we love cricket

idntlikecricket.c.uk

		Stuff 'n' nonsense .....
		30 December 2009 Test cricket on TV (again) (a bit) (eventually)
		The announcement that the home test series v Australia could (subject still to formal review) form part of the "crown jewels" reserved for free-to-air TV is well covered in the current (January 2010) Wisden Cricketer magazine with a smattering of readers letters pointing out that whatever the ECB says, the Sky money has NOT reached grass-roots cricket, an editorial and a column by none other than Matthew Engel. Blimey, if that lot can't move this forward then heaven help us: The case against a continuation of the Sky monopoly is making itself by the day with fewer people following and getting involved in the game. I know as I am Treasurer of a village club and see fewer juniors (and full members) coming forward each season. Still, plenty of "Kolpaks" are earning a living further up the pole... However, even Ashes inclusion is too little (all home test cricket should be FTA) and too late - (a) the damage has been done and (b) with Sky already having the 2013 Aussies in the contract bag, the first home Ashes series people will see will be 2017, twelve whole years after 2005. That is basically a generation lost. And still the ECB resist... footnote: England have just won the 2nd test in Durban. I wonder how many people saw it. Could you pick Graeme Swann out of an ID parade? What about Jonathan Trott?
		31 August 2009 Test cricket on TV
		What a marvellous Ashes series, but did you watch it? The TV viewing figures were published and showed that something like 2m were watching versus 8m in 2005, the final year of Free-To- Air viewing. I wish I had a pound for everyone who said to me what a shame it was that they couldn't see it. Enough said? Apparently not. The campaign continues.....
		8 February 2009 West Indies cricket
		Hopefully the resounding victory by West Indies against England in Jamaica will help the revival of interest in the game in the Caribbean. The seemingly empty Sabina Park stands throughout most of the game were depressing. The result, and its nature, opens up the series as a contest (apparently a foregone conclusion that England would win …!). In conjunction with the West Indies’ side’s victory in the Stanford Tweny:20 farce last October, this could represent a turning point and one that will good for cricket as a whole. The islands need new cricketing heroes and Chris Gayle, Jerome Taylor and Sulieman Benn seem to fit the bill.
		1 February 2009 Bearded Wonder
		Cricket will, of course, recover from the loss of Bill Frindall; statistics will still be kept, and quoted, masterfully, by someone else, someone different. But maybe things won't quite be the same on TMS for a while. Cricket has lost what, to many devotees, was a defining feature on a varied and undulating landscape that included the likes of Arlott, Johnston, Benauld, Blofeld; people who loved cricket and whose love shows through in their work because of their ability to convey that love. It is probably a rather peculiarly English thing, this romanticising of the game, but it is there nonetheless. Many have been, and hopefully will continue to be, inspired by the input of these people and there is something there that sets the game apart. Does the game create these people or do these people make the game? There is, I suppose, a virtuous circle and the one fear that many have is of this circle being broken. Will over-commercialism break it? Too much cricket? Twenty20? Stanford? Lack of free-to-air TV coverage in Britain? Betting scandals didn't, Packer didn't, cynical tactics (BodyLine, West Indian bumpers) didn't. Let's hope not and instead look forward to being entertained and enthralled by the likes of these people for years to come.
		24 January 2009 TV Coverage Rights
		The suggestion in the press that Culture Secretary Andy Burnham is to reconsider including cricket within the so-called “crown jewels”, thus opening the way for live cricket re-appearing on free-to-air TV (presumably from 2013 when the current ECB/Sky deal expires) is good news indeed. It is probably too late for a generation of young people who have not seen cricket on TV since getting hooked in 2005 during the England Ashes; people like my son who was 11 in 2005 and despite being taken to Lord’s every year as well as Canterbury, Hove and Beckenham for live cricket (tests and limited overs) has seen his interest in the game wane from the high point of 2005. To an extent this is my fault for not subscribing to Sky, I suppose, but I still believe he has missed out on the live tests and John Player League Sunday afternoon games that I grew up watching in the 1970’s. Now comes the chance to correct two of the most short-sighted decisions ever taken by the ECB. There seems to be a suggestion, however, that the “crown jewels” status only covers Twenty:20 cricket (county or England games?) not tests because the latter is too difficult for the BBC to schedule. This would be wrong: Twenty:20 is the modern (if somewhat unsatisfying) alternative to the 1970’s JPL and people want to watch this, then fine. However, to exclude tests would be wrong. They can easily be scheduled. Not on BBC1 or BBC2 as before, but on BBC3 or 4. As far as I can tell, these two channels are empty during the day and would be perfect for test cricket. As to the argument that Sky coverage is higher quality than the old BBC or Channel4 broadcasting, this is a myth, too. The important thing is to show the cricket; it is simply about the cricket; everything else (snickometers, hawk-eye, endless replays, cameras in players’ faces following them off the pitch, etc.) are just gimmicks. It is people’s passion and enthusiasm that generates interest. So come on Mr Burnham, include the test matches in the “crown jewels” and let people watch proper cricket again. Test matches on BBC3 or BBC4 will do nicely in our digital terrestrial age. Links: Guardian articles The Guardian 23-Jan-09 and The Guardian 22-Jan-09

		<< back to home page