a much higher standard which resulted in my loyalty to your site. You and your team's efforts fall far short of what went before and my loyalty has now gone elsewhere. You still have my money however and that is what annoys me and the many who have come here to complain.

Credit where credit is due - it does look like most of the recurring issues from the other blogs have been covered here, and I thank you for that. It does prove that the messages are read and I hope the finished product reflects this.

I suppose the main issue has been created because the site was launched before it was ready. Perhaps this was as a result of tight deadlines imposed on you from above - if this is the case, I hope future updates take place with full testing having been completed.

Can I please request that the headlines down the middle of the page are widened?

Finally Ben, if you do read messages, as it seems, then please respond to the F1 blog. It is really rather unfair that no response to legitimate questions has been given (you will find the legitimate questions in between the emotionally charged and anger filled comments). I understand that it must be difficult reading non stop criticism, but some of the issues I think do deserve a response like you have done here.

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

My theory: the Daily Mail has just become the most popular newspaper website on the internet: loud, garish, higgledy-piggledy, repetitive, incomprehensible, just plain bizarre. You've decided to copy them 'cos, well, it works... for them.

I'll come back when you've realised your errors, as you will, and rectify them, as you must. Meanwhile, I've just noticed that The Guardian's done something completely weird: they've got the football fixtures listed... um... I think the word is chronologically. So, like, I know what's on tonight. Has anyone else noticed that?

If it ain't broke don't fix it springs to mind?!

If it ain't broke...

Just want to point out that even if there is a link, it certainly isn't easy to find European results/tables.

I couldn't find them in the new format, so I searched on google for the Spanish table and a BBC link took me to the old BBC Sport format, with up to date details.

Cheers

the previous sports pages were good so why change them when they did not changing. the live commentray with any in game/action photos is a good improvement which would improve the old live commentray like when it from refresh manually to auto a couple of years ago.

i have question for the bbc sports/ict team how many of have smart phones/tablets and used that to help design the sports pages to be used only on smart phones/tablets? the changes dont work on the pc the look gerish and have too much info on them. the changes need to be user friendly and a clear order of whats happening so far its all over the place you have to spend 5minutes looking for you want and spend another 5minutes clicking on links to get to it.

bbc will always ignore these comments. these changes are change sake.

here is a radical idea from the previous homepage an option to customise the homepage and sports pages. to gvie us the content we want. we all have different intrests. with the previous homepage i had news (political), iplayer, sport (football, f1, cricket), weather with the customise options other people would have what they are interested in.

You're taking the feedback of every person seriously, yet don't appear to want to change anything the majority of people want ie - colour choice, layout, headlines position on front page, text indenting.

I want to know who you got feedback from when you were testing and building the site. Seems you take the feedback they give you much higher than any of actual people who use the site and comment here. You won't make knee-jerk changes, yet you did when you changed to this abomination of a website.

You can't reply to everyone, but I don't believe you've replied to anyone. I wrote a complaint about the site, but still I haven't feedback and I guess I won't this blog is all that we get.

My usage of the BBC Sport website has diminished considerably since the re-launch 3 weeks ago. I only come back to read the hundreds (probably now thousands) of messages on these blogs complaining about the site, but you don't seem to react to any of them. I guess you are probably thinking if you leave it long enough people will stop complaining, which is probably true, but they will also find other, better websites to use.

I used to think BBC Sport was the best sports website on the Internet, it's now not even close to the best - what a shame.

@56 The old site was just as bad just differently - the long lists and lack of easy movement from one sport to another was really bad from my point of view. The new site probably suffers from too many dynamic pages and poor management of the context selected on each so I look at results for a specific league and then look at fixtures and I have to reselect the league again. The converse is that I can see all tables UK and the reset of the world without leaving the page. Swings and roundabouts.

I'm sure over time things will be reassessed just like the news website has been changed quite a lot since its major relaunch.

@55 Try Football->Results (its on the far left second line of the menu) and select European in the first drop down and Spanish in the second. Same works on the tables and fixtures pages.

Unfortunately the use of XHR requests means that indexes and searches will not take you there as there is no Spanish results page....Maybe something the Sports team could think about.

Thank you for the update, Ben. Good news, I say.

