When I was growing up in the early 1980s, it was accepted that lads played football in the winter and cricket in the summer. Test matches were shown on BBC TV all through the day - no adverts, no gimmicks, just hour after hour of cricket. Because of this we knew all the players, the way the game worked and would even pester our dads to take us to a game.

To the modern "short attention span" teenager, this probably sounds deathly dull, but we found it fascinating. Then, in the evening, we'd go out with our mates and play cricket for hours on the nearest sports field (in our case the one next to Crookes Cemetery).

Fast forward to now, and the fact that terrestrial TV doesn't show any cricket at all means a whole generation have been bypassed. However much Sky like to boast, the number of people who have Sky Sports is very much a minority, which means that public perception of cricket as England's top summer sport seems to be fading.

Furthermore, test match cricket simply isn't the right sport for a subscription TV channel that relies on gimmicks and adverts every few minutes. It requires concentration, calmness and no distractions to be fully appreciated. It's not the sort of sport lads will watch on a TV in a pub.

Thus the introduction of the ridiculous pantomime farce that is 20/20 cricket - a desperate parody of a classic sport for thick people with short attention spans. How long before Sky Sports bosses - who of course hold all the purse strings - decide test cricket is too long and boring for their viewers and demand it be replaced by wall-to-wall 20/20 or something even worse?

Test cricket belongs on the BBC; unless the BBC wrestles back TV coverage of test matches form Murdoch's evil empire, I can see interest in the sport fading altogether.


What do you think?

I've always been a fan of Sky's coverage tbh but I see where you're coming from and I do think a lot of people are missing out.

''How long before Sky Sports bosses - who of course hold all the purse strings - decide test cricket is too long and boring for their viewers and demand it be replaced by wall-to-wall 20/20 or something even worse?''

I dont agree with you there though, Sky pump a lot of money into the game by buying the tv rights but they dont decide on fixtures or what matches England can or cant play, that's up to the ECB. If Sky ever decided that Test cricket was too long/boring they simply wouldnt bid for the rights to it and somebody else would pick it up.

It'd be good to see cricket back on the BBC although Channel 4's coverage was much better when they took the home Test matches apart from having adverts and who's to say they wouldnt bang it on BBC3 when anything else of interest was on anyway. I've been quite disappointed with sport on the BBC lately, their take on Dwain Chambers has had a horrible bias for instance, so if anything I'd prefer to see it on Channel 4 again even though Sky's coverage is better.

For those that dont have Sky Sports though they can watch it streamed over the internet :)

I dont agree with you there though, Sky pump a lot of money into the game by buying the tv rights but they dont decide on fixtures or what matches England can or cant play, that's up to the ECB. If Sky ever decided that Test cricket was too long/boring they simply wouldnt bid for the rights to it and somebody else would pick it up.


Consider this - so far hypothetical -possibility though:

Sky offers £500 million for a series of international Twenty20 matches, three a week for four months over the summer.

BBC1, or CH4, offers £15 million for live coverage of seven Test matches.


Sky still would not be "ordering" the ECB to scrap test matches, but ... that'd be a hell of a lot of incentive.

Until the days of sky I don’t remember seeing any of the local football teams on TV or every stroke of a Golf tournament or every over of a cricket match, people can knock sky prices but you can’t knock their coverage.

Consider this - so far hypothetical -possibility though:

Sky offers £500 million for a series of international Twenty20 matches, three a week for four months over the summer.

BBC1, or CH4, offers £15 million for live coverage of seven Test matches.


Sky still would not be "ordering" the ECB to scrap test matches, but ... that'd be a hell of a lot of incentive.


I see how you mean and you just have to look at the Allen Stanford series to see how much money talks. To be a bit pedantic though Sky would never pay massive money to sponsor events outright, its not how they make their money, although they would pay top dollar to broadcast something if another party did make such an offer. Another thing is that the ECB arrange the calendar years in advance so to bin a home Test series would be quite an effort and lets remember this is cricket and who runs it. Could you imagine the uproar at the MCC if the ECB even thought about shelving home Test matches!

Until the days of sky I don’t remember seeing any of the local football teams on TV or every stroke of a Golf tournament or every over of a cricket match, people can knock sky prices but you can’t knock their coverage.

I think you're completely wrong mate.

The golf was always on BBC, as was every home Test and one day international, and various one day County Cup matches.

There was a live football match on ITV every Sunday afternoon from about 1985-1992 from the top flight, and then (depending on which region you were watching) a match from the lower divisions featuring a side from your region until about 1995. I could pick up Central, so there was always a match on, but local sides were featured regularly on Yorkshire, and at the time, it couldn't even be Weeds.

Local sides weren't regularly featured on the live Sunday matches because most of us, as is still the case, were hiding in Division Two or below.

The home nations' international fixtures were always on terrestrial TV, home or away, albeit split between the constituent nations local BBC networks.

Rugby Special was a mainstay of Sunday afternoons on BBC2, and there would often be live matches, especially Pilkington Cup matches.

In pure broadcasting terms, what Sky have done is to bring a myriad of options. The sport itself was always available regularly, all year round, on terrestrial TV.

