Poor Show Channel 4

[jf2001]

Fair Enough....

You seem to know more on the subject than me. I feel angry and the obvious point of attack would seem to be C4 but I guess that other such as the government do some explaining to do.

I guess I'm also miffed at Mark Nicholas as I don't like the way that the Zimbabwe highlights always started with shots of him from every angle as he babbles through some cheesy monologue. Yes Channel 4 have brought innovation but rampling stories from the BBC team was just as fun.....

What r your thoughts on Richard Johnson's call up and possible damage to Somerset's push for DIv 2? Also was Blackwell unlucky or not in the mix from the start??

 

[luckyeddie]

Re: C&G Vs Surrey

Apologies if the answer to this is featured in theis thread but I lost the plot after a while. I am disappointed C&G cricket isn't featured on C4 especially when the alternatives includes the tripe that is Big Brother 4. At the risk of being accused of arrogant, Somerset (winners and an excellent pedigree in this comp) and Surrey (say no more) is about as big as this gets but no cameras it seems. Perhaps only the later rounds are covered but shame as chances are we will miss out on air-time and I will miss out on the chance to run around wearing Somerset Talk boxer shorts and get excellent free publicity. :O

Sky showed the whole game live (good one too) - winners (Surrey) to get pasted at Derby next month (I hope).

I wholeheartedly agree regarding the lamentable situation regarding live TV coverage of cricket on terrestrial television - especially WC2003.

Television, unfortunately, reflects (OK, claims to reflect) the viewing habits and intelligence of the great unwashed. It's all about viewing figures. Maybe if it was re-packaged as 'Reality cricket' with a few snakes, exploding cricket balls and ladies losing the occasional item of clothing, then C4 would give the game REAL coverage.

 

[Frome Exile]

Re: Fair Enough....

What r your thoughts on Richard Johnson's call up and possible damage to Somerset's push for DIv 2? Also was Blackwell unlucky or not in the mix from the start??

My thoughts on this are many and varied.

Johnno deserves England recognition, but to me he is a better player in the longer game than in limited overs. Indeed, I tend to agree with one contributor to a BBC web site message board who says the selectors appear to have got RJ and Kirtley (in the Test squad, I think) round the wrong way!

The worrying thing is that I don't think he'll play unless Gough breaks down. The squad has a look of one in which one experienced bowler will play with a bunch of youngsters. Had Caddick not retired from ODI's and been fit, this would have been him. With doubts over Gough, and Hoggard injured, an alternative "old pro" was needed. Although he's yet to be capped, Johnno has 142 limited over games under his belt, and has been "around" the England set-up before, so he gets the nod as back-up to Dazzler. I'll be really P'd off if we lose him for three vital CC2 games and he carries drinks, but I can see that happening.

With regard to our Div Two push, as I posted on Grockles earlier, thank God (or Kevin?) we signed Nixon McLean and not some third string Aussie batter.

Many (including Vic Marks) have suggested that the England heirarchy question Blackwell's fitness and attitude. I don't think many Somerset fans doubt his commitment, and he seems to me to be at least as fit as Flintoff, so I reckon he's pretty unlucky.

Also, Burns probably did him no favours yesterday by not bowling him. Five or six tight overs to go with his quick-fire 39 might have strengthened his case for a call-up............and might have won us the game to boot!

 

[luckyeddie]

Re: Re: Fair Enough....

<snip>
I'll be really P'd off if we lose him for three vital CC2 games and he carries drinks, but I can see that happening.

Dunno about that. It would be like the Kevin Kirtley/James Innes cloning situation - a release before the end of day 2 and Johnson could see his name in the papers as a centurion.

 

[Frome Exile]

That rule only applies to Tests.

I think I'm right in saying that the One-day squad remain as a squad for the entire "tournament". The rule about nominating a player from a county eleven who can later be replaced only applies to Test squads.

It wouldn't make sense to release Johnno back to Taunton, because you didn't need him on say June 26th for the game against Zim, only to then lose a bowler in that game and pull the released player out of the county game again on the 28th to play SA.

Similar principles apply to the 1st/3rd of July and the 10th/12th July (assuming England make the final).

Releasing players during the Pakistan series is largely a non-issue, because all that the players will be missing is the 20Twenty.

 

[Frome Exile]

I'm wrong

The rule applies to ODI's as well, but it's use in these circumstances would be farcical, unless the England selectors can be sure they won't want players for either of the games that overlap a CC match.

 

[jf2001]

Can it get any worse???

I apologise now as I'm about to moan on the same subject but the highlights on channel 4 are really doing my head in. Firstly, I have been at home this week but unable to watch or listen to cricket as a) it's not on Channel 4 during the day and b) probably got this wrong but could only see occasional 30 min slots on BBC radio.

Admittedly, the highlights last night (Thirs) were 45 mins long rather than half an hour but they still had the agonising intro which someone at Channel 4 obviously is going to pull in the viewing figures. The black and white introduction with Mark Nicholas pulling all manner of silly faces is just AWFUL (sorry, no caps, i know...)

:!(

 

[marc71178]

Radio 4 Long Wave is on all day except for the Shipping Forecast.

