Quote:
> > Channel 7 has out bidded channel 9 for the live
> > telecast of the cricket from England in 2001.
> > At last no more ch 9 commentators. This is a breath
> > of fresh air.
> > Channel 7 will telecast all the test matches and all the
> > one day matches.
> > Anything is better than the appauling telecast of ch 9
> > last time round in 1997 when only we west aussies only
> > got the last session of play.
> Hate to burst your bubble, Colin, but The Age is taking a more cynical
> view. ( http://SportToday.org/). They
> point out that there is no guarantee that the Ashes will be free-to-air.
> Channel 7 has stated that their commitment is to footy, and where footy
> and cricket clash, footy will win out.
> </quote>
> Now, if Seven had had the rights to last year's tour, there would
> have been 16 instances of AFL matches clashing with Test matches.
> There would also have been six Mondays on which the cricket
> would have clashed with Talking Footy. Talk about clashes for the
> Ashes!
> Bateman said that where clashes could not be avoided, the cricket
> would be shown on "another service". Translated, that might mean
> another free-to-air network, but almost certainly means one of the
> pay networks, Optus or Foxtel.
> </unquote>
> I hope for the sake of Aussie cricket fans that The Age is wrong, but
> knowing the way Channel 7 works, I would guess that if you don't have
> pay TV, you won't see much of the 2001 ashes.
Brian is right. Luckily for me Channel 7 is working to set up a sporting
arrangement with Optus, I understand. Which means you poor ***s with
Foxtel are going to miss out just as much as those with no pay-TV. This
annoys me really badly. I signed up with Optus because they had won the
pay-TV rights to whichever tour was coming up at the time. But then Foxtel
won the rights to the tour of South Africa and I missed out! Then Optus won
the rights to the next tour and Foxtel viewers missed out! It is ludicrous
that, even after we make the commitment to pay for our TV viewing, we have
to depend on external factors as to whether we get to watch the cricket or
not.
I think channel 9 have done an extremely good job televising cricket in
this country since they first took over as the cricket channel. Do you
remember the days of one camera only on the ABC? So every second over, all
you saw was the batsman's back and you had to guess what was going on. Most
of the tecnology that we now take for granted was introduced by channel 9.
They have been not as successful broadcasting overseas tours - and for a
very valid reason. Just because I like to watch every ball of every day of
every match doesn't mean that everyone else in the country wants to. And
our game does take up a lot of broadcast time. Could you imagine how you
would feel if they announced that they were going to show Days of Our Lives
6 hours per day for five days straight, then take three days off and do it
again and again?? And not just during the day but in prime time too?? You
would be very angry! (Well, I would!) And that's how non-cricket fans feel
about the way we monopolise the TV station during the summer. And the
ratings don't necessarily justify generating that sort of anger.
I am sure you will find that channel 7 will show no more of a commitment to
show every ball than 9 did. And their previous record does not necessarily
fill me with confidence that they will do a better job. I'd better renew
that Optus contract - and hope like hell that 7 don't change their mind and
switch to Foxtel.
Drewy