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

Happy New Year .....

....well almost......its only 2 months in to 2009 so I guess its not terribly late for the first post of the year :-) The end of 2008 and the beginning of 2009 has been quite engrossing primarily because of the tussle for supremacy between Australia and South Africa. And its interesting how once again, the Aussies are showing that the biggest mistake 'pundits' can make is to write them off. But I am jumping way ahead. The series in Australia was a real cracker and it was great to see the Springboks actually delivering so well on their abilities