Aussie ashes coverage

[keaton]

Man of Harveys
there's excellent access for free, you can listen to TMS or watch the highlights.
And i'd rather County Cricket existed and therefore we had a decent cricket team locally and nationally rather than change the system for the benefit of people who don't pay attention to cricket for four and half years get to watch the big matches

 

[Man of Harveys]

But county cricket existed when the BBC had the TV rights and when Channel 4 had them. They paid for those TV rights, they just didn't pay quite as much. Sorry but to me it's always looked like a decision driven by pure greed: grab the cash and sod the consequences. Could you imagine, say, a child becoming interested in TMS when it's a sport that they've never seen on telly? I can't.

I may well be wrong but I suspect more people watched even the less interesting Test matches on Channel 4 and the BBC than are now watching a brilliant Ashes series on Sky. I think it's a shame.

 

[Brovion]

For what little it's worth, my opinion on the removal of the national summer sport to where it can be accessed only by those with enough money to spunk up the wall on televised sport is that it was a total f***ing disgrace; a piece of cretinously short-termist money-grabbing by the game's administrators and a move likely only further to push the game into being one enjoyed solely by the affluent. And yes I could afford it and no I don't want to make Rupert Murdoch any richer.

Both test matches this summer alone SHOULD have been great national events. They haven't been. Because of the ECB acting like an idiotic and greedy whore.

And Brovian, I know you're a terrific shit-stirrer (and I kinda like that) but to paint Channel 4's brilliant and pioneering cricket coverage as rubbish compared to Sky's cheesy graphics fest - who exactly ARE those vaguely homoerotic little films of the cricketers strutting forward butchly meant to impress? Toddlers? - is just a nonsense.

Because I'd happily go back to the days of Jim Laker clambering up the scaffolding and being out of breath for the first few overs for the sake of everyone who has a telly being able to watch it.

And breathe...

Blimey, I didn't realise I was a shit-stirrer! Occasionally I might say a few tongue-in-cheek things to, er, 'provoke a debate', but I reckon about 95% of what I write is my genuine opinion and not said for effect. Certainly on this thread, yes, I stand by what I say about Sky's coverage compared with Channel 4. I must admit that when Sky started cricket coverage I feared the worst when Charles Colville commentated as he was a bit "Well this game desparately needs either another wicket or a six", I thought it was all going to be like that, a bit like in football when Andy Gray tries to convince you that a 0-0 draw between Bolton and Blackburn has been a pulsating exhibition of footballing genius. However I have been pleasantly surprised by the commentary and production standards, to say nothing of the innovations such as hotspot. Even the BBC with dear old Jim, Richie and Peter West didn't do it any better. But yes, the trailers are bombastic crap

Anyway I'm glad you came out with the reasons why you won't have Sky as it does back up the point I made to DKM earlier that for some people still see Murdoch as a maleovent force (the Devil Incarnate I think I said). Again, I don't see it that way, I used to, after all I picketed at Wapping! Now I think that if people can't see how much British sport has benefitted from Murdoch's investment then they're a load of bigoted ignorant cretins who are quite prepared to cut off their stupid noses to spite their faux-liberal faces in a purile show of gesture politics. (Yeah, ok, I DID say that for effect).

 

[The Oldman]

I'm very torn on this one. I do have all Sky sports channels including HD and for me and the missus we really get our monies worth. These dedicated sports channels give you so much more than can be fitted into the "free" mainstream ones. Also I do not believe the UK would have advanced so quickly into widescren , HD , and the techinical innovations if we had to rely on BBC, ITV or H 4.

Having said all that I know there are many (particulary the OAPs) who cannot afford Sky yet would love to watch Test Cricket.

 

[Questions]

For what little it's worth, my opinion on the removal of the national summer sport to where it can be accessed only by those with enough money to spunk up the wall on televised sport is that it was a total f***ing disgrace; a piece of cretinously short-termist money-grabbing by the game's administrators and a move likely only further to push the game into being one enjoyed solely by the affluent. And yes I could afford it and no I don't want to make Rupert Murdoch any richer.

Both test matches this summer alone SHOULD have been great national events. They haven't been. Because of the ECB acting like an idiotic and greedy whore.

And Brovian, I know you're a terrific shit-stirrer (and I kinda like that) but to paint Channel 4's brilliant and pioneering cricket coverage as rubbish compared to Sky's cheesy graphics fest - who exactly ARE those vaguely homoerotic little films of the cricketers strutting forward butchly meant to impress? Toddlers? - is just a nonsense.

Because I'd happily go back to the days of Jim Laker clambering up the scaffolding and being out of breath for the first few overs for the sake of everyone who has a telly being able to watch it.

And breathe...

Hypocrate.
You trundle off to the pub or a mate`s house when the Albion feature on Sky I bet. This anti Murdoch stance is like all your arguements, 20 years out of date. Cricket survived in its old format with the BBC because pay TV had yet to be born (licence fee.... cough)
You just sit at home listening to the world service the next time we feature, crying because you`re misguided principals stop you going to watch a match with the lads down the boozer.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

Having said all that I know there are many (particulary the OAPs) who cannot afford Sky yet would love to watch Test Cricket.

well they can eff off for a start.

