English Spinners

[Jim2109]

Re: English Spinners

one other thing about Sky vs free TV....

the BBC, ITV and C4 would be queuing up to show the Ashes series. theyd also probably pay handsomely just for that series.

Sky on the other hand pays for county cricket as well. they dont show county championship matches, only one day matches, and more often than not they are day/nighters to appeal to a wider audience on weeknights.

its all very well making a law so that the Ashes is free for everyone. but if that were the case Sky would probably pull the plug on their coverage, because the county matches probably only draw viewers in the 10's or 100's of thousands. but they take the hit on the small matches because they make their money on the internationals, and especially the Ashes. remove those bigger matches, which account for a fraction of the overall TV revenue Sky pays to the ECB, and youll also remove most of the money by Sky withdrawing. and that will hurt cricket more in the short term than reduced interest.

i definitely dont see terrestrial TV lining up to pay for county cricket. even the IPL only gets coverage on ITV4!!! 80% of the nation probably dont even know that channel exists.

 

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Re: English Spinners

Ch 9 pays a fortune for the cricket rights, but that is there summer ratings banker, not just the ashes, but every series, every summer.

What is the difference between Australia and England?

Ch 9 want the cricket coverage, they pay big money to get it, however, they make that money back and more on advertising during the coverage. Who knows what advertisers will be paying this year for a 15 second ad between overs.

Surely, in England at least, a free to air channel should be able to muster up enough money to buy the rights, and make money back on advertising during the coverage.

 

[someblokecalleddave]

Re: English Spinners

one other thing about Sky vs free TV....

the BBC, ITV and C4 would be queuing up to show the Ashes series. theyd also probably pay handsomely just for that series.

Sky on the other hand pays for county cricket as well. they dont show county championship matches, only one day matches, and more often than not they are day/nighters to appeal to a wider audience on weeknights.

its all very well making a law so that the Ashes is free for everyone. but if that were the case Sky would probably pull the plug on their coverage, because the county matches probably only draw viewers in the 10's or 100's of thousands. but they take the hit on the small matches because they make their money on the internationals, and especially the Ashes. remove those bigger matches, which account for a fraction of the overall TV revenue Sky pays to the ECB, and youll also remove most of the money by Sky withdrawing. and that will hurt cricket more in the short term than reduced interest.

i definitely dont see terrestrial TV lining up to pay for county cricket. even the IPL only gets coverage on ITV4!!! 80% of the nation probably dont even know that channel exists.

Don't get me wrong I've back-peddaled previously on the 'Ashes should be taken from SKY argument' because as you rightly say they put so much money into the sport. It would be nice to think that we could could have a mixture of coverage deals in the way some of the Aussies are describing, but culturally we're not in the same league as the Aussies in our appreciation and take up of sport (Certainly cricket) and as you say the terrestrial channels wouldn't go near County games with a barge pole because there wouldn't be any audience for it. Does anyone know what kind of audiences the IPL has been picking up? I've tried watching it - but as previously mentioned I cannot watch TV if I'm being bombarded with advertising. I never watch ITV, Channel 4 or 5 because of the same reason hence I'm sitting here ranting on these forums all night!!! So I find the IPL approach to its coverage un-watchable.

An interesting question that arises from this is - what did happen to English cricket or has it always been a very poor cousin to Football, Wimbledon, Rugby and athletics? I kind of have this perception that English cricket at all levels is in decline - the fact that it's not on the tele anymore and it only is now via SKY, it's not played in schools, clubs all over the country despite the SKY money do seem to be struggling rather than thriving and culturally it's becoming what seems obscure. Hence the poor looking spin prospects? Is there an argument that fast bowling in the 70's and 80's helped to kill it off and just made the spectacle of cricket even more in-accessible to the layman?

 

[mas cambios]

Re: English Spinners

I don't think the issue of television and English cricket is an easy one to tackle. Part of the problem is in the way certain channels are funded and another part is in how our territorial television is structured.

To put it bluntly, the BBC simply doesn't have the money to throw at the game and whilst I'm sure demand is there they are unlikely to want to show something which takes up 8 hours of daytime television. Couple this with the cost of producing a days play and you can see why a cheap bargain hunt style program is going to win. This rules them out leaving the likes of ITV, C4 and Five to come into play. Again, I can't see ITV having the cash especially with their recent monetary problems, likewise Channel 4 (it wasn't that long ago they were talking about selling of parts of it). This leaves Five and where they stand is anybodies guess.

On the other hand, if they could guarantee a sizeable amount of cash from advertising then it just might sway them. This would come at a cost to the game and a move towards the IPL overkill in terms of product placement. I can stand an advert per over but I really can't stand them every 2 balls.