By putting the results and fixtures in chronological order, restoring the vidiprinter and fixing live update, the site will be back with the data that is up to date and in the right order. That will be a huge step forward.

Web site design is a matter of taste. Correct, easily read and interpreted data is a matter of survival!

So the BBC see fit to respond to 118 complaints in regards to the Whitney Houston coverage
https://bbc.kongjiang.org/www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-17114756

But Ben and his team and the ones we have complained too again totally ignore our complaints and I am pretty sure there are more than 118 complaints and come back with some peacemeal reply.
Ben, why cant you take it onboard most of us hate the website.

@58 Yes, that's an important point about the News site. The redesign was fairly horrific on launch and really screamed at the viewer - huge headlines, raw colours, not enough information above the fold. But now the toned down version is much more usable.

Shame the BBC couldn't have learned some lessons from it, though.

Ben,
I think you and your team should be awarded the OBE (out before easter)

You won't make "knee-jerk changes" to the site? You wouldn't have needed to if you had got the site right in the first place! It's all about common sense and user friendliness. Progress is meant to make things better, not worse! Given the obvious awkwardness of the site for football results and fixture information, I have started using SkySports instead. I will return when you have sorted the mess out.

I really hoped your coverage of european football would improve with changes to the site but instead you seem to have done the opposite. I can't find the tables any more let alone the brief snippets of news the old site had.

Disappointing.

I am pleased you are now acknowledged that this site is flawed (well maybe not in those words but if you didn't think it was we probably wouldn't have had a response).
Why it was launched untested and faulty who knows but that is sadly what we have got.
3 weeks have passed and site is still a mess. - yellow and black are BBC sport colors - okay so why not more black as on the F1 page? that could be done in just a few mins
I go on to home page and no stories stand out to me less pictures larger print would help me.
Hopefully things will be put right over coming weeks and I will keep checking and hoping but I do not use site like I used to any more.
I know it will take time as the site has probably been designed by committee and the same committee has to authorise changes Probably met yesterday when they all came back from having the half term week off as holiday!

Ben Says "Unfortunately it isn't practical to post comments in response to every individual message we receive" Ben, I am still waiting for answers from questions that were asked last July, You appear to answer no questions at all.

I would like an answer to the question that is being ignored by the BBC, Why are the BBC not showing full delayed reruns of the race? Bernie E has confirmed the BBC have the right to do this, but even after all the complaints made to the BBC over this deal they still choose to ignore what the licence payer wants.

Ben,
I'd just like to try to explain my (and I think I speak for many) point of view to you. It's a relief you're going to change the fixtures/results pages BUT...

The new fixtures/results format is deeply flawed to the point of being ridiculous, unbelievable in fact. It is absolutely clear that whoever came up with it has NO CONCEPT of what a user wants. Meanwhile the department has been posting jargon filled blogs about the design and testing process and how much people liked it pre launch. This is deeply insulting to all the posters trying to explain to you what a hash you've made of it.

You've obviously had meetings where you've discussed these issues and realised you had to act but you TOTALLY FAILED to engage with us in the comments section of your last blog. If you'd posted once in a while to let us know you were having those meetings etc. the whole atmosphere might well have been different. Having said that the guy on the design blog ignored the scores of comments about the design faults but responded to the guy who corrected his spelling, which was just as bad.

I hope you realise that the vast majority of us are making these comments (even the angry negative ones) to try to get you to improve the site. You ignore us, your complaints department patronises us and the trust tell us to go away. Thanks!!!

You're so proud of the "new" live scores pages for each division but they're not new. We already had one ... one that included goalscorers and red cards, which the new one doesn't. It just has flashier graphics and links. So information-wise the new version is worse. Most of us want at-a-glance information which we've now lost.
The update buttons are some kind of accessibility requirement you tell us but the new site is full of accessibility issues. Even I struggle with the green/grey in the league tables and I have no sight problems. I could go on but you get the picture. Pretty much every issue that's been raised by more than two or three people is something that really does needs changing. We're trying to help so engage with us properly.

On a positive note (from your point of view) no one has yet bothered to join my facebook group "BBC website disaster" which I created this morning as a means of getting you to listen to us.

