Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Twenty20 world cup

It's the way things have gone. There's no 'just' about it though. Long-term it will marginalise cricket. Whoever thought it was a good idea to take it away from the mass audience is a fucking idiot.

It's not just me who thinks this. Ritchie Benaud talks a lot of sense about these matters, and in Australia, in many ways a more capitalist place than here, all important cricket matches are free-to-air.

In Australia, SA and India legally all major test series have to be avaliable live on free to air TV. Meanwhile in NZ and the WI Murdoch has the exclusive live rights. Which level do the ECB want England to be on? :rolleyes:
 
The BBC need to look at themselves as well. They pay some idiot millions to present a chat show, but won't even consider putting in a serious bid for cricket. They have channels 3 and 4 and interactive. No excuse whatever. BBC4 doesn't even come on air until the evening. A whole channel free to use all day every day.

As you might tell, it fucks me off. I genuinely feel let down.
 
The BBC need to look at themselves as well. They pay some idiot millions to present a chat show, but won't even consider putting in a serious bid for cricket. They have channels 3 and 4 and interactive. No excuse whatever. BBC4 doesn't even come on air until the evening. A whole channel free to use all day every day.

As you might tell, it fucks me off. I genuinely feel let down.

BBC3 and 4 aren't free to use during the day as their frequencies are being used by CBBC and CBeebies.

However the BBC could easily have used Interactive if there was no room in the BBC1 or BBC2 schedules, which is doubtful the BBC could have easily scheduled the cricket if they had the will to make a serious bid for it, running until 1pm on BBC1, put the lunch break analysis behind the red button then resume on BBC1 at 1.40 after lunch, then at tea switch the coverage to BBC2 so CBBC can go out as normal and the 6 o'clock news would start on time.

Arguably the BBC would find it easier to schedule cricket on their mainstream channels now than when they last had the rights, as they don't show much horse racing these days, there's no Tests in late June so no clashes with Wimbledon or Royal Ascot, Neighbours isn't getting massive ratings just after lunch or at 5.35 and since BBC News Channel came along there's no need to have the news on every hour (:mad: at the BBC going to the news headlines when Graham Gooch was about to make his triple hundred at Lord's). The Olympics and F1 could cause a problem, but they could just move the cricket to BBC2 or behind the red button when they're on.
 
Well done Pakistan - well deserved. Not the most consistent team of the tournament, but they put in the key performances.

Overall I think I'm converted to 20-20. It's more tactical and more strategic than I had thought. It uses all the skills of the full game, just condensed. Yes it lacks some of the subtleties, and will never take the place of test cricket for me. But I would like to see a domestic 20-20 league sold to a free channel. It would really boost the game at all levels.
It has a whole load of new subtleties though! There's - I mean - new shots. How amazing is that? There's the game of wits against the bowler. No longer can the batsman expect the good length ball just outside off stump and no longer can the bowler expect the batsman to stand still.

We have bowlers like Mendis, Afridi - their skills positively glorious in Twenty20 - who might have been derided as 'bits and pieces' bowlers otherwise. The mindless quick who just runs in and bangs it in half way down the track - well he would be a big liability.

The very short form makes losing wickets slightly less crucial, giving teams a chance to recover.

The Indians have called it right with their IPL.

the basic contest - bowler attempting to hit the stumps, batsman attempting to hit the ball - is really there, uncorrupted, as in no other form of the game.

oh and loads of sixes!

Viva Twenty20! :cool:
 
Back
Top Bottom