This leaves SKY ready and able to swoop in as they can afford to pay over the odds and have the dedicated channel space to show games. Adverts are not that intrusive (compared to some sports/channels) and their production values are high. Yes, you do pay for it in terms of the subscription but on the other hand, it would cost a family of four probably upwards of £250 to visit a test match for day.

A solution needs to be found and I can't see why SKY can't continue but on the basis that they must sell a certain numbers of tests per year (for example give two Ashes tests to the BBC and one from every other series). That way they still get something from their investment, the ECB sees little if any drop in funds and we all get a few games on free to air.

Whilst I think TV exposure is one element needed to attract new fans, it is not the be all and end all. Newspapers and other media need to be utilised and the counties themselves need to do more to attract people through the door. For example, as of this evening one county had sold 17 (yes, one seven) tickets for their opening Pro40 game on Sunday. Taking members into account based on current numbers they are likely to have no more than 1000 people attending a 16,000 seater stadium. I'm sure more will be sold on the day but surely it points to problem there. If the product is boring or unappealing then you can't expect the media to cover it.

I'm all for history and tradition but I'm a realist. The game in this country needs to change and change radically. Maybe if they do and become largely self supporting then the ECB would have scope to take a massive cut in TV funds to get the national side exposure, without compromising the game as a whole.

 

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Re: English Spinners

What is the advertising situation with Sky when they are showing the cricket?

Don't they show one or two ads at the end of each over?

Channel 9 simply show an ad at the end of each over, or after a wicket has fallen. They don't really have much advertising during the coverage, unless it is promoting one of their own shows or Tony Greig's product endorsements. Hell, every now and than Richie Benaud puts in a few words about how 'great' some show is that you know he wouldn't even consider watching. I spose, if your on a nice 6 figure salary for calling cricket you wouldn't shy away from saying how great some show is every now and then.

That formula makes them a lot of money, when Kerry Packer took over the coverage of the cricket that was one of the factors which he was attracted to. Packer didn't take over the coverage because he wanted to make the game better, he did it primarily to make money, a lot of it. Having the chance to show ads at the end of each over was a big selling point for him.

It's a good point you make about counties doing more to attract fans to watch the game at the stadium. Unfortunately, that is harder than it sounds.

 

[Jim2109]

Re: English Spinners

Sky is actually very good for ad-breaks during sports. on test match coverage they tend to take a short ad break between overs every 10 minutes or so. when a wicket falls they take a longer advert break. the good thing with test cricket is that it moves slowly enough that there is time to analyse things properly between overs, so adverts dont break things up too much.

on the one day games i think they take short (1 or 2 advert) breaks every couple of overs. again, its not too intrusive. they also dont do much (if anything) in the way of product placement. the only advertising they tend to do is of other Sky programs every now and again, and they are usually cricket relevant, or at least sports relevant. none of this IPL nonsense where every single type of delivery and shot is sponsored by a different company. it sounds utterly ridiculous when you listen to the commentary. but its very clever marketting for India, and their domestic companies can get worldwide publicity through it. aside from the IPL there probably isnt another viable option for them really, hence why there is so much money in it!!

 

[Boris]

Re: English Spinners

Just a small note on the ad things:

I'm more likely to pay attention to one of the 2/3 ads during over breaks than if I have been bombarded over after over with random pointless crap like the stupid 'MRF Blimp' in the IPL (I feel ashamed for remembering the brand name ).

I think a station is better of downsizing the amount of ads and upping the prices on the few that are left. Businesses should then feel more motivated to advertise in that small space that everyone will see and remember, especially if it repeats.

 

[someblokecalleddave]

Re: English Spinners

Back to the English spinners. In the Guardian today there's a story about Rashid not playing so welll for Yorkshire. It then goes on to say that he's fallen apart since going away with England to South Africa where they mucked about trying to change his action. Apparently Jenner had said previously not to do anything with him till he was 25. He's now got no confidence in what he does and has changed the way he bowls completely. No doubt the article will appear on-line over the next few days. But more reasons for England being short on spinners perhaps?

 

[Jim2109]

Re: English Spinners

exactly, England coach the life out of players at international level. to the point where during matches bowlers are under specific instructions from their coaches as to the exact deliveries they must bowl. regardless of whether they know better. regardless of simple common sense. its the reason why you will watch an entire test match without a single fast bowler aiming a delivery actually at the stumps.

you get someone like Freddie Flintoff who does whatever he fancies, and then you hear reports that he doesnt get on with the management and hes a destabilising influence in the dressing room. thats management speak for "he doesnt do exactly what we tell him, he uses his own head and gets better results, making us look stupid".

 

[Tumo]

Re: English Spinners

It's over-coaching, the players almost become like robots, because the english cricket system wants them to be 'textbook' down to a t. look at mendis, murali, malinga, and people like warner, jayasuria, dilshan, we'd NEVER get that in england. look at KP with his innovation, you can tell he hasn't come through the system! look what happened to jimmy, you'd think they'd learn! if it comes naturally, and it works (like rashid and jimmy did), then DON'T CHANGE IT! Argh it's so infuriating!

