You Too Can Pay Per View Two

Off again….a follow up to yesterday!

I saw a lot of interesting stuff revolving around yesterday’s post. AB is quite right to suggest that I am “despondent” about the future, and the reasons are there to see when looking at the Nick Hoult article in the Telegraph. The sheer level of fright the ECB are showing at their county clubs showing real-time fixed camera action and the impact it has on Sky is remarkable. Once again, the ECB are much more concerned about keeping a broadcaster sweet rather than those who actually want to watch their sport. If this is their attitude, we have no chance.

I find Sky’s attitude to this rather predictable. I take, for example, my visit to the States coming up. I would quite like to watch the cricket easily and accessibly from my tablet/laptop. I don’t want to use any proxy hosting software or illegal streams blighted by poor pictures, spamware, pop-ups et al. I’ve paid for the service, I should be able to use it where I like. When I was with Sky, you could watch Sky Go quite easily. I had two or three attempts to get it to work through Virgin Media and nothing worked on my mobile platforms. So stuff it. They’ve lost a willing consumer for a few weeks, and I get more angry at their intransigence. That’s a perfect model for sustainability, right there. However, even if I got it to work, I’d need to go through a proxy server abroad. Why? To protect US cricket broadcasting rights? What broadcasting rights? If I were the ECB I’d be screaming blue murder at this inconvenience and stupidity that a person wanting to consume their “product” has to go through. So, folks, I won’t be seeing a ball of the second and third tests against Sri Lanka, despite paying for Sky Sports. What a f*cking joke.

There is a way for the ECB to change this, but they won’t. They are now the addict to the Sky “pusher”, needing their fix of Sky cash, bowing to all their demands, just to keep going. Without Sky money, they have a cricketing model that is now knackered. They have seen salaries inflate for the top players, they’ve increased the ticket prices, and now we see the northern heartlands turning away from test cricket. The ECB needs to start thinking more creatively. The fixed camera coverage belongs in the Stone Age. I have watched Minor League Baseball online – it was given away for $10 on top of the MLB Premium package a few years ago – and it was better than that. The ECB need to invest in a proper digital streaming platform to allow people to watch cricket on their TVs and other platforms at home or on the move. So when there are 9 games scheduled on the Friday special T20 nights, the other 8 not covered by Sky do not disappear into the ether. Pitch it at a reasonable price – £50 a season – and try it. I hear the powers say that the youth consume their experiences differently now (a bit patronising. I’m not a youth, and so do I) and yet they stick with the arcane TV model that stifles digital content. They’ve made some steps on the ICC tournament front, but everything else is done to protect the big deal. Because without the big deal, they are royally f*cked.

I saw a Tweet earlier to say that the BCCI had taken down AlternativeCricket. The authorities treat bloggers and cricket nuts, who want to share their love of the game, 99 times out of 100 for absolutely no commercial gain like criminals. Get some enlightenment. Every single one of those people who click on here, other blogs, youtube channels, Facebook pages, twitter feeds is a customer. Each one of those people is getting engrossed in cricket and wants to find out more. They want to read about it. They want to watch the highlights. They want to damn well love the game. What do these short-sighted f*ckwits do? And they are f*ckwits. Go after them. Why? Why the hell pursue Robelinda for his brilliant video clips? Why get Facebook to delete Alternative Cricket? Because there might be a couple of quid you are missing out on? As Mark and others say, this isn’t a free market at all, it’s straight up protectionism. I’ve always said, if I felt like, today, I wanted to see a clip of Brian Lara’s 277 at the SCG, I should be able to find it somewhere and watch it. If Channel 9, the rights holders want to charge a nominal fee, so be it. I might pay it. But you can’t and they won’t. So Rob puts a clip up online, a service the rightsholder doesn’t want to provide and has shown that to be the case, and he is potentially threatened with a copyright suit by some organisations? Where is the sense in that? Really. Where is the sense….

Let’s go back to domestic cricket and the County Championship. There is a latent audience out there. Some people would quite like to be able to watch their county on the way home from work, or in their breaks, and a basic (above fixed camera) feed with commentary would be a really good way to go about this. Others displaced, retired or unable to attend could watch an hour or two as they pleased. When something magnificent is happening, people can dip in and watch it. I don’t know the expense, but let’s say it is plausible. A web platform on the Smart TVs, via digital TV platforms (a la Netflix and Youtube on Virgin or Xbox) and mobile hardware would be a terrific innovation. There’s a chance this might just work.

Rather than try silly, costless innovations like the points system, try something that might last. That might be a trend setter. Have confidence in your ability to connect the sport with people. You hide the whole thing behind a paywall, then you are shutting off a massive potential customer base. I’m despondent because I’ve seen little innovative that is going to address the key problem with the sport. Visibility. Cricket is not football, which still has a major footprint on terrestrial TV as next month’s Euros will show. It is not rugby that has its marquee international tournaments on free-to-air. It is totally hidden.

I believe all the ECB are doing is catering to its existing customer base, and being dictated to by a broadcaster which holds all the cards. Tom Harrison has a mighty job to do. Cutting players salaries is not going to be an option – it never is – and ticket prices are exorbitant for international cricket as it is (given you take much of the weather risk, and all of the overs short risk).  It may be too late to find alternative income streams, and yet you hamstring yourself with a TV contract that means innovative counties can’t even get their token highlights shown to make it even harder. It’s a bind of their own making, only cricket lovers are the losers.

That’s right David Collier (referring to the quote I highlighted yesterday). Some of us are emotive over it. Because we think not only that you and your kindred spirits at the ECB are snobs, we also think you aren’t up to it too. In fact, we know you aren’t. Call Stanford…quick.


11 thoughts on “You Too Can Pay Per View Two

  1. Mark May 6, 2016 / 8:38 pm

    Oh man, you’re on fire Dmitri. This is what we want. Tremendous stuff.