Hoping it's not another 12 days before we hear from you again, all the best etc.

Re post 67.
Here's the facebook link for anyone inteested in keeping the pressure on

https://www.facebook.com/groups/170830816365748/

@67. At 19:50 21st Feb 2012, mattlehagi wrote:

On a positive note (from your point of view) no one has yet bothered to join my facebook group "BBC website disaster" which I created this morning as a means of getting you to listen to us.

-----------------------------------

Sorry mattlehagi I don't do facebook or else I would (I'm too busy meeting and talking with people to do "Social Networking").

On another topic (namely the "web-site") there is one question which, as far as I can see, has not been responded to.

You'd think, given the nature of the question and the significance it carries, that this would of been the question Ben / Scott / Cait would have addressed:

Why have the Editorial Guidelines been disregarded (at least) in respect of the colour-blind issues and the left-justifying of text?

Given that neither the design or test processes identified them we now have 2 failures.

Surely the absence of a reply means that has increased to 3 failures!

What is the point of having Editorial Guidelines when they can be ignored / discounted over such a fundemental issue accessibilty?

What do we all have to do to get this issue (and ideally others) addressed? Complaints department dead-bat all complaints. Looks like it's the Trust / Govenors / MPs / Press then ....

So, the videprinter is back. But it's not updating automatically. One disaster after another. Had enough now.

Hi TT,

no problem regarding joining the group, I understand and respect your resistance to social media.
I got a facebook account at my young daughters insistence (and to spy on her) and opened a twitter account to complain to David Bond regarding the Sepp Blatter racism row when BBC Sport stopped all blogs for 3 days (because they were worried about racist comments presumably). Amazingly enough he never replied but did write probably his best blog ever later the same day and surprise, surprise the vast majority of comments were intelligent and interesting.
It just occurred to me that if it catches on they're much more likely to act than they are to this internal pressure. Plus it took about a minute to set up so worth a try.

As one of the people who did respond to the survey.... When it first was first made available online.... And who told the BBC there and then that I found the site unwieldy, unfriendly and not fit for purpose, I must admit that the "test site" at that time was much, much less hideous than the one that finally went "live".

Or maybe it was just that I could escape it and go back to the humdrum but readable, enjoyable, user-friendly Font of All Sport Knowledge we had all come to know and love....

The real problem with the revamped site is surely that it really is definitely "Not Fit For Purpose"......

Something went really, really badly, disastrously wrong....

Its isn't just the awful layout, the garish colours that fly in the face of any Accessibility agreements the BBC has signed up to , the higgledy-piggledy mess of (mainly useless and duplicated) information, the lack of any form of logical design flow.....

Basically.... It doesn't work properly!

And in this technological day and age.... That is a total disgrace......

PLUS.... I forgot to mention...

It takes A G E S to load any of the new Sports Pages on my desktop or laptop.... And I refuse to lay out a few hundred pounds for yet another piece of technology just because the BBC can't get it right.

Just read the preview on the 'Well v Hibs game. Hibs seem to have signed Tom Sawyers. Did Mark Twain give him a free transfer? Will we get Huck Finn next?

What an incredible amount of bad comments. I agree with most. What a complete waste of money and case of changing something that was perfectly good.

Not only bad comments on here but many people I have spoken to over the past couple of weeks who used to use this site and no don't. I only keep checking it in the hope they have reverted back to the old site!

The new site is terrible. How could this site have been allowed to be launched with such appalling navigation. This is an exercise in style over substance and the style isn't even any good. This makes me so mad. Progress is supposed to make things better. far to often these days we "progress" for progress sake. This is very much one step forward and ten steps back. Well done BBC.

I dont usually post comments but i'm making an exception in this case, the previous BBC Sport website was excelent and it was always going to be difficult to improve it but 'oh dear' what a dissapointment, I tend to be on the sport site numerous times everyday but I am now looking for an alternative, such a shame to ruin something like that, I would love to have the old site back.

what annoys me the most is that anyone at the BBC could possibly think this aboration was an improvement. Assuming they didn't think this heap of rubbish was better, who in power signed this rubbish off. They should be ashamed and should now be unemployed. Don't waste taxpayers money on rubbish like this.

