It was mentioned in a Facebook Live video yesterday that both Nasser Hussain & Michael Atherton would be in Bangladesh for Sky. Ian Ward also mentioned he'd be presenting from the studio.
Sky Sports Cricket Coverage 2016
44 of 69
No sign of a September county game as yet.
Is there one in the bank?
Would imagine Middlesex V Yorkshire on the 20th is being earmarked
Is there one in the bank?
Would imagine Middlesex V Yorkshire on the 20th is being earmarked
They will not announce a match until they know which, and more significantly when, they will be showing it. And that depends on the title chase.
If Yorkshire and Middlesex keep up with each other making the Lord's game a title decider it is certain to be shown.
But if one of Yorkshire and Middlesex win their next two and other loses theirs, the champion will be decided in the penultimate round. So Sky will want to show whoever can win it then.
And Somerset are not out of contention should they win their next two and the other two only draw or lose theirs.
If Yorkshire and Middlesex keep up with each other making the Lord's game a title decider it is certain to be shown.
But if one of Yorkshire and Middlesex win their next two and other loses theirs, the champion will be decided in the penultimate round. So Sky will want to show whoever can win it then.
And Somerset are not out of contention should they win their next two and the other two only draw or lose theirs.
Bet it would have been on if it was Surrey v Lancashire, as that is who the majority of commentators played for (plus non player Colville a huge Surrey fan)
Originally Posted by inothernews:
“Bet it would have been on if it was Surrey v Lancashire, as that is who the majority of commentators played for (plus non player Colville a huge Surrey fan)”
“Bet it would have been on if it was Surrey v Lancashire, as that is who the majority of commentators played for (plus non player Colville a huge Surrey fan)”
You don't seriously think the commentators make these kind of decisions do you?
Originally Posted by Bosox:
“You don't seriously think the commentators make these kind of decisions do you?”
“You don't seriously think the commentators make these kind of decisions do you?”
To some extent, Yes.
One of the excuses is 'No commentators available'
Sky are clearly not interested in county cricket. They are the driving force for the 8 city franchise T20, and their commentators don't even bother to disguise their contempt for T20 fixtures like Derbyshire v Leicestershire.
I don't think the commentators have any say at all..
However I do understand your point. Sky aren't hiding the fact that they have no time for county cricket.
Its been treated awfully this summer...
Although I suppose the other side of the coin is, without Sky would anyone else be interested? Its a tough one for the EBC.
Personally I'm disgusted that there won't be a championship match shown, but the question is. Do enough people care?
However I do understand your point. Sky aren't hiding the fact that they have no time for county cricket.
Its been treated awfully this summer...
Although I suppose the other side of the coin is, without Sky would anyone else be interested? Its a tough one for the EBC.
Personally I'm disgusted that there won't be a championship match shown, but the question is. Do enough people care?
Top or bottom it's gonna be an exciting end, and if it's not shown it's a disgrace. However it does allow counties to webstream games + BBC commentary, Notts and Glamorgan have done it this season, so there's no reason the counties involved with the shake-up can't.
But in future, ECB needs to sell the one-day/Test rights to Sky, but have it's own youtube channel for the CC and let us sub to that if they can't do it for "free"/ad based.
But in future, ECB needs to sell the one-day/Test rights to Sky, but have it's own youtube channel for the CC and let us sub to that if they can't do it for "free"/ad based.
Originally Posted by Neil_Harris:
“No championship game on Sky”
“No championship game on Sky”
That's a big kick in the 'nads for an already struggling County Championship. It needs every bit of exposure it can get, even if it'd just be playing out to 100K people on Sky Sports.
Originally Posted by jazzydrury3:
“I find the BBC Commentary very good, you can bounce across all the games, on there website and app.”
“I find the BBC Commentary very good, you can bounce across all the games, on there website and app.”
I do too, the future is to stream county cricket with those commentary's. The ECB just need to realise that.
Forgive me, as I have no clue on this subject but how costly is it to have 4 fixed cameras running at every ground? (They have £70 million in the bank)
Originally Posted by joshua_martin:
“i would imagine that sky will send out bumble nasir hussain michael atherton and botham”
“i would imagine that sky will send out bumble nasir hussain michael atherton and botham”
Bumble mentioned on Twitter that he won't be in Bangladesh
Originally Posted by Neil_Harris:
“I do too, the future is to stream county cricket with those commentary's. The ECB just need to realise that.
