keepcricketfree.com

Doesnt it have something to do with the fact that sky presumed that by 2010, everyone will have digital satellite TV or something? If so, then take cricket then.
They should have left cricket as it was on C4.
The ashes win got everyone interested in cricket, and to make it available to those who only have sky was to basically undo the effect that the ashes had in this country.
 
Nightwatchman said:
The ashes win got everyone interested in cricket, and to make it available to those who only have sky was to basically undo the effect that the ashes had in this country.

Spot On.
 
I am unforunatly one of these who dont have Sky, i used to, but all we watched in my household was the channels which are available on Freeview and Sky Sports, All me the sports. It cost ?38 just the have the Sky sport package and im a collage everyday and there is no point, so i just have put up with Teletext, BBC website and 45 mins of highlight which i find incredibly horrid to watch as it doesnt have all the days play.
 
barmyarmy said:
ECB.tv do the series online for not a lot.

Yeah that's a great alternative to Sky, but it's no replacement for Terrestrial cricket. I'm happy with Sky though; They do a good job.
 
:D BA you just reminded me, Broadband should be here tomorrow :p

CANT WAIT!
 
evertonfan said:
Yeah that's a great alternative to Sky, but it's no replacement for Terrestrial cricket. I'm happy with Sky though; They do a good job.

I've been watching it online with a cable running from the computer to the TV. That way I have the cricket on the (large) TV screen but can still use the computer at the same time. I'm very pleased with it at the moment although, as you say, it's no replacement for terrestrial.
 
barmyarmy said:
I've been watching it online with a cable running from the computer to the TV. That way I have the cricket on the (large) TV screen but can still use the computer at the same time. I'm very pleased with it at the moment although, as you say, it's no replacement for terrestrial.

In all honesty, the only thing I miss from Channel 4's coverage is the Analyst. Sky's 'Third Man' just doesn't have the same effect. Sky has Bumble too; He might not have been the best coach, but you have to love him as a commentator.
 
barmyarmy said:
ECB.tv do the series online for not a lot.
I think ECB.tv is only for countries where there is no broadcast agreement. As SKY have exclusive rights the UK isnt on that list.
 
Apparently the 4th Test between England and Pakistan is Sky Sports 100th Test match. Here's to 100 more of the same quality. At least they'll get there quicker now we don't have to put up with the drivel of channel 4. :cheers
 
Channel 4 were a little better than Sky Sports. The Analyst was fantastic, telling us exactly why the ball reverse swung or why Glenn McGrath was doing better in this match than the last. Sky Sports have used the 3rd Man, but often they just look at people sleeping in the crowd or what the players are saying.

I don't miss the regular breaks for Racing on Saturdays though!
 
Skateboarder said:
Channel 4 were a little better than Sky Sports. The Analyst was fantastic, telling us exactly why the ball reverse swung or why Glenn McGrath was doing better in this match than the last. Sky Sports have used the 3rd Man, but often they just look at people sleeping in the crowd or what the players are saying.

I don't miss the regular breaks for Racing on Saturdays though!
But the commentators at Sky do the job of the analyst themselves as they have the knowledge that the likes of Mark Nicholas and Michael Slater didn't. Channel 4's coverage wasn't game orientated enough. The program started 15 minutes before and finished when the Cricket did. They just didn't have enough knowledge to keep the audience interested.
 
If its the ECBs wish to encourage/introduce more people to the game only allowing subscription TV viewers to watch ain't the right way to go about it.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top