And the vomit-inducing yellow?

I have registered for the blog specifically to let you know that thanks to this and your main site redesign, I rarely visit the BBC sites any longer and go to The Guardian instead. Sound familiar?

I know it's hardly the most important issue that's been raised, but I see that some people have complained that the BBC have broken their own guidelines by not left-aligning text of two or more lines. If you mean on the story pages, then although the left margin does move (to wrap around images, information boxes and some quotes), and although this may not be to everybody's taste, the text is still left-aligned.

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

ONLY ONE BIG ISSUE. WHY, GIVEN THE AMOUNT OF IPAD USERS, CAN'T WE VIEW VIDEO CONTENT. POOR, POOR, POOR!!!!!

I have to say that the new web layout for BBC Sport is a backward step in terms of ease of viewing and navigation, in fact I no longer use the website and now prefer other websites. I decided to register for the first time purelybso i could convey these comments. It's a great shame since i've always preferred the BBC sport site over all other options, but no longer. I hope it is changed soon. For the immediate future I will not be back.

@81. At 21:13 21st Feb 2012, Jalisco Red wrote

If you mean on the story pages, then although the left margin does move (to wrap around images, information boxes and some quotes) ... the text is still left-aligned.

As it was a previous (now closed) blog you may have missed my earlier post:

https://bbc.kongjiang.org/www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/sporteditors/2012/02/more_on_our_new_website.html?postId=111676007

Would you call this left aligned?

"So in terms of themes that continue to come up, here are some areas we are actively looking at:

• Formatting of results and fixtures - we know there has been some frustration with the way our pages that display up-coming football matches are laid out.
...
• Headlines on the homepage - ... We know that many of you just want to scan the headlines of the big sports stories of the day - and that is one of the reasons we have introduced a new flexible, image-heavy section
• Videprinter - we know some of you are missing the videprinter, ie the single page containing all the latest scores as they come in, across all football divisions. "

Ben, I think what you're really saying is that your initial audience research was rubbish, and you've now spent a load of time, effort and money designing and developing a site that's no use to its users - i.e. not fit for purpose.

I hope it's that - I hope you didn't all just ignore the audience research and go off to design a site that you felt would be good on the CV.

Whichever it is, I realise you cannot now admit to either of those failings because heads would have to roll; and we can't have people taking responsibility for their decisions, can we?

Please try to get someone to explain the thinking behind an "image-heavy section" aiding the "scanning of headlines". I can't get my head round that one.

What a load of old rubbish.

I am starting to like the sky sports site as it gives me the information I want and quickly, like the old bbc sport site used to do.

Cheerio

@ Think Tank, no, I didn't miss that post. I found it very funny, witty, and generally I agree with the point you're making: the stories/articles aren't as easy on the eye as they were before, no doubt about that.

But, yes, that text is left-aligned, because it starts from a left-hand margin. The fact that that margin moves in doesn't make it a right-hard margin.

*right-hand margin, even

Here's something else for you to fix then:

Looked at the site (for the live scores) for the Chelsea game this evening, and did the usual "double tap" as on any iDevice to zoom into that area. it zoomed into the text, but didn't include the column to the left with the timestamps in ... essential, as it's a chronological list of events. Set you DIV/SPAN tags so that this is included when you zoom into it.

It worked on the old site. Something else that the new, "dynamic" site fails to do. Exasperated ...

If you don't like the website click here

https://www.facebook.com/groups/170830816365748

Well Ben, you had a great opportunity but I'm afraid you're not even close. At the risk of repetition you have completely missed the main points raised in numerous comments - poor use of colour / confused design / sacrificing quality for the sake of quantity. Instead you have concentrated on patting yourself on the back for fixing a few bugs that shouldn't have been there in the first place.
I'm resigned to the fact that it's unlikely you'll admit the redesign is a failure and more likely that the BBC will adopt a siege mentality, hoping this "noise" will blow itself out soon enough.
Thanks, but no thanks, I'm off to find someone who understands what the customer wants.

And that YELLOW!!!!!!!

