Whoops! I obviously got a bit swept up in the last Ashes fever and then....er....just became a bit lazy about updating this blog! In all honesty, I was planning to update it earlier but didn't want to tread on Midnight's Tour Diary toes. However, the fact that he is still on tour and I am back at work has forced me to do anything I can to feel reconnected with cricket! I will, though, try to avoid either thoughts or tantrums related to the current tour.
BBC news today carries a report that the future of cricket broadcasting will be made before the upcoming general election. For any of you non-politicos, that's 3 June at the latest but potentially a month or so earlier. The real debate concerning cricket is whether home Ashes series will be shown on free to air TV, or whether it will remain, as with all other cricket, off the 'Crown Jewels' list and consigned to pay TV (Sky Sports, unless a subscription broadcasting mutiny takes place).
When, after the home Ashes in 2005, the realisation that such scenes would not be available to all for viewing, most spectators were gutted: some on principle, some just because they liked Channel 4 coverage. For a while, other media chappies joined in with the masses' argument: take away tours, take away all other series, but don't take away our Ashes! But, as happens, the story was dropped. As it rears its head again now, I keep hearing the ECB's complaints that removing Sky funding will have a massively detrimental effect on the Counties and grass roots cricket.
Obviously Sky's money has done good things for English cricket. But how much damage has been done because so many supporters and potential supporters can't watch the game? Yes, plenty of people do have Sky, and Sky Sports at that, but how do you come to the game otherwise? We currently have a situation where you can only be introduced to cricket by a parent, who provides pay TV for their children. Wouldn't it be nice if young people could discover it for themselves? Or maybe I'm just being idealistic. I fear I've asked too many questions, rather than answered them.
As a romantic traditionalist I would prefer cricket to be shown on terrestrial TV. I thought Channel 4 did a fantastic job not just of broadcasting the live games but encouraging new viewers to the game through their analysis and jargon-busting segments. They even led Sky in many ways through their innovative coverage. However, I don't see the point in only showing five tests every four years on free to air channels. Either the public loves cricket, and the advertising will recoup some of the bidding costs, or it truly is a minority sport that needs the dedicated coverage (County cricket as well as non-England internationals) and financial input that Sky can provide.
When the time for the decision making comes, what I would really like to be compulsory is not free to air broadcasting of home Ashes series, but a daily highlights package of all England games, T20, ODIs and Tests, both home and away, against all opponents. This keeps the money in the English game, whilst allowing viewers to catch up on the team's on-field exploits. A 45 minute slot, with analysis and interviews included, would be much more watchable than Sky's two-hour highlights marathons that take up far too much of busy viewers' time.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment