When I read this quickly, I saw Cock, Root and opening in the same sentence and I wondered what was going on.
One of the biggest sporting travesties in recent times was the decision of Sky to buy the rights to show all England (sorry Cym) cricket after the 2005 Ashes win. It was an incredible series and the popularity in the sport ballooned as a result. Then all of a sudden it was taken away from the bulk of the viewing public. As a result, the last two Ashes wins - as good as they were - seemed to slip under the radar somewhat. I'm pleased it hasn't been as straightforward as people were expecting it to be (funny to say two days into the first test), because a whitewash would be an anti-climax. This weekend - should the test last until then - will be spent finding a Scottish pub that'll show the 'homosexual martial art'
I've probably not mentioned this before but I'm an ex pro (cricket) so understand the way cricket is set up and the distribution of ECB funds is handled. Firstly, I agree that the 2005 Ashes was a major turning point for the sports popularity but don't run away away with the idea that every kid wanted to become the next Freddie Flintoff overnight, when the governments of the last 30 years collectively sold off school sports fields and virtually zero cricket got played in any non public school the game was always struggling - the poor sides we had in the years leading up to 2005 was related (I believe) to the government and school policies of 1980-2000. Away from the political arguments it's important to understand that whilst Sky are often criticised for their strategy they have pumped significant sums into cricket at all levels. The ECB (who collect all revenues from England games/deals) have spent significant sums on grass roots cricket, identifying ex cricket grounds and sponsoring re-development, upgrading facilities at hundreds of clubs, providing training to coaches who are able to qualify then teach kids back at their clubs, capital equipment purchases to improve facilities and upgrade pitches etc. In addition to this the ECB have subsidised counties who have struggled financially to ensure that staff at loss making counties remain in employment and first class cricket continues to be played in counties such as Leicester, Derby, Kent to name but a few. None of this would have been possible without Sky investment. I could tell you some frightening stories of financial investment (with borrowed funds) from counties such as Yorkshire, Lancashire, Warwickshire, Glamorgan and probably the worst recently is Durham who host their first Ashes test in a few weeks. The ECB will end up bailing out counties who are failing. If cricket were to return to terrestial TV it would result in massive reduction in income for the sports governing body and with that will come a massive reduction in sponsorship of projects such as those I mentioned above, it will drive the sport backwards, possibly terminally. Also there's no guarantee that BBC/C4 want cricket, it's not a global sport so can't be sold around the world, it's played at a time when most people are at work and the set up/broadcast costs are huge, there's very little return for the TV companies. It pains me to see so many kids playing the game (I also coach) and telling them to go off and study Jimmy Andersons action or Steven Finn's approach for them to say they can't because they don't have Sky but I am of the view that without the investment the ECB are able to make off the back of Sky money cricket will slowly die.
I guess it's a tough balancing act - it's a trade off between being accessible (though, as you point out, not guaranteed this accessibility) but being in dire straits financially or getting the investment and alienating a large proportion of people. I'm not sure how much of a say in such matters the ECB and others get in the machinations of sport broadcasting, but you can understand why the Sky deal would be preferable. I appreciate the insight - like everything in life the story is far more complicated than face value would indicate. I'll keep your info in mind. Thanks
Hmmm.... the England bowling attack'll have to pull something special out of the bag to rescue this one I fear.
The pitch is hard to score on, and I can see Swann ripping into the Aussies in the final 2 days. Just need to get score, that can give him something to bowl at. Also, the ball is reversing, so Anderson and co can also play their part.
Same(well not ever). Kind of reminded me of Alex Tudor getting 99 not out on his England debut(I think). At least Agar has plenty of chances to get a century in the future. It's been a great test so far, guaranteed a result one way or another, a good dose of controversy and some good bowling. Above all I think Clarke's captaincy has been the most impressive, his field selection and bowling tactics(assuming he's had the main say) has been spot on and other than taking the new ball early today and wasting one of their appeals he was near perfect. As much as I want England to win this, an Aussie win would really set the cat amongst the pigeons for the series.