 

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Re: English Spinners

exactly, England coach the life out of players at international level. to the point where during matches bowlers are under specific instructions from their coaches as to the exact deliveries they must bowl. regardless of whether they know better. regardless of simple common sense. its the reason why you will watch an entire test match without a single fast bowler aiming a delivery actually at the stumps.

you get someone like Freddie Flintoff who does whatever he fancies, and then you hear reports that he doesnt get on with the management and hes a destabilising influence in the dressing room. thats management speak for "he doesnt do exactly what we tell him, he uses his own head and gets better results, making us look stupid".

Can anyone shed some light on a guy called "Blackwell""?; I think his first name is Ian. Was reading an article online that said he was the best all-rounder in the county comp and was a spinner/batsmen, played for Somerset but Langer didn't like him because he was overweight and didn't do any fitness work et al.

In fairness, Flintoff at times has gone overboard with drinking and pedalos and what not.

From memory, Rashid played in a T20 against SA last November, got hammered, and hasn't played since.

 

[someblokecalleddave]

Re: English Spinners

sounds about right there's some fairly up todate news about Rashid on the cricinfo website, but nothing about how he did this weekend and the state he's in at the moment. The other bloke - yeah I've heard the name but don't know anything about him.

 

[Jim2109]

Re: English Spinners

Can anyone shed some light on a guy called "Blackwell""?; I think his first name is Ian. Was reading an article online that said he was the best all-rounder in the county comp and was a spinner/batsmen, played for Somerset but Langer didn't like him because he was overweight and didn't do any fitness work et al.

In fairness, Flintoff at times has gone overboard with drinking and pedalos and what not.

From memory, Rashid played in a T20 against SA last November, got hammered, and hasn't played since.

ive seen Blackwell play for county on the TV. hes a left arm off spinner, he plays for Durham now and hes pretty good. hes played for England, but he was always overshadowed by Ashley Giles during his peak years. hes 31 now, and when youve got Graeme Swann playing like he is, and then Tredwell waiting in the wings, hes not likely to get a call up again. not unless Swann does something to lose favour, like getting caught drink driving!!

as said though, Blackwell can bat a bit!! 23 first class centuries according to Wikipedia and 45 fifties. but then Graeme Swann is phenomenal with the bat in an aggressive capacity. hes not the kind of guy youd want to build an innings, but if you need 100 to win off 30 balls youd send him in! ideally with big Kev at the other end. and Tredwell isnt bad either.

Blackwell was given a chance for England and just wasnt the best player available in his position. unlike Rashid who has never been given a chance, and now it sounds as though the coaches have wrecked him. the same happens with ALL young English players. they amaze at county level, get an England call up for a year or 2 and loiter on the fringe without getting many matches, then they turn to sh*t for 3 years. then some of them come back amazing again when they reach their mid-20's, others just vanish.

whilst not a spinner (or a bowler even), the most ridiculous England snub of recent years is a wicket keeper called James Foster at Essex. he played a handful of games at T20 or ODI level a couple of years back, and impressed. hes excellent with the gloves, far better than Matt Prior. hes also a deadly batsman, especially in one day games. hes got some massive shots and hes much more consistent than Prior. he hit Scott Borthwick, the young Durham leg spinner, for 5 sixes in a row in a match last season, Essex needed 31 runs to win off 6 balls and looked totally beaten, and Foster won the game with those 5 shots in the final over, followed by Borthwick bowling a wide with the last ball!!! yet England snubbed him, he should be our T20 keeper for sure.

 

[A.B De Villiers]

Re: English Spinners

whilst not a spinner (or a bowler even), the most ridiculous England snub of recent years is a wicket keeper called James Foster at Essex. he played a handful of games at T20 or ODI level a couple of years back, and impressed. hes excellent with the gloves, far better than Matt Prior. hes also a deadly batsman, especially in one day games. hes got some massive shots and hes much more consistent than Prior. he hit Scott Borthwick, the young Durham leg spinner, for 5 sixes in a row in a match last season, Essex needed 31 runs to win off 6 balls and looked totally beaten, and Foster won the game with those 5 shots in the final over, followed by Borthwick bowling a wide with the last ball!!! yet England snubbed him, he should be our T20 keeper for sure.

I have heard and read about this bloke. A victim of the revolving door of english keepers. But supposedly he is the most talented and consistent to not play more for england.

 

[someblokecalleddave]

Re: English Spinners

I have heard and read about this bloke. A victim of the revolving door of english keepers. But supposedly he is the most talented and consistent to not play more for england.

There's an exceptionally good batsman at Essex as well that shed loads of people say should be in the England set up - Graham Napier.