Forgive me, as I have no clue on this subject but how costly is it to have 4 fixed cameras running at every ground? (They have £70 million in the bank)”
“I do too, the future is to stream county cricket with those commentary's. The ECB just need to realise that.
Forgive me, as I have no clue on this subject but how costly is it to have 4 fixed cameras running at every ground? (They have £70 million in the bank)”
Put it this way, I run a £60 HD webcam 24 hrs live (it can be inside or out) which I bought from Lidl.
I could stream the live pictures on youtube and get cash from the ads, or have it as a pay-channel, or simply allow viewers to watch free.
The cam gives me pretty good pictures, but one costing a bit more would do so much better.
If Lancs wanted a contribution, or even a sub, I'd be delighted to help. But in return I'd want all the games streamed - not just the days when Sky aren't showing something.
Am I getting confused here ?
Sky aren't showing any more county games. Fair enough. It would be nice if they were but sadly they have decided not to. I agree that the county game needs help so it would have been a double bonus. But how is showing games for free online helping the county game ? If a county were to stream games online then surely they should charge for it, they are in the business of making money after all.
Sky aren't showing any more county games. Fair enough. It would be nice if they were but sadly they have decided not to. I agree that the county game needs help so it would have been a double bonus. But how is showing games for free online helping the county game ? If a county were to stream games online then surely they should charge for it, they are in the business of making money after all.
Originally Posted by Darren Lethem:
“Am I getting confused here ?
Sky aren't showing any more county games. Fair enough. It would be nice if they were but sadly they have decided not to. I agree that the county game needs help so it would have been a double bonus. But how is showing games for free online helping the county game ? If a county were to stream games online then surely they should charge for it, they are in the business of making money after all.”
“Am I getting confused here ?
Sky aren't showing any more county games. Fair enough. It would be nice if they were but sadly they have decided not to. I agree that the county game needs help so it would have been a double bonus. But how is showing games for free online helping the county game ? If a county were to stream games online then surely they should charge for it, they are in the business of making money after all.”
Hello Darren.
I'm going to try not to antagonise you. As I know I normally do.
You seem to be defending sky here so can I ask you a question.
Let's just say I solely subscribed to sky for cricket.
Since they had the contract, they've covered county cricket brilliantly. Championship, Pro 40, T20 et al.
We've had championship cricket every September, this year promises one of the closest ever finishes.
Recently my bill went up.
Today I learn the championship finale won't be televised.
I'm allowed to be grumpy surely?
As for streaming them free online. I doubt anyone will stay away from the ground to watch it. And if 1 person watches for 10 minutes and gets into cricket , then surely that's good?
Originally Posted by Darren Lethem:
“Am I getting confused here ?
Sky aren't showing any more county games. Fair enough. It would be nice if they were but sadly they have decided not to. I agree that the county game needs help so it would have been a double bonus. But how is showing games for free online helping the county game ? If a county were to stream games online then surely they should charge for it, they are in the business of making money after all.”
“Am I getting confused here ?
Sky aren't showing any more county games. Fair enough. It would be nice if they were but sadly they have decided not to. I agree that the county game needs help so it would have been a double bonus. But how is showing games for free online helping the county game ? If a county were to stream games online then surely they should charge for it, they are in the business of making money after all.”
That depends on whether your aim is exposure or money.
If they can entice more people to watch County Cricket even if it's via a stream then that increases exposure. Potentially that increases the possibility of making more money in the longer term (whether or not through charging for streams).
Originally Posted by Neil_Harris:
“Today I learn the championship finale won't be televised.
I'm allowed to be grumpy surely?
”
“Today I learn the championship finale won't be televised.
I'm allowed to be grumpy surely?
”
To me, this is more of an issue with how the rights are packaged than with Sky. If the ECB had actually wanted the County Championship to be shown (more regularly) then they could or should have included that requirement in the contract with Sky and/or offered packages containing just County Cricket that would be required to be shown.
I guess the question is whether or not there is actually a customer who'll pay for the rights to transmit live County Championship cricket or not, and perhaps the ECB think not, which is why it's bundled with International cricket and not actually required to be shown if there's a conflict of interest...
Originally Posted by Neil_Harris:
“Hello Darren.
I'm going to try not to antagonise you. As I know I normally do.
