Cricket
LRB has an article on cricket (written after the 4th test) which makes some interesting points; as to how valid they are will require someone more knowledgeable about cricket than me to say. The one about the lack of non-white players struck me as interesting, but no more, but a friend of mine who doesn't read the LRB and I would say was a left-wing Conservative, made the same point to me today, which made me think there was something odd about it, particularly given the team's recent past.I would certainly disagree with Runcimann about Sky having control of test matches. A test match takes up about 6 hours a day solid play for five days, something which just can't be shown on general-purpose channels very well. The BBC's commitment to cricket was always dodgy, I remember highlights being shown past 1am, and even now it can't, despite the plethora of channels, find anything other (except on occasion) better than AM to put the cricket, a channel my car radio certainly can't get. The idea that some kid comes off the football pitch, turns on their four channel TV and sees test cricket and will become the next Sir Freddie, is silly. What cricket needs is money, and Sky offered multiples more than the rest.
ps and there was some fool today in The Guardian, or possibly the FT, saying that he loved test cricket, it was his life, blah, blah, but he would never watch it on TV whilst it was Murdoch's shilling, etc etc. Bet he does really.
posted by Matthew @ 9/18/2005 01:38:00 AM
Comments: 0
