Australian Cricket Broadcast Rights 2018 - 2023

Remove this Banner Ad

Test cricket is aging out. BBL all on Foxtel (or Optus or whatever else) would destroy any ambition of CA being as big as the AFL and NRL.
 
Cricket seems to be heading down the same path as the NBL in the early 00's. Putting it more and more behind a paywall will really hurt the sport.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Test cricket is aging out. BBL all on Foxtel (or Optus or whatever else) would destroy any ambition of CA being as big as the AFL and NRL.
It’s dying out in every other part of the world but it’s still the most popular format of the game here. The only other country that regularly gets good crowds for test matches is England, but the game is now only popular there with 55+ upper class private-school types and South Asian migrant communities.

The reason Test cricket is still popular with the broader population here is because of its cultural legacy but more importantly its exposure to the lounge rooms of every household in Australia all summer long. There is no other country that has this luxury (SABC being an occasional exception in South Africa) and it’s why Test cricket has been relegated to a niche-interest sport in the rest of the world.

CA must not piss that away until such time as television becomes obsolete, and as far as live sport is concerned that’s still a long way off. They don’t need to be the AFL or the NRL or anything else. CA execs don’t need to be household names like Gill or Peter V’Landys. Their responsibility is to be a custodian of the game in this country. Nothing more, nothing less.
 
Last edited:
Thanks, Gough.

I hope you're right about News Corpse.

The Australian newspaper is the classic example of a Murdoch vanity project. The circulation has been low for years and, pre-COVID, it was not unusual to see untouched stacks of free editions of the paper in airports around the country. It has been a hideously awful publication for a while. A haven for Pellists, Tony Abbott supporters and other right-wing nut jobs.

I am amused when I see people pick up the Oz at the supermarket, usually in combination with the woeful Herald Sun. Many of these people seem to be Anglo-Aussie Boomers, probably enjoying a tidy sum coming in from their franking credit rebates.

I refuse to buy this newspaper. There are a few redeeming features that I will look at when I can get my hands on the paper, e.g. at a cafe, such as the sudoku puzzles, bridge columns and crypto sum (weekend edition only). Gideon Haigh warrants a read through and Peter Lalor is OK. But I will gladly pass on the predominant pus in the paper, consisting of the likes of the tedious Paul Kelly, Albrechtsen, Sheridan, Creighton etc.
so you have a defiant bone in your body... just wanting to know so I can follow your erudite reasoning in the future... no answer required..
 
Thanks, Gough.

I hope you're right about News Corpse.

The Australian newspaper is the classic example of a Murdoch vanity project. The circulation has been low for years and, pre-COVID, it was not unusual to see untouched stacks of free editions of the paper in airports around the country. It has been a hideously awful publication for a while. A haven for Pellists, Tony Abbott supporters and other right-wing nut jobs.

I am amused when I see people pick up the Oz at the supermarket, usually in combination with the woeful Herald Sun. Many of these people seem to be Anglo-Aussie Boomers, probably enjoying a tidy sum coming in from their franking credit rebates.

I refuse to buy this newspaper. There are a few redeeming features that I will look at when I can get my hands on the paper, e.g. at a cafe, such as the sudoku puzzles, bridge columns and crypto sum (weekend edition only). Gideon Haigh warrants a read through and Peter Lalor is OK. But I will gladly pass on the predominant pus in the paper, consisting of the likes of the tedious Paul Kelly, Albrechtsen, Sheridan, Creighton etc.

The depressing thing is that Kelly is probably the best of The Australian's political writers.
 
The depressing thing is that Kelly is probably the best of The Australian's political writers.

Nattering Ned is a rambler who rails at any idea that is remotely progressive. PVO is the least worst of the Strayan's political writers, but he tends to sit on the fence too much.

Back on topic. Channel 7 are likely to dumb down the cricket to a cringeworthy level, like they do with their programming generally.

Channel 9's cricket coverage was innovative in the 1980s before descending into staleness for many years and, latterly, lazy jingoism, especially in the Brad McNamara era [hi to Brad if your Google alerts are still active]. Geoff Lemon's article from 2015 about the dire state of Channel 9's cricket coverage is superb.
 
The business section in the paper isn't bad. Could be wrong but I thought Adam Creighton wanted to get rid of franking credits so you should probably be beating yourself off over him.

Anyway why am I talking about this SRP crap on a cricket board.

'Killer' Creighton and "beating off" in the same sentence. Now I have heard it all.

If Tim Worner has any influence at all over the cricket coverage, the outlook is grim ...
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

It was interesting to read that networks are prepared to take a hit (lose money) on the cricket coverage in order to cross-promote their hit shows in prime time. That says it all about how the networks view the game.
Its also odd. I would expect very little crossover between the cricket audience and the all-new-all-singing-all-cooking-all-makeover-all-the-same-as-last-year "reality" game show tripe audience.
 
maybe it's based on the BBL grabbing families/female viewers?
I can see that for Olympics and Tennis, even footy gets a fair slice of female viewers. But I like to think cricket viewership (I'm including T20 under a loose definition of "cricket") is more discerning.
Networks clearly don't think so, otherwise Slats wouldn't kep getting gigs, and they would crunch numbers big time on these things.
 
The business section in the paper isn't bad. Could be wrong but I thought Adam Creighton wanted to get rid of franking credits so you should probably be beating yourself off over him.

Anyway why am I talking about this SRP crap on a cricket board.

Peter Lalor.
 
I can see that for Olympics and Tennis, even footy gets a fair slice of female viewers. But I like to think cricket viewership (I'm including T20 under a loose definition of "cricket") is more discerning.
Networks clearly don't think so, otherwise Slats wouldn't kep getting gigs, and they would crunch numbers big time on these things.
Slats doesn’t strike me as the sort of bloke that would have female viewers flocking. Somehow got a gig on that striptease show that Seven keep flogging so I must be missing something!
 
For the record, here's what last month's Australian Cricket Press for Progress Report had to say about female tv viewership:
Gender diversity in television audiences expanded once again. Previous highs in female viewership on FTA (36% - 39%) were maintained, while the diversity of male-skewed subscription channels decreased slightly (32% - 35%). BBL and Test matches drew the most diverse audiences amongst men's formats, followed by the rebel Women's Big Bash League.

The latest figures I've seen for AFL has the female tv audience at around 43%.
 
Nattering Ned is a rambler who rails at any idea that is remotely progressive. PVO is the least worst of the Strayan's political writers, but he tends to sit on the fence too much.

Second best, then. Pardon me for not recalling them all.

Back on topic. Channel 7 are likely to dumb down the cricket to a cringeworthy level, like they do with their programming generally.

Channel 9's cricket coverage was innovative in the 1980s before descending into staleness for many years and, latterly, lazy jingoism, especially in the Brad McNamara era [hi to Brad if your Google alerts are still active]. Geoff Lemon's article from 2015 about the dire state of Channel 9's cricket coverage is superb.

Yep. Hilarious that CA are being hoist by their own money-grubbing petard ATM.
 


The debt-laden network would not comment on how much it had paid but it was less than $25 million. Seven is due to make its three final payments in November, December and January but managing director James Warburton declared they would not make those instalments, effectively valuing the rights at a quarter of their annual value.

"Seven has paid the first instalment reflecting our fair value."
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top