What a strange way to list the goal-scorers in a game - Dundee Utd scored 4 times tonight, listed as:
Dixon 58′ Daly (pen) 56′
Robertson 84′ Rankin 70′
I can understand trying to compress it onto 2 lines, but why not preserve the time order? Who reads English from right to left? It's just as easy to program it as 'normal' as it is in this order, maybe easier... more change for change's sake, perhaps?

https://bbc.kongjiang.org/www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17023225

Thanks for the feedback, even if it took a little time to get back to us.
Even in 'actively addressing' these areas, there's sadly still no actual direct answers being provided to many concerns.
• Formatting of results and fixtures - why are there any such problems at all?
How was this missed when we are assured everything had been rigorously tested & passed by atypical users of the site?
For the user, improvement none, answers to repeated requests to why not bring back the superior previous version again none so why not at least try to incorporate the previous page design?
• Reflecting the BBC sport brand - the previous version incorporated the colouring of the brand adequately, why not simply retain the basic colouring for headers & links? A simple fix & answers so many complainants.
• Headlines on the homepage - again how did this pass testing initially? More worrying, how can we place any confidence in your comment "we will test any potential further changes before introducing them onto the live site." when it didn't obviously happen prior to launch?
This time, please can we see evidence of how this testing is being done & by whom?
• Videprinter - again, how on earth could this have been missed?
If your testing was done by 'real' representative users even in a test environment & on a mock up site missing such a basic, prominent feature is surely impossible.
On historic data alone the number of hits this page would have had on the previous site would have demanded it be included, so again why no answer as to why?
These are the areas you indicate are being addressed, but sadly so much more remains - tip of the iceberg.........?

Could I add a major annoyance and I think poor design feature for your consideration.

Too much space is wasted on all the pages with the grey areas down the side and often white areas as well.

If I have my browser at full screen size on my 17" screen:
On the football home page at least 30% of space is wasted and blank either side of the actual information
On some pages the wastage is even higher!

Given that one of your aims was better use of horizontal space and given that html is very good at catering for variable size windows its hard to understand why its designed this way!

A suggestion if you spread the current design out horizontally you could actually have a sensible width for the "headline " column

At a time when the BBC, along with many other public funded bodies, is supposed to be cutting costs, why was a relaunch deemed necessary ? The old site provided exactly what most sport fans wanted - live scores, reports and results. Why waste money providing the same product in a new (and presumably expensive) new packaging ?

Ben can you please tell me your bosses name and contact details as I want to complain to him about your total lack of understanding and inability to do your job properly as you are now wasting our licence fee payers money on trying to get right what you have already made a right royal mess of.. Does it not shew that all these mistakes are due to bad planning, inaccuracy, ineptness and total lack of understanding what is required because if you do not think so then we have all been disenfranchised by a corporation that is clearly now a lumbering Behemoth that the ability to hide behind its concrete, lead lined cloak of untouchability. I hope that someone takes account of the wastefulness of this failed project and its ongoing repairs like an old jalopy mended with isopan and held together with gaffer tape and bean cans! I am so angry that the old sports web site has been changed, and it is not for changes sake that we complain but because there are soo many mistakes and failures in the new one. God know's what you have been doing these past days to allow such a failure to breathe fresh air. No apology that is also to be noted we have had to endure the utter shambles of the new site and all its faililngs and you cannot even say sorry flolks we got some things wrong and we apologise.

Hi Ben.

I, like a few posters, am part of this lovely online industry and can feel the pain when you open up the Pandora's Box that is feedback. Unfortunately you are part of a much larger team but it is you who is at the sharp end.

Whilst I feel some of the comments are a little raw - particularly people going to Sky, for God's sake - they are broadly justified.

There are some fundamental IA and usability issues with the site that I am surprised were not picked up in UAT or basic research.

It's folly to believe the BBC can ever please the masses - unfortunately, the masses all have to stump up the license fee and therefore all have a say. This creative tension/ rock and hard place situation obviously means you're on a hiding to nothing whatever you do but I have to side with "the masses" – the website does need a rethink.

Sometimes it’s best to stick with what you have and evolve rather than revolutionise…I don’t envy you though, mate.

is anyone going to explain why the new Sports Website does not follow the BBC Compulsorily Guideline that all text written in English Language MUST be left justified?