"but in 2008 he wrote his name in the record books with an astonishing 152 against Sussex in the Twenty20, which included a world record 16 sixes. " from Graham Napier | England Cricket | Cricket Players and Officials | Cricinfo.com

 

[legspinner_don]

Re: English Spinners

Graham Napier was found out with short pitched bowling - he can't deal with it. That innings was spectacular, but it was on a small ground where the bowlers were bowling length, perfectly in his hitting zone. Since then he's barely mustered a score to shout about. He is more of a bowler though.

Ian Blackwell's had a chance early in his career but his attitude reaked. More destructive batsman than Swann though, Jim. He's got some power! But his face and attitude don't fit. Similar to Andrew Symonds, I'd say.

On Rashid... we all know how hard it is with leggies. England took him on tour to get some experience to work with the England set up. They personally assigned Mushtaq Ahmed, a brilliant leggie, to work with him. Obviously something's happened on tour where perhaps the pressure got to him, and James Tredwell was brought in to replace him. If the report from David Hoops (Gu) is accurate and he was bowling long-hops with little confidence, then thrusting him into the limelight to make his test debut in Banga would be completely irresponsible. I think David Hopps was perhaps slightly too harsh on Rashid. Granted, I didn't see his bowling, but every leggie goes through consistency issues especially when working on their action.

Perhaps people had too great expectations of him before anyway. Anyone that saw him in county cricket said he was a decent leggie, but had more talent as a batsman. So the idea that England have wrecked some potential Warne-class spinner by taking him on tour is wrong. He had some sucess at county level and could, potentially, turn into an international leggie, but the road was always precarious and delicate, and never certiain to produce results. Perhaps he was involved too early in England squads, but I would say a lot of that is due to public pressure. The media and public were clamouring for him to be involved in England from the moment he made his debut. England slowly get him involved, and then the media shout from the rafters crying what a mistake it was when he doesn't immediately take to it.

The lad is still only 22, very young for legspinner. It's good to see Yorkshire still giving him a chance, and if you look at yesterdays Pro40 match, he was the most economical bowler on both sides, going at just over 4 from 7 overs. Let's not get too excited about this. He's bowled a few long-hops and is lacking confidence, but who as a leggie hasn't?!

 

[Jim2109]

Re: English Spinners

im not so sure with Napier. that 152 innings was magnificent, but he seemed to just have a purple patch one season that he hasnt repeated at any other time in his career.

the 152 runs in that one innings account for 25% of all T20 runs scored in 55 matches!! hes an average county bowler as well. i can see why England would overlook him, hes 30 as well so not much of a future prospect. when youve got the likes of Eoin Morgan and Luke Wright playing the same role/position as Napier would if he were playing, id go with the younger guys every time.

 

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Re: English Spinners

Yeah in the article Blackwell said he was 'old school' and that Justin Langer didn't like his attitude. To me, reading in between the lines, it sounded like Blackwell likes sinking piss and eating crap rather than at least trying to get fit.

Foster played in the 2002/03 series Ashes series, I can't remember being particularly impressed with his batting.

Is it just a matter of time before this Kiewsetter (sp) lad takes Prior's spot in the test side?

 

[legspinner_don]

Re: English Spinners

Is it just a matter of time before this Kiewsetter (sp) lad takes Prior's spot in the test side?

I reckon Prior's got the test spot sewn up until at least after the Ashes. Prior's long underperformed at ODI/T20 level: not always due to him, however, as he was shifted from 1 to 7 to 3 back to 2 on a regular basis. Ever since Gilchrist came on the scene, England have looked to find their own Gilchrist who can both open and keep. They've tried a multitude of keepers in that role in the last three years (Nixon, Mustard, Davies, Jones) but none have grasped their chance. Kieswetter's started well with a hundred against Banga, but we all know there's a big difference between Banga and the rest of world cricket. He's performed well in county cricket, and often opens for Somerset in the shortened game. Whether he's as a complete batsman, or even keeper, than Prior is definitely up for debate.

The real one to watch out for when it comes to keeper/batsman is 23yr old Steven Davies, who recently moved from Worcestershire to Surrey. He opened for Worcestershire in 40/T20s, and has started this season very well for Surrey. His new county are a bit of a shambles at the moment, but they are seen as one of the biggest, most influential counties in England. Given a few more years of development and he'll be very close to being England keeper.

 

[a for effort]

Re: English Spinners

I think half of Prior's problem in ODI's is that he likes to hit boundaries instead of turning the strike over. Obviously hitting boundaries is a good skill, but for the majority of the standard ODI innings, the field will be spread and picking off singles is the order of the day, which isn't Prior's specialty.

His batting is much more suited to Test cricket, where the fields are more aggressive and boundaries are easier to find. I wouldn't mind seeing a new keeper in for ODI's (Probably Kieswetter, though I don't know what Mustard did wrong to get dropped in the first place).

None of this is particularly on-topic, however.