Quite agree HappyHippy, Sky are just greedy so and so's who don't like sharing. Setanta offer a wide range with value for money, free even if you have the XL tv package with Virgin and no "sparklies" when it snows.

I think you're completely wrong mate.

In pure broadcasting terms, what Sky have done is to bring a myriad of options. The sport itself was always available regularly, all year round, on terrestrial TV.

My memory must be fading then, I remember sport being a Saturday afternoon event with a rushed mix-match of events the highlight being wrestling :o, football was one or two selected games unless you count match of the days quick whip-round of the games and there was the odd European game if the satellite link held out for a full match.

The BBC and ITV cherry picked events there wasn’t the range there is available today if you want to pay for it, I have even seen Rotherham United on Sky, could you have ever seen Rotherham on the BBC.

The BBC and ITV cherry picked events there wasn’t the range there is available today if you want to pay for it, I have even seen Rotherham United on Sky, could you have ever seen Rotherham on the BBC.

That's fair enough but this thread is about Sky killing test cricket, not Rotherham United. If Sky demonstrated a commitment to the county game by showing a 4-day game between Northants and Leicestershire for example and left the test cricket to terrestrial TV that's be fair enough, but the point of this thread is that their dominance means there's no cricket on terrestrial TV, thus public interest in the game from the more casual fan is diminishing.

That's fair enough but this thread is about Sky killing test cricket, not Rotherham United. If Sky demonstrated a commitment to the county game by showing a 4-day game between Northants and Leicestershire for example and left the test cricket to terrestrial TV that's be fair enough, but the point of this thread is that their dominance means there's no cricket on terrestrial TV, thus public interest in the game from the more casual fan is diminishing.

We have gone of track slightly and I don’t want to comment on cricket coverage as I don’t watch that much but as mentioned in your first post I remember playing it all-day in the summer likewise I remember playing football on the street / park.

You don’t see gangs of kids having a kick about like you used to do so maybe it’s a social thing and sport in general rather than just cricket.

That's fair enough but this thread is about Sky killing test cricket, not Rotherham United. If Sky demonstrated a commitment to the county game by showing a 4-day game between Northants and Leicestershire for example and left the test cricket to terrestrial TV that's be fair enough, but the point of this thread is that their dominance means there's no cricket on terrestrial TV, thus public interest in the game from the more casual fan is diminishing.

Sky show plenty of County cricket, much more than has ever been on terrestrial tv anyway but you couldnt force them to show 4day games like the one you mentioned as nobody'd watch it, just look at the ground attendances. The best way of increasing public interest in the game imo would be to get 20/20 on terrestrial. Max exposure as its on in the evening during peak viewing hours when kids are home from school and it makes much better tv than Test matches. Kids these days see Test matches and just think theyre boring, theres not enough stimulation for those with shorter concentration spans and they simply wouldnt want to sit in all day watching a team try save a game by scoring at 2 runs per over, they wouldnt appreciate it.

theres not enough stimulation for those with shorter concentration spans and they simply wouldnt want to sit in all day watching a team try save a game by scoring at 2 runs per over, they wouldnt appreciate it.

Good point it’s a bit like trying to tell them to ditch their Xbox and learn the finer points of a game of chess.

The best way of increasing public interest in the game imo would be to get 20/20 on terrestrial.


Which is about equivalent to saying the best way to increase interest in historical documentaries is to show more soap operas on TV. :loopy:

Which is about equivalent to saying the best way to increase interest in historical documentaries is to show more soap operas on TV. :loopy:

Because soap operas are shorter versions of historical documentaries? Of course yeh theres that gangster in Eastenders who's had all those wives, I think he's called Henry? I cant see where you got that from.

If you wanted to use a proper analogy with historical documentaries it'd be more like watching a 2hr long documentary instead of watching a 5 day Time Team Live dig. :rolleyes:

My memory must be fading then ....

Reckon so mate!

The BBC and ITV cherry picked events there wasn’t the range there is available today if you want to pay for it, I have even seen Rotherham United on Sky, could you have ever seen Rotherham on the BBC.

I've seen Rotherham on ITV.

As for the range, that's exactly my point. All Sky have done is give more options. I could watch International Caravanning, or the South American qualifiers for the over-80's Extreme Knitting Championships if I wanted, no doubt, and aside from that, why should I have to pay a premium to watch? Not to mention that I can only watch one sport at a time anyway.

That's fair enough but this thread is about Sky killing test cricket, not Rotherham United. If Sky demonstrated a commitment to the county game by showing a 4-day game between Northants and Leicestershire for example and left the test cricket to terrestrial TV that's be fair enough, but the point of this thread is that their dominance means there's no cricket on terrestrial TV, thus public interest in the game from the more casual fan is diminishing.

I do think you've got a point. In fact, such is their dominance, they broke up the "Crown Jewels", of which the home Test Series were a part, if I remember correctly.

Sky show plenty of County cricket, much more than has ever been on terrestrial tv anyway but you couldnt force them to show 4day games like the one you mentioned as nobody'd watch it, just look at the ground attendances.

