SillyCowCorner1
Moooo
You jinxed himWarner has made it look all too easy today
You jinxed himWarner has made it look all too easy today
It's a bit trickier than that, but I get what you mean. The wider appetite is there.Its such a simple solution too - just have the match streamed online somewhere behind a paywall. The channels can stream it on their site, or the cricket board can host the stream. Eitherway, there is money to be made by simply giving people around the world a chance to tune it.
But nope. And if people can't watch the action, why are they going to keep following the sport.
Same goes with footage of old games. Why hide it from the world? Make it accessible!
TBH I don't think he's bowled that well so far, but he's got a new batsman to work over now.Can Shakib win this for BD?
Hmm, if anything Adam Gilchrist's 1st innings knock gets more plaudits than Ricky Ponting's 2nd innings ton from what I've seen.If Australia do win this, a bit like the Bang/Oz 2006 Test which Australia scrambled to victory, while the 4th innings chase gets all the kudos the late order runs Oz got in the 1st innings were pivotal imo. Made an almost impossible situation become difficult but manageable.
I remember as a kid coming back to the TV and getting worried when there was more than 1 add at a time, wondering if it was a wicket or just the drinks breakAs someone used to the Australian rhythm of cricket coverage where you have one 30 second ad between overs, I find these multiple ads in the coverage I have on in the background make me occasionally wonder whether a wicket has fallen.
I still get worried with ad breaks on switching on the TV, all the time.I remember as a kid coming back to the TV and getting worried when there was more than 1 add at a time, wondering if it was a wicket or just the drinks break
Haha yeah, used to do that all the time too.I remember as a kid coming back to the TV and getting worried when there was more than 1 add at a time, wondering if it was a wicket or just the drinks break