[UTVLifer]

This has happened on The One Show too since Matt Baker's departure

To the point now where it feels like presenting The One Show is a form of jury duty for many BBC presenters

In contrast, This Morning hasn't got as wide a pool of talent to draw from when it comes to filling the chair next to Holly

[m_in_m]

To the point now where it feels like presenting The One Show is a form of jury duty for many BBC presenters

In contrast, This Morning hasn't got as wide a pool of talent to draw from when it comes to filling the chair next to Holly

The One Show however has stabilised with Jermain generally doing half the week and Ronan the other. Roman Kemp seems to be the main stand in when Jermaine or Ronan are away.

[Brekkie]

Rochelle did say she'd be back on air during the summer though not sure who she is hosting with. I've also seen a report that Ruth is doing a week again which would be even more surprising than last year given the mudslinging from Eamonn, though Ruth kept a dignified silence through all that.


Personally if they're not replacing Phil and as much as I rate Craig I would have Alison and Dermot split the week with Holly and the three of them be the main face of the show, with Craig and Josie then doing the holidays.

[PJamo]

Probably better this way. Allows the show to trundle on for a year with a 'tried and trusted team' approach rather than going for a Phil replacement who would be scrutinised relentlessly and doomed to fail from the start.

I doubt we'll see a change back to the A team / B team type arrangement that the show has previously gone for until Holly decides to move on .

[EJnutz]

I would not make Holly the main presenter. I would have the team splitting the presenting amongst themselves during the week. This will make it more a "family" of presenters and it does distant itself a bit from the Holly/Phil line up.

I hope Ruth is going to do more than a week.

[DTV]

Suspect it'll be the same with BBC News now with just a group of hosts covering the 1/6/10 rather than a named host for each bulletin.

To be honest, it's de facto been that way with the One and Six since George Alagiah first went on medical leave, and the Ten has been more of a free-for-all than it could have been for a good few years now. I think with news, though, it actually sort of works as being less personality-led and more team-based can be a good thing, helped enormously by the BBC having a strong bench. Plus, it has arguably enabled a smoother transition post-Alagiah and Edwards than you might otherwise have had - Chakrabarti and Myrie, in particular, would likely have had a harder job stepping up without the years of non-fixed presenters.

I do agree, though, that falling back into guest or rotating presenters has become a lazy cop-out for a lot of TV producers in the last few years - with it sometimes seeming they can't be bothered to take the decisions required of a screen test round. Obviously, there are some cases of strong teams, but, when partnership chemistry is a key part of the programme, it does make it harder. And when you've got outside guests, it's always hit-and-miss.

[Brekkie]

The One Show however has stabilised with Jermain generally doing half the week and Ronan the other. Roman Kemp seems to be the main stand in when Jermaine or Ronan are away.

And of course sister show Morning Live is now pretty much "Guess who is hosting with Gethin?", where once Kym Marsh stepped down from daily duties did announce a team of regular co-hosts yet still seem to have multiple guest hosts in addition to those too.
Heck they've probably already had more female co-hosts than This Morning has had in 35 years.  


The risk with This Morning going down this route is Holly needs to have chemistry with 4 presenters rather than 1, and if she doesn't that is harder to hide over 2.5 hours than 30-45 minutes.

[Otis Crump]

Actually The Big Breakfast and Chris Evans kind of started the idea of hosts not doing the full week with him cutting down to three then two days a week after a year.  I hated it then too, and for whatever reason when Chris left they were very reluctant to give Mark Little the role full time.


Although I think Holly (and Phil) taking so much time off if this is the approach they're taking I'd actually give her more time off so we get more weeks with Dermot and Alison (and I guess Josie and Craig), with Holly doing some Fridays to offset that.

I think Chris only cut back to 3 days a week. Don't think he was ever down to just 2. He took a week off early in 1994, which dovetailed into the launch of Don't Forget Your Toothbrush and Chris only hosting on Tuesday to Thursday from then on.

[Andrew]

Probably better this way. Allows the show to trundle on for a year with a 'tried and trusted team' approach rather than going for  a Phil replacement who would be scrutinised relentlessly and doomed to fail from the start.

I agree with that. The Phil replacement would receive undue coverage like you say

Ratings would be analysed and taken out of context, comparing a heat wave day with the new host versus a snow day with Phil. There would be stories that viewers don’t like the presenter, how the show is in crisis as viewers switch off, all based of course on a few tweets

Bringing in a new face into the ‘family’ quietly and then if popular making them the main presenter is a much better way of doing it

[Brekkie]

I agree with that. The Phil replacement would receive undue coverage like you say

Ratings would be analysed and taken out of context, comparing a heat wave day with the new host versus a snow day with Phil. There would be stories that viewers don’t like the presenter, how the show is in crisis as viewers switch off, all based of course on a few tweets

Bringing in a new face into the ‘family’ quietly and then if popular making them the main presenter is a much better way of doing it

How long should that take though?  They've already bought the obvious replacement in to the family with Craig Doyle and viewers have already somewhat welcomed him.   Why stretch it out any longer? It'll have been 4 months come September.

Ratings were analysed for about two weeks after Phil left and that was that - not seen them reported since.


TV can't continually put off making decisions or changes because they're frightened what the tabloids or social media might think.  It's no way to run a business.