Post by hhsussex on Dec 2, 2014 11:44:17 GMT
An interesting, but rather muddied and muddled article here Free-to-air TV coverage 'by 2015' by the ubiquitous George Dobell talks about the prospects of cricket being shown "in front of the paywall" perhaps as early as 2015, and the article is supported with numerous quotes from Richard Gould, the Surrey CEO, who also gets his own panel for his views on ""the highest attendances at domestic cricket in the modern age", with the new fixture list providing an unprecedented opportunity for the county game."
Just as I was scratching my head and wondering what was the matter with me for thinking that the fixture list was actively contributing to the precipitate decline in county attendance, it dawned on me that the whole article , or extended puff piece for Richard Gould and Sky, was actually talking about Twenty20 and seems to constitute a bit of propaganda by Gould to get someone to broadcast on free to air tv, a little package sanctioned by Sky, of a highlights package of "five or six minutes per game " from matches NOT picked by Sky for it's paywall broadcast.
Gould seems to be happy that he can maintain his gates of "15, 000 or 16, 000" and grow them and that this will produce "the highest attendances at domestic cricket in the modern age next year". Of course he is against the concept of franchise cricket because he sees that as "the beginning of the end of the 18 county system". Yes, well, if you think that domestic cricket is all about T20 gates in central London, its easy to see why you would think that - scared of competition, moi?
All of this, of course, is a sideshow to the real issue of whether cricket as a pastime - not merely the business model of Clarke and Gould and Murdoch - is in terminal decline, and whether this has been hastened by the lack of free to air cricket in significant quantities, that is Test matches and regular transmission of full one day games. Its a pity that correspondents such as Dobell don't bother to address this, but then, why should they, when Gould provides such cheap material.
Just as I was scratching my head and wondering what was the matter with me for thinking that the fixture list was actively contributing to the precipitate decline in county attendance, it dawned on me that the whole article , or extended puff piece for Richard Gould and Sky, was actually talking about Twenty20 and seems to constitute a bit of propaganda by Gould to get someone to broadcast on free to air tv, a little package sanctioned by Sky, of a highlights package of "five or six minutes per game " from matches NOT picked by Sky for it's paywall broadcast.
Gould seems to be happy that he can maintain his gates of "15, 000 or 16, 000" and grow them and that this will produce "the highest attendances at domestic cricket in the modern age next year". Of course he is against the concept of franchise cricket because he sees that as "the beginning of the end of the 18 county system". Yes, well, if you think that domestic cricket is all about T20 gates in central London, its easy to see why you would think that - scared of competition, moi?
All of this, of course, is a sideshow to the real issue of whether cricket as a pastime - not merely the business model of Clarke and Gould and Murdoch - is in terminal decline, and whether this has been hastened by the lack of free to air cricket in significant quantities, that is Test matches and regular transmission of full one day games. Its a pity that correspondents such as Dobell don't bother to address this, but then, why should they, when Gould provides such cheap material.
