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 ...

England in the 90s revisited and oh, for backup bowlers!

So its come to this finally. As the cliche goes, the wheel comes full circle. Australian selection policies these days resemble that of England from the 1990s :-) Took a quick look at the last two years and over 37 Test matches since 1 Jan 2008, Australia have used 36 different players. That's an average of roughly one additional/new player every 1.48 matches! Talk about instability. When compared to India (a new player every 1.94 matches), South Africa (2.14), England (2.24) it shows how things have changed in the last two years with regards to the power balance in Test cricket. What the overall stat also does not show directly is that most of these new players have been bowlers. With the exception of replacing Hayden and Symonds the batting line-up has been quite stable but the bowling has been the exact opposite. Indian spinners like Amit Mishra, Piyush Chawla, Ashwin, and Murali Kartik must be ruing the fact that they don't have an Australian passport! The latter in parti...

World T20 preview: surprises in store again?

In its short history of seven years (and four editions), the World T20 has thrown up many surprises. Four different winners (each of them unfancied at the start of the tournament), with even England winning silverware. Australia have made just one final and have yet to win (but then it took them till the fifth edition to win the Champions Trophy too). Possibly the most surprising fact about the World T20 is that we're into the fifth edition but India are yet to host one. Given that their victory in the inaugural tournament led to the IPL and the face of the modern game changing, I would have expected a 1987 like scenario with the BCCI doing its utmost to host the championships but that has not been the case. Maybe the IPL brand needs protection in their opinion? The latest version in Bangladesh will throw up plenty more to add to the list of the surprises I'm sure. Its been a pleasant change already to have a proper qualifying tournament between the lower ranked teams  as opp...