Has the Big Bash failed to Deliver?

[frankrizzo]

obviously CA are short sighted and want it both ways, big revenue and tv ratings from tests(which they are in the process of trying to kill off as fast as they can) and big money and tv ratings from the big bash.

Long term test cricket is doomed to failure if the first class structure is disconnected from the test summer, and what then?

No strong tests means no more creaking former test stars to prop up the big bash, both forms of the game suffer as a consequence of these greedy and short sighted custodians of our game.

 

[Admiral Byng]

I think the Big Bash has been a huge success.

There's always room for improvement and things could have been done better. There needs to be a better connect between the test series and shield cricket so fringe players and players coming back from injury get some useful cricket into them. It is a valid criticism, which I think can be solved by better scheduling, not by abandoning the Big Bash.

I see the Big Bash being good for the long term future of the game. It means more young players choosing to play cricket as a career option, possibly at the expense of footy, dare I say it.

 

[Tulip]

Main thing to do now is give the Melbourne and Sydney teams an identity - to give supporters a reason to choose the Stars/Renegades or Thunder/Sixers. I don't think the Hurricanes, Strikers, Scorchers, Heat have any such issue, basically everybody follows the local team no questions asked.

Dissolve them and bring back the Bushrangers and the Blues: Probably the two most popular state sides around. For the people I've spoken to here in Vic that know their cricket, the BBL has made them miss the Vic team. Personally, I'd rather see Finch and Bobby opening together rather than against each other, for example.

 

[Tulip]

The Sydney teams are split geographically, really.

To put it in footy terms - Sixers = Swans, Thunder = Giants.

Stars = Richmond Station

City Loop

Renegades = Southern Cross Station

Flinders St.

Not so good here, I'm afraid

 

[Zarrix]

I think that two melbourne and sydney teams was a bad idea. If they didn't want to keep the states by themselves, then they should have least made it vic country and melbourne and nsw country and sydney. I still think however they should have kept the states and added ACT and New Zealand teams.

 

[MisterMarcus]

The Sydney teams are split geographically, really.

To put it in footy terms - Sixers = Swans, Thunder = Giants.

Would have been better to call them "Western Sydney Thunder" then, really promote the division and the rivalry.

 

[brucetiki]

I think that two melbourne and sydney teams was a bad idea. If they didn't want to keep the states by themselves, then they should have least made it vic country and melbourne and nsw country and sydney. I still think however they should have kept the states and added ACT and New Zealand teams.

I wonder if down the track CA and Cricket New Zealand would look at merging their domestic T20 comps into an ANZ Championship-style competition.

 

[Cleavy]

I wonder if down the track CA and Cricket New Zealand would look at merging their domestic T20 comps into an ANZ Championship-style competition.

well the original plan was for a Southern Hemisphere comp including teams from Australia, NZ and South Africa

 

[Truckosaurus]

I'm split over the T20 format in general. On the one hand, it's fun to see some big hits but on the other the oversaturation of it (e.g. having a World Cup EVERY YEAR, 2 games for every tour plus all the domestic competitions) means the novelty value wears off pretty quick. I like ODIs too but I hate the 7 match series that keep getting scheduled.

I watched most of the games in the first couple of weeks but that slowed to a trickle and now I probably won't bother to even watch the final, despite my franchise, the Scorchers, being in it. It's hard to say what exactly has put me off. Partly it's the franchises, meaning I don't have state-ties to fall back on in caring who wins neutral matches. Partly it's the incredibly commercial nature of the competition: just about everything that can be sold has been sold, and a few things have been made up just to sell them (Sorry Weetbix, I don't care how many sixes have been hit in the competition, only how many the team has hit in the match/needs to hit in the match to win). Even the Power Play has a sponsor. I half expect next year to hear something like, "Okay, it's the final over and the Scorchers need 18 to win off it. Remember this over is brought to you by Vodafone, 'Vodafone: Do you like us yet?'" Player names have been shoved down to the bottom of the shirts to give sponsors the prime of place on the back which I could tolerate if it weren't for the fact that whoever designed the shirts absolutely sucked at their job. Putting aside the all-round general crappiness, the names are unreadable even on television, I can't imagine being able to read them at the ground. If I want to know who's fielding the ball, I have to hope it gets mentioned.

Partly its the nature of the beast affecting the commentary. Every little thing gets so hyped up by the commentators that there aren't any highs and lows in the game, everything's at the exact same manufactured 'excitement!' level and all it does is make everything boring.