You seem to be defending sky here so can I ask you a question.
Let's just say I solely subscribed to sky for cricket.
Since they had the contract, they've covered county cricket brilliantly. Championship, Pro 40, T20 et al.
We've had championship cricket every September, this year promises one of the closest ever finishes.
Recently my bill went up.
Today I learn the championship finale won't be televised.
I'm allowed to be grumpy surely?
As for streaming them free online. I doubt anyone will stay away from the ground to watch it. And if 1 person watches for 10 minutes and gets into cricket , then surely that's good?”
“Hello Darren.
I'm going to try not to antagonise you. As I know I normally do.
You seem to be defending sky here so can I ask you a question.
Let's just say I solely subscribed to sky for cricket.
Since they had the contract, they've covered county cricket brilliantly. Championship, Pro 40, T20 et al.
We've had championship cricket every September, this year promises one of the closest ever finishes.
Recently my bill went up.
Today I learn the championship finale won't be televised.
I'm allowed to be grumpy surely?
As for streaming them free online. I doubt anyone will stay away from the ground to watch it. And if 1 person watches for 10 minutes and gets into cricket , then surely that's good?”
Can I ask you a question Neil ? How do you deduce that I am defending Sky ?
Originally Posted by brundlebud:
“That depends on whether your aim is exposure or money.
If they can entice more people to watch County Cricket even if it's via a stream then that increases exposure. Potentially that increases the possibility of making more money in the longer term (whether or not through charging for streams).”
“That depends on whether your aim is exposure or money.
If they can entice more people to watch County Cricket even if it's via a stream then that increases exposure. Potentially that increases the possibility of making more money in the longer term (whether or not through charging for streams).”
I agree that showing it on Sky would certainly spread the gospel and help give it exposure to potential new viewers but I don't think a webstream will. The only people who will sit and watch a county cricket match on a laptop or via a webstream will be cricket fans I fear.
All I am saying is, if it is to be streamed they should charge for it so the counties can make some brass from it.
Originally Posted by brundlebud:
“To me, this is more of an issue with how the rights are packaged than with Sky. If the ECB had actually wanted the County Championship to be shown (more regularly) then they could or should have included that requirement in the contract with Sky and/or offered packages containing just County Cricket that would be required to be shown.
I guess the question is whether or not there is actually a customer who'll pay for the rights to transmit live County Championship cricket or not, and perhaps the ECB think not, which is why it's bundled with International cricket and not actually required to be shown if there's a conflict of interest...”
“To me, this is more of an issue with how the rights are packaged than with Sky. If the ECB had actually wanted the County Championship to be shown (more regularly) then they could or should have included that requirement in the contract with Sky and/or offered packages containing just County Cricket that would be required to be shown.
I guess the question is whether or not there is actually a customer who'll pay for the rights to transmit live County Championship cricket or not, and perhaps the ECB think not, which is why it's bundled with International cricket and not actually required to be shown if there's a conflict of interest...”
The deal does cover number of days sky shows cricket in the summer.
have to check if they do actually meet the requirement this year.
Quote:
“plus 60 days of domestic cricket every season.”
“plus 60 days of domestic cricket every season.”
http://www.espncricinfo.com/england/...ry/551654.html
was widely reported in the press and even in Sky press releases of 60 days of domestic cricket have to count all the days up to see if it meets the requirements.
Guessing with the blast having a huge block as met they covered a lot of T20 games and then the One days games meant they didn't actually have to show 2 County championship games to meet the criteria.
Whereas when the T20 was in a block they couldn't show that many T20 games that they do now so had some days they could spend on the County championship.
Originally Posted by Darren Lethem:
“Can I ask you a question Neil ? How do you deduce that I am defending Sky ?”
“Can I ask you a question Neil ? How do you deduce that I am defending Sky ?”
Maybe not defending, more sympathetic to their cause. Basically on their side.
Originally Posted by Neil_Harris:
“Maybe not defending, more sympathetic to their cause. Basically on their side.”
“Maybe not defending, more sympathetic to their cause. Basically on their side.”
Again, I will ask the same question. How do you deduce that ?
I said
Sky aren't showing any more county games. Fair enough. It would be nice if they were but sadly they have decided not to. I agree that the county game needs help so it would have been a double bonus.
How is that either defending Sky or being sympathetic to them OR 'on their side' ??
44 of 69