    It is utterly incomprehensible why they took down the county clips. It’s county cricket ffs. You would be lucky to get one man and a dog there watching. And someone wants to watch a clip from a fixed camera? It would be hilarious if it wasn’t so depressing. How much to these clowns think county cricket is worth as a stand alone alone sport? Peanuts, thats how much. If people aren’t going to pay £700 per year to take out a contract to watch test match cricket, they sure as hell are not going to pay that so they can enjoy county cricket.

    But come on, we are not dealing with geniususis at the ECB. They may pay themselves huge salaries, but they are not the sharpest. There are so many ways you could open this up. As you say, season tickets for a dip in, dip out county cricket update. The cricket administrators globally seem to have reversed the whole theory of market capitalism. They actively don’t want anyone to be interested, passionate or watching their product. They go out of their way to try and hide it from as many people as they can.

    When I walk round the supermarket they are always trying to tempt me with a new chocolate biscuit or French cheese or something. ” Would you like to try a piece sir?” If the ECB were running it they say ……..” fuck off, your not having any of our cheese.”


  2. d'Arthez May 6, 2016 / 9:21 pm

    Even the WICB has the right idea at times. As far as I am aware, they’re the ones responsible for setting up some cameras and generating web streams for all the First Class games in their domestic competition. Couple that with radio commentary (which is pretty common there), and you get to see and here what is going on there. I have seen more domestic First Class cricket from the West Indies, than I could possibly see English domestic First Class cricket in a decade on Sky. The only thing you pay to watch the WI domestic cricket is your internet provider. There are no additional fees whatsoever.

    For the sheer joke of it, I tried accessing the highlights of today’s IPL match through Cricinfo. Needless to say, I cannot see those highlights. Because of the territory I am in. Now, I can’t be bothered to try with a proxy (an easy way to circumvent that nonsense), but I would not be surprised if these geniuses of marketing put in the same restrictions in Nepal, China, and a host of other places, where the game has the potential to grow.


  3. fred May 6, 2016 / 11:22 pm

    “I hear the powers say that the youth consume their experiences differently now (a bit patronising. I’m not a youth, and so do I) and yet they stick with the arcane TV model that stifles digital content.”
    Yes,we all do. I’ts remarkable how the television has changed from being the centre of focus to just one of the options. In my household, people get input from a range of places, and the TV is just one of them.
    CA ran a great service for a while streaming HD quality coverage for $25 a year, but it stopped. ECB also streamed HD coverage on Youtube for free one year, but it stopped.

    How many people are there around the world looking at these crap pirate internet feeds because that’s the only way they can see cricket? Can you imagine the financial and exposure benfits to cricket if those feeds were made available worldwide for a nominal cost? Why hasn’t someone approached the ICC and said that they would share the cake with BCCI and Sky, but also make good video available to places like continental Europe, USA, China etc?

    Where I live, I can’t get any official cricket coverage. I’m blocked on every radio and television channel. Utterly nonsensical.


    • Mark May 7, 2016 / 9:30 pm

      Dmitri, you’ve made it!


  4. Grenville May 6, 2016 / 11:31 pm

    I’m with AB, put CC on free to air and, say, the Oval test and you’ll see it grow. Why?
    County grounds aren’t that badly attended, a 1000 or so at Hove in May when I went (on a weekday). In the proper summer, or at Arundel or Horsham, good crowds show up. People bloody love cricket. They play it up and down the country. The beeb country commentary is pretty successful, I’m told. Finally, and I think this is Maxie’s point, free to air broadcasters need eyes on that game. Sky needs subscribers. A free to air broadcaster needs to engage the public in the game. Channel 4 did that really well. Sky have a couple of pictures of Joe Root with ‘
    #Ashes’ under him. Get an enthusiastic, free to air broadcaster and the CC will soar in popularity.

    (plus, AB’s right about how shoddy the Sky deal is. It’s bad value for the viewer and the ECB has sold themselves short. There are so many unbroadcast games. They are worth something and could be sold).


  5. Sean B May 7, 2016 / 11:04 am

    Great post (not pies) again. I absolutely agree entirely.


  6. Keeper99 (@PaulKeeper99) May 7, 2016 / 8:34 pm

    Brilliant, brilliant post/article (not sure what you call it on a blog). The argument might not be FTV vs PPV if that battle is lost, so why can’t the debate move on to how technology in the digital age can both generate income AND attract newcomers to the game and meet the needs of loyalists? The ECB have flogged the family silver off at the local car boot sale and generally spend their time congratulating themselves over trebles all round. But they have their bonuses and their 50 million quid profit and can scapegoat Northants for all the ills in the game, so why should they bother really?


  7. CRICKETJON May 8, 2016 / 10:57 am

    “Have confidence in your ability to connect the sport with people.”

    What prospects are there Dmitri of paying for my drying cleaning please because I spat out my tea when I saw that sentence. The trousers are warm and wet but mercifully are not red.


  8. AB May 10, 2016 / 11:19 am

    Here is a case in point relating to sky’s coverage of English domestic cricket.

    On Thursday the 19th May, Surrey are playing Glamorgan at the Oval, 6:30 start time. Perfect for tea-time viewing for potential fans (who are lucky enough to have sky, of course).

    But, Sky aren’t showing it. They have 7 channels to fill, and there is nothing much else going on (premier league darts is the only other live broadcast), but they can’t even be bothered to turn up and film it.

    Its almost as if the ECB and sky are deliberately colluding to try and put people off watching domestic cricket…


    • LordCanisLupus May 10, 2016 / 11:47 am

      Agree. There is a play off semi on but this is why we need a digital online platform. What’s the harm in showing a game on there if someone wants to watch it?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s