Fair enough, the BBL had some of these issues before the revamp, but they seem to have gone up to 11 since. I haven't felt at all inclined to attend any of the matches, even if I'm alone on that point. [/rant]

And for the record, so no one tries to dismiss me as an old fart, I'm 21.

 

[Blessed]

I'm not a massive fan of Twenty20 cricket but the money flowing into the coffers is a good thing.

This is a false reality.

The Big Bash is to lose Cricket Australia $24 million in the first two years as per Malcolm Conn's article.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...big-bash-success/story-fn6w5t7q-1226255792806

CA will lose at least $24 million over the next two years after rushing the introduction of its new eight-team competition but expects to reap that back in spades when the cheques are signed at the end of next season.

Channel 9 don't have the money to pay big to bring Big Bash to prmie time so James Sutherland is living in a dream land.

 

[The Passenger]

the big thing regarding the big bash is that the expenses for it are through the roof.

far higher than what it was under the old state system.

as i said six months ago the often quoted expenditure figure for the big bash is around 30 to 40 million

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=23022353&postcount=113

but this competition is expected to be able to run on it's on legs, and the numbers getting bandied around are somewhere in the 30 to 40 million mark to run this competition as a whole... it's impossible to see them reaching that in income.

 

[Perry Pie]

My problem is with the format of the schedule. In eseence it is a game a day and what that seems to do for me is slow the whole thing down and make it all a bit hollow because nothing is ever completed - it is an ongoing grind.

Lets contrast that with footy. At the end of each weeked we have a ladder. The round is over and we can all see how everyone is getting on. There is a day or two splitting straws over completed games, then there the anticipation & build up for the next weeks games.

So why not try to compress the schedule so there there are two games a day, with 2 2/3 day gaps between rounds? It will create highs and lows which are missing at the moment.

I also agree with the comments about the lack of identity for the Sydney & Melbourne teams. For Melbourne the teams should be better themed South & East of the Yarra v North & West of the Yarra.

 

[The Passenger]

agreed that the game a day format draws the competition out. that seems to be cricket administration MO at the moment. world cups are run in the same way.

though at least with 50 over games you can see the logic because they want to maximise tv time and playing games concurrently doesn't allow that.

but with 20 over games you can play two games a day and keep it on tv.

 

[Underarm]

My problem is with the format of the schedule. In eseence it is a game a day and what that seems to do for me is slow the whole thing down and make it all a bit hollow because nothing is ever completed - it is an ongoing grind.

Lets contrast that with footy. At the end of each weeked we have a ladder. The round is over and we can all see how everyone is getting on. There is a day or two splitting straws over completed games, then there the anticipation & build up for the next weeks games.

So why not try to compress the schedule so there there are two games a day, with 2 2/3 day gaps between rounds? It will create highs and lows which are missing at the moment.

I also agree with the comments about the lack of identity for the Sydney & Melbourne teams. For Melbourne the teams should be better themed South & East of the Yarra v North & West of the Yarra.

they had a 5 day gap for the perth test (both in prime time against each other) and it just felt too long. the difference between T20 and AFL is that afl is way more complex, you can talk for hours about it with mates and not come to a conclusion. T20 is quite simple and much easier to come to consensus. (much like Baseball). perhaps a 'day' between the rounds could be good, provided they quicken the pace. the perth test break, followed by the whole week before the final means the ending is more subdued.

 

[nineteen eighty]

This is a false reality.

The Big Bash is to lose Cricket Australia $24 million in the first two years as per Malcolm Conn's article.

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sp...big-bash-success/story-fn6w5t7q-1226255792806

CA will lose at least $24 million over the next two years after rushing the introduction of its new eight-team competition but expects to reap that back in spades when the cheques are signed at the end of next season.

Channel 9 don't have the money to pay big to bring Big Bash to prmie time so James Sutherland is living in a dream land.

Do you honestly think that will the case when the next broadcast rights come up? Really do you? There is a very simple and fundamental reason as to why it is costing CA this time around...FOX bought the rights for absolutely next to nothing as it was a completely unknown quantity. Given the number of viewers this comp, expect the broadcast rights to provide CA with a significant profit in years to come. Many times over.

 

[Tiff]

Do you honestly think that will the case when the next broadcast rights come up? Really do you? There is a very simple and fundamental reason as to why it is costing CA this time around...FOX bought the rights for absolutely next to nothing as it was a completely unknown quantity. Given the number of viewers this comp, expect the broadcast rights to provide CA with a significant profit in years to come. Many times over.

Is Channel 9 putting in a bid? And how much do you think the broadcast rights would be worth?

 

[Admiral Byng]

I'd wouldn''t mind seeing One or 7Mate getting the rights.