Or, I believe that C***info have a link to the same commentary.

 

[Rik]

Most of the highlights begin with Nicholas trying to act and failing...WHY?

JUST SHOW US THE BLOODY CRICKET!!!

 

[Rich2001]

ITC Guidelines for Sport on Television

Category A events
MUST be shown on free-to-air Terrestrial TV
Olympic Games
FIFA World Cup Finals Tournament
FA Cup Final
Scottish FA Cup Final (in Scotland)
Grand National
The Derby
Wimbledon Tennis Finals
European Football Championship Finals Tournament
Rugby League Challenge Cup Final
Rugby World Cup Final

Category B events
May be shown on Pay TV provided there is the potential for satisfactory secondary coverage on Terrestrial TV
Cricket Test Matches played in England
Non-finals play in the Wimbledon Tournament
Other matches in the Rugby World Cup Finals Tournament
Five Nations Rugby Tournament matches involving home countries
Commonwealth Games
World Athletics Championship
Cricket World Cup (final, semi-final and matches involving home nations)
Ryder Cup
Open Golf Championship

So Marc - Wimbledon isn't fully protected, nor is the Open, and nobody cares about the Boat Race.

I am highly concerned about Cricket's inclusion on List B - and given the BBC & C4's attitude to the World Cup highlights (i.e. no interest at all in showing them) - it could be a bit messy.

Test Cricket was removed from List A in June 1998. Oh, how I hate New Labour.

Sorry to dig up the old topic, but I was just reading a report on Cricinfo and it gives a few facts that people haven't relized.. Inculding putting a few of Neil's points above right and answering a few questions that cropped up through the thread.

One major point that I will highlight is quoting Neil "Test Cricket was removed from List A in June 1998. Oh, how I hate New Labour." In fact the report reveals it was actually the ECB who requested it was lowered to only a Cat B sport.

Theres quite alot of info in the report about the BBC / C5 possibly wantting the cricket if C4 give up on it, it also confirms what I was saying about the guy who infulanced cricketing coming to C4 has indeed left and going into a bit of detail about what the viewing figures are like for the WI tour (2000), Ashes 2001 and the current Zimbabwe tour.

Well here's the link for anyone intrested Who Calls The Shots?

 

[luckyeddie]

I read this very closely earlier today (amongst another group of similar reports) and I feel that the onus is on US, cricket fans, to complain, complain and complain again whenever Channel 4 (or any broadcaster) do anything to upset us regarding cricket coverage.

They place great truck on the number of complaints that viewers make (hence the mention of '100 complaints' when the Edmund Hillary Everest program was re-scheduled , yet 'only a handful' of complaints when the cricket was canned at 6.00 pm).

I've never been a 'Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells' - but I will be in future. Don't just post your whinges here - let the broadcasters have both barrels. Otherwise, our test matches will soon be starting at 8.30 am.

On a positive note, let them know when they've done things right too (this might be a little more difficult)

 

[marc71178]

Sounds like an action group is needed!

 

[Neil Pickup]

One major point that I will highlight is quoting Neil "Test Cricket was removed from List A in June 1998. Oh, how I hate New Labour." In fact the report reveals it was actually the ECB who requested it was lowered to only a Cat B sport.

I'm still blaming the government as it is their responsibility to correct the market failure and make sure it is always available to free viewing.

 

[luckyeddie]

I resent the fact that, when watching the cricket this morning, a big red blob kept appearing, enticing me to watch 'Big Brother'.

I feel that, for reasons of balance, Channel 4 should have a big red blob in the corner when Big Brother is on - click it and you should get re-runs of great cricket matches.

 

[jf2001]

Thanks a bundle....

I was delighted to see that my attempts to avoid the score of the first England match yesterday was pointless as the Channel 4 highlights were screened at the highly useful time of past midnight. I appreciate the match finished late being a day-nighter but C4 do like to bung cricket in the graveyeard shift if at all possible. I welcome their screening of Twenty20 and Mark Armani interviewing players in the batsman's shelter after they're out but after midnight is only ever gonna be watched by diehard fans.

I see in scheduling priority Cricket is on a par of about the third helping of the day of Big brothers Little Brother's Big Dogs Little Dogs Mindless News or something similar. This fascinating bulletin by Dermot is mindless at 6pm and equally so at after midnight.

 

[luckyeddie]

Channel 4 sucks big time.

I think the only reason they have condescended to cover some Twenty20 games is the ECB targeting of young fans, which of course fits nicely into Channel 4's 'no-one under 18 or over 35 welcome' policy.

See DD's 'take' on the proposed 3 ODI series against Australia next year

DD's column

It's about the fifth 'article'

 

[Bazza]

I thought Channel 4 was the opposite - ie Under 18's and over 35's? Oh wait I just relaised, were you being sarcastic?

 

[luckyeddie]

I thought Channel 4 was the opposite - ie Under 18's and over 35's? Oh wait I just relaised, were you being sarcastic?

I'm quoting what was said regarding the reasons Channel 4 gave for canning the test match coverage at 6.00 pm to show the repeat of a game show.

Maybe they were being sarcastic.