Two sports media people have their say on t20 v ODI

In the Sydney Morning herald today there's an interesting article in the sport section.

There's a good look at the decrease in attendance and viewer numbers ofor the ODIs this summer. Something that's only mentioned in passing is the mismatch that most people were expecting this summer (and that has resulted) meaning people weren't keen to part with their hard-earned to go to games, or watch on the teev. There have been very few years where the Zoggian Royal Family hasn't made a trip to Sydney and/or Melbourne to attend at least a day of international cricket, sometimes Tests, sometimes ODIs. This summer, the interest in any of it, even the t20s was non-existent. Ticket prices were too high for what was expected to be a thrashing. I am quite happy to hand over the denarii to watch Australia, and would prefer they won, but I want to see a contest. I suspect most cricket fans are the same.

The stands will be packed next summer for the Ashes. It's India's turn after that, which - provided there isn't overkill in MODI series between now and then - should also draw a good crowd, as should the SAffy series after that.

Anyhoo, this was tucked away at the end of the article.

media analyst, Peter Cox of Cox Media, predicted the one-day game's time was almost up.

That the Pakistan Twenty20 out-rated Sunday's ODI "accentuates the problem for cricket", he said. "That's amazing, that's even more scary."

Cox predicted Nine chief executive David Gyngell would push for a bigger say in scheduling in the next round of contract negotiations with Cricket Australia, with the channel set to call the tune about who plays, when they play and what format they play.

"I think cricket needs a big kick up the arse," Cox said.

He said Twenty20 cut out the "boring bits". "Sport is about television and the only television ratings that really matter are prime time, so you play your Twenty20 in prime time."

Be careful, warned Lynton Taylor, Kerry Packer's lieutenant in the heady days of World Series Cricket.

"I think there has been too much cricket this summer and taking it this deeply into February is a mistake," he said, warning more Twenty20 was not the answer. "Will the audience tire of the Twenty20 game quickly if there is a surfeit of it? I think it will. It's a great spectacle when it happens but how often do you want to see such hit and bash?"

Not sure about Cox's expertise, and the idea of CA rolling over and letting Channel Nein have a greater say "about who plays, when they play and what format they play" would be utter stupidity given the contempt Channel Nein has treated sports fans across the board with. Doesn't matter whether it's cricket, leeeeg or AFL, Nein has screwed the pooch on multiple occasions with all of them in the past decade.

But if I worked for CA I would be paying very close attention to what Lynton Taylor says. It makes a lot of sense.

But if I worked for CA I would be paying very close attention to what Lynton Taylor says. It makes a lot of sense

aye!

He said Twenty20 cut out the "boring bits". "Sport is about television and the only television ratings that really matter are prime time, so you play your Twenty20 in prime time."

What a load of sh!t.

Once they get bored of the linear cricket, and become accustomed to similar results - the glitz and glamour will start to hurt, rather than impress. They'll know soon enough when they've made a big error in putting T20 over the most important format in cricket.

Basketball was very big in Aust in the mid to late 80s before the crowds realised what a shit sport it is and how no amount of dancing girls and fireworks can make the game better.

JGK wrote:Basketball was very big in Aust in the mid to late 80s before the crowds realised what a shit sport it is and how no amount of dancing girls and fireworks can make the game better.

Which possibly explains why cricket will never take off in the States. Stoopid Seppos...

This is part of the reason why cricket doesn't have a mass fanbase like Rugby Union or Football in many areas of the world. It's mainly due to the fact that you have to pay attention to enjoy cricket in its full form. (Much like the NFL, I imagine.)


I grew up watching Test cricket on Channel 4 (from around 2001). It just happens when you know you'll enjoy something, but you can't explain what drew you toward it. It's there, you watch it and think, "oh, this is interesting - I'll stay tuned".


There were a couple of times when I flicked around (blasphemous, I know), but overall cricket maintained my viewing, without having this 'in your face' drudgery that Lalit Modi thinks is the 'future of modern cricket'. C4 advertised the game to me, just as it was. It didn't attempt to throw me cheerleaders or fireworks; it just advertisted the schedule, the build up and arranged historical snippets in-between. My point is - being able to watch cricket on terrestrial TV is the reason I became passionate about the game, so I reckon it could work for a broader audience, especially in my part of the world and even in parts of England and elsewhere where cricket is classed as a 'nancy boys game'.


It's also a nice challenge to figure out cricket.

Well said Smerk. Of course, that means you're officially a dinosaur...

What species of dinosaur?

DJ_Smerk wrote:What species of dinosaur?

Yasheepsgotasaurus

Sounds suspiciously familiar.