Fair point about the viewing figures, but the drop in County attendances has been ongoing for a few decades now, and a lot of that is down to social matters in my opinion.

The best way of increasing public interest in the game imo would be to get 20/20 on terrestrial. Max exposure as its on in the evening during peak viewing hours when kids are home from school and it makes much better tv than Test matches.

While your argument looks good to a point, and I think your thinking is reasoned, unfortunately, it's flawed in the case of English cricket, I believe. The main reason being that everywhere else where 20/20 has become big, the four and five day games are still going strong. In the UK, due to a number of reasons, the County and Test game is in decline.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again (even if there is an element of 'fuddy-duddiness' about it), 20/20 will encourage the 'wrong' sort of cricket.

Kids these days see Test matches and just think theyre boring, theres not enough stimulation for those with shorter concentration spans and they simply wouldnt want to sit in all day watching a team try save a game by scoring at 2 runs per over, they wouldnt appreciate it.

Which has a much wider implications than perhaps first meets the eye. Malky's mention of X-Boxes and the like is very pertinent. Go back 20 years to just after the beginning of the home computer boom, loads of us would still pick up bats, balls and stumps for a game (even if we had a computer), AND would watch Test Matches. Kids probably don't now as they're conditioned to things only lasting an hour at most.

More pertinent to the decline of the sport in general over here though, are the lack of open spaces and decent wickets to play the game, and the following drop in numbers of schools who have a team.

Taking the sport away from most people's screens just speeds up the slow death.

Because soap operas are shorter versions of historical documentaries?


Just as much so as you can reasonably argue that twenty20 has anything to do with proper cricket, yes.

Just as much so as you can reasonably argue that twenty20 has anything to do with proper cricket, yes.


Come off it, thats a bit of an extreme. What kind of game do you think kids play at school? More often than not they play 20/25/30 overs each as timed games are a bit of a pain. Ok there are some silly rule changes to make 20/20 a better spectator sport but fundamentally its still the same competitive game between bat and ball.

Soaps and historical documentaries though, for starters one is played by actors and the other by historians, thats a pretty big difference right there. The whole point of them is totally different, you know with one there to bore/entertain and the other to inform. Cricket on the other hand is a game played in a competitive spirit by professional sportsmen however long the game is.

Come off it, thats a bit of an extreme. What kind of game do you think kids play at school? More often than not they play 20/25/30 overs each as timed games are a bit of a pain. Ok there are some silly rule changes to make 20/20 a better spectator sport but fundamentally its still the same competitive game between bat and ball.

There's a vast difference. They don't spend their whole time trying to smash bowlers out of the ground, but are still perfecting skills such as defensive batting, and spin bowling.

Fair point about the viewing figures, but the drop in County attendances has been ongoing for a few decades now, and a lot of that is down to social matters in my opinion.

Yeh I agree, there's plenty of reasons why the County game's as bad as it is.


While your argument looks good to a point, and I think your thinking is reasoned, unfortunately, it's flawed in the case of English cricket, I believe. The main reason being that everywhere else where 20/20 has become big, the four and five day games are still going strong. In the UK, due to a number of reasons, the County and Test game is in decline.

If you look into it a bit closer you might find things to be a little different. Attendances in other countries arent great at all these days, certainly in the Test arena. Test matches only sell out in Eng/SA/Aus and even in India you'll only get a good crowd if Australia are playing. Look at the series Australia have just played in the West Indies for instance, all those big new stadia and they were completely empty. They struggled to even half-fill them for the World Cup! New Zealand when England toured there this Winter, again nobody was there, they were all at the Super 14s. They do get massive crowds on the subcontinent for the ODIs but nothing like that for Test matches, a large part of that is the way they price and market them though. I dont know so much about first-class cricket abroad but I cant think it would be doing much better than our game, especially with the way Test attendances are.

There's a vast difference. They don't spend their whole time trying to smash bowlers out of the ground, but are still perfecting skills such as defensive batting, and spin bowling.

Oh yeh I see how you mean and agree that its played in a vastly different way but the rules arent greatly dissimilar. I was just trying to say that its the same game basically under different constraints which is what 20/20 and Test cricket are.

I could watch International Caravanning, or the South American qualifiers for the over-80's Extreme Knitting Championships if I wanted,.

I get your point but you forgot to mention fishing, now there’s a spectator sport if ever there was one. :rolleyes:

There should be atleast 1 test ayear on terrestrial TV.

not everyone can afford sky especially old people who spend all day watching it

I was a late bloomer as far as Cricket was concerned, and enjoying the beauty of the game. I only ever watched it on Ch4 and loved to watch all forms of the game. I wish they would bring it back to terrestrial tv, I refuse to have paid for tv JUST to watch cricket!

I actually live near to the Hallam ground but struggle to find match dates and cost. To sit for the day listening to the sound of leather on willow <sigh> with a cool glass of something would be pure heaven.

Bring it back to normal tv is what I say :)

Watch it streamed over the internet perhaps? Quick google and you're away no special software needed.