Or even CA taking a bold step and doing it themselves, internet TV, pay per view live streaming over their website. I'd pay $20-30 to watch the whole series.

 

[Doodlesweaver]

I'd wouldn''t mind seeing One or 7Mate getting the rights.

Or even CA taking a bold step and doing it themselves, internet TV, pay per view live streaming over their website. I'd pay $20-30 to watch the whole series.

I'm in England and you could pay for streaming for the whole series on the CA website - only for outside Aus customers. I didn't realise till half way through but they also had separate pricing grades for the finals. Excellent idea.

 

[frankrizzo]

edit..

 

[Blessed]

Do you honestly think that will the case when the next broadcast rights come up? Really do you? Given the number of viewers this comp, expect the broadcast rights to provide CA with a significant profit in years to come. Many times over.

Do you really think Channel 9 are going to pay big money for BB?!?

In summer, in non ratings time, delivering ratings of about 500,000 people around Australia with a debt of $3.6 Billion.

The numbers don't make sense.

Do you think Seven would be paying big money to put something on Seven mate?

They might do it if they got it for free.

But none of the terrestrial tv stations are going to pay big money to put Big Bash cricket on their 2ndary sister stations.

This isn't the 80s mate. TV stations have to act very frugal.

Cricket Australia are living in fairy world.

 

[frankrizzo]

it's foxtel or bust for the big bash and foxtel will know it when they head into negotiations.

 

[Admiral Byng]

I'm in England and you could pay for streaming for the whole series on the CA website - only for outside Aus customers. I didn't realise till half way through but they also had separate pricing grades for the finals. Excellent idea.

How much?

 

[Bradesmaen]

Do you really think Channel 9 are going to pay big money for BB?!?

In summer, in non ratings time, delivering ratings of about 500,000 people around Australia with a debt of $3.6 Billion.

The numbers don't make sense.

Do you think Seven would be paying big money to put something on Seven mate?

They might do it if they got it for free.

But none of the terrestrial tv stations are going to pay big money to put Big Bash cricket on their 2ndary sister stations.

This isn't the 80s mate. TV stations have to act very frugal.

Cricket Australia are living in fairy world.

Channel 9 already has the tests/ODI's to worry about in December and January, so hard to see them stumping up money + then more money for extra crew. Don't forget they do not broadcast in HD because they won't have the HD production crew in Australia (there are only a few around apparently - no idea why). Then C7 has the Australian open right during the finals of the Big Bash and won't move its coverage of the Tennis for that. Channel 10 couldn't afford anything and SBS couldn't give a crap. ABC doesn't have the money and concentrates on the Womens game anyway.

Basically, it is hard to see it being in Primetime on any network (especially with 6 games a week sometimes) and difficult to see it on any network unless the BBL accepts a low fee.

 

[nineteen eighty]

Do you really think Channel 9 are going to pay big money for BB?!?

In summer, in non ratings time, delivering ratings of about 500,000 people around Australia with a debt of $3.6 Billion.

The numbers don't make sense.

Do you think Seven would be paying big money to put something on Seven mate?

They might do it if they got it for free.

But none of the terrestrial tv stations are going to pay big money to put Big Bash cricket on their 2ndary sister stations.

This isn't the 80s mate. TV stations have to act very frugal.

Cricket Australia are living in fairy world.

Mate I seriously cannot be bothered arguing the point with someone who is completely blind to the appeal the BB will bring to any of the broadcasters next time around. It has shown it can pull significant viewers (up with the NRL in terms of numbers). Obviously they wont get as much as what the NRL gets from Fox due to the lack of games but CA will still get plenty.

I get it, you don't like the BB. That doesn't mean it doesn't have commercial appeal...just means you don't like.

I think it's great for what it is...entertainment!

The biggest issue CA has relating to BB is the conflict it has with the Sheffield Shield and Test Cricket. As others have rightly pointed out, BB is perfect for the school holidays. However, that does not allow a decent and proper preparation for players who are looking to play tests. It was masked this year (it may have been you Blessed who pointed this out) due to the enormous success of our team in combination with the Indians gutless display. Will be interesting to see what happens when we are under the pump and there are no SS games to allow for a players proper preparation.

 

[Doodlesweaver]

How much?

I think it was around 20 bucks for the whole shebang and I paid about Aussie dollar 1.99 - I think - for the final. Excellent quality stream.

I'd given up on the illegal streams as they were so covered, and I mean covered, in ads.

It's Sky or bust over here usually - they buy up the rights to Aussie international cricket - so this was really welcome. I don't mind paying if the stream is good quality.

And I've watched the Shield streams on CA as well.