 

[Man of Harveys]

Hypocrate...arguements...you`re misguided principals

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

well they can eff off for a start.

And they're tight-wads.

 

[tedebear]

This is bloody unbelievable, can you not win gracefully?

Tyrone B. who ever he is does not represent me thats for sure - AFL is one of the most boring games ever invented. Cricket wins hands down. We were beaten fair and square and in the same way the English would, we are debating wickets where we thought the judgement was dubious. The English press are the worst in the world at it....

and furthermore - I can't believe the shit that Ricky Ponting gets, yes he's competitive and yes he's exceptionally serious about what he does, but he will become, if he isn't already, one of the greatest cricketers EVER. A little English respect seems to have escaped you all, given the plaudits he's just heaped on Freddie and the Lords crowd. Is it just jealousy?

 

[Stumpy Tim]

Typical anti-Australian thread here, which is always rather pathetic. Pure jealousy really. All this "Australia has no culture" rubbish. OK - there are no old churches, but there's plenty of theatre, comedy, there's the f***ing opera house for fucks sake. There's also a thriving beach culture, which most parts of Britain will never understand because the water is like sewage & it's freezing most of the year. And yes, sport is a major part of the culture Down Under. And the country is rightly proud of its sporting success given we only have a population of 20 million. So let's get off the standard British high-horse shall we.

In terms of the coverage over here, the Ashes is definitely the number one sporting story during the test matches. When the sport section comes up on Sky News the Ashes always leads when a test is being played, and sometimes between tests. Having said that, more time is devoted to AFL and Rugby League - but that's because England V Australia is one match, while there are ten games of NRL each week and the same for AFL - so obviously there's more to cover.

The reporting is very pro-Australia (most commentators were talking up their chances of getting the 500+ they needed), but when they lost they were very appreciative of England (Flintoff's) performance. They took defeat well.

The funny thing is that when Australia win they don't gloat like the Brits (I include myself in that). I guess they're used to winning

 

[Lush]

The funny thing is that when Australia win they don't gloat like the Brits (I include myself in that). I guess they're used to winning

Nope. They're just arrogant tossers.

 

[The Spanish]

I like the fact you have to mention you CAN afford it if you wanted to. How cringy. Why bother mate. No one cares how well you are doing to afford 40 quid a month, its hardly going to make or break anyones opinion of your upward mobility.

Like questions said, it used to be on terrestial but now its not. Things change. Your stance against Murdoch probably does not stand up to close scrutiny. I cannot imagine you were smacking coppers in the face at Wapping. Like everything with you, its mostly a pose. Its very embarrasing, have you got any more apps for your iphone or anything else equally as vital to your life as your one man battle against the evils of News International?

 

[Questions]

Yeah good point. Its certainly ripped holes in my arguement hasn`t it ?

Put me back on ignore for fucks sake you moron.

 

[Wozza]

Typical anti-Australian thread here, which is always rather pathetic. Pure jealousy really. All this "Australia has no culture" rubbish. OK - there are no old churches, but there's plenty of theatre, comedy, there's the f***ing opera house for fucks sake.

Yes, yes, there's a big bridge too - w00t!

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

Yeah good point. Its certainly ripped holes in my arguement hasn`t it ?

Was that an argument ? I thought it more a personal attack to which MoH gave a reasonable response.

 

[Questions]

Was that an argument ? I thought it more a personal attack to which MoH gave a reasonable response.

Man of Harveys makes these big speeches about Murdoch and his evil Sky but still watches it when the Albion or another game he fancies is on. That makes him a hypocrite.

Nothing more cringworthy than someone who makes out they have a strong moral viewpoint and then crumble like a pathetic toady when its put to the first test.

Whatever next ? Clapham Gull refusing to set foot in the MK Dons ground...

Cripes ..you lot and your principals.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

Man of Harveys makes these big speeches about Murdoch and his evil Sky but still watches it when the Albion or another game he fancies is on. That makes him a hypocrite.

Nothing more cringworthy than someone who makes out they have a strong moral viewpoint and then crumble like a pathetic toady when its put to the first test.

It would be cutting your nose off to spite your face if the club you follow is on the box down the pub and you choose not to watch if you wanted.

I can't see a problem with it. But then maybe I am not looking for an opportunity to have a personal attack.

 

[Questions]

It would be cutting your nose off to spite your face if the club you follow is on the box down the pub and you choose not to watch if you wanted.

I can't see a problem with it. But then maybe I am not looking for an opportunity to have a personal attack.

Personal attack ? A bit melodramatic isn`t it ?

You are a bit of a drama queen aren`t you DKM.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

You are a bit of a drama queen aren`t you DKM.

......

 

[Couldn't Be Hyypia]

I think it is unarguable that if you reduce the access to a sport on TV it will, in the long run, receive less attention than it had previously. If that's the case then it's likely that putting test matches on Sky is going to damage cricket's popularity. As a coach and player I have seen the incredible effect of the 2005 series on player numbers (huge influx of new colts players for a couple of years and many of those players are still playing today). No matter how good this series is, I can't see it having the same effect.