Skip to main content

Don't be afraid of the world wide web

By most measures, cricket is an old fashioned sport. The premium form of the sport consists of contests that last five days and even the shortest format lasts longer than most full matches in other major team sports. The club/franchise culture is just about starting to catch on, especially when compared to the likes of football. Its also one of the few outdoor sports that is affected by (and leaves itself open to be affected by) the elements. So as Dave Hawksworth points out in this blog post, its not a real surprise that its been slow to embrace the internet.

As I see it, there's two barriers or problems that have prevented this. First, most forward thinking organisations these days have a dedicated team that focuses on digital and new media, whether it be getting content online, creating a social media presence or marketing themselves. Most cricket boards across the world and the ICC don't really have such dedicated teams or if they do (like the ECB) they don't do a good enough job of raising awareness amongst fans. The second issue that slows things down is the fact that a lot of senior management across both cricket administrations and their broadcasting partners belong to the "old media" world and as such are afraid of the internet and the changes it might bring along (reduced incomes, increased transparency etc). This second issue is not unique to the world of cricket by any means and is something that lots of organisations, newspapers and TV companies being amongst the foremost, are having to deal with at the moment. Given (as Dave points out) that these two account for the bulk of cricket's presence in the media today, its not surprising that the internet revolution has yet to hit the game. Change can't be resisted forever though so the sooner the fear is shed the better.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Et tu?

As a single sport website, I think Cricinfo has brought about a revolution and the fact that they were bought by ESPN is testament to how highly valued they've become. Their editing and approach to articles/opinion has been refreshing to say the least and even though they seem to have had a lot of editorial staff movement they've usually maintained very high standards. Off late though, both in their headline styles as well as in actual content, there seems to be an occasional slippage of standards and an inching towards the modern media sensationalism which is a bit of a pity. This piece  by Siddharth Monga is a classic example. Granted that the last two press conferences by Dhoni and Sehwag  indicated clearly that the captain and his deputy did not agree on this aspect of selection but "discord", "dissent", "public sniping" feels rather presumptuous and heavy handed. Yes, it is a team sport but there is no reason why everyone on the team needs ...

Quick singles: Why the double standards?

I'm no fan of David Warner's but for once, I'm firmly and squarely on his side . Sportspersons are probably treated the most unfairly by public opinion (and often the media) whenever they are involved in pay disputes. "Oh, look these millionaires are complaining about not getting paid enough" seems to be the gist of the general reactions. I find this attitude inexplicable at best and grossly hypocritical if I'm feeling less charitable. Like the rest of us, all athletes have the right to fight for what they think they should be paid. That is the fundamental part. In addition (and unlike many of the rest of us), most sportspersons operate in the knowledge that they only have a short period available as a performer, and therefore only a short period to maximise earnings. Most people that I know would behave exactly the same as Warner and his colleagues are doing. So why all the hue and cry?

A kick up the backside

Its very interesting (and revealing) that so many Indian cricketers pull up their socks and become better players once they've been dropped from the side and left out in the cold for a while. The trend is even more prevalent currently when the selectors have a larger pool of good players to choose from. Dravid (from the one-day team), Kumble, Ganguly, Sehwag, Yuvraj, Zaheer, Harbhajan, the list goes on. In fact, the only people I can think of who haven't been dropped at any point in recent years are Tendulkar (in any form of the game), and Dravid (from the Test team). This article in the TOI attributes their post-drop performance improvements (at least in Yuvraj's case and a few more as well) to anger. I'm not too sure I agree. I think its more a generic Indian mentality of taking things easy and getting soft and comfortable too easily. Its a national trait and one that needs great guarding against. I've discovered the hard way how getting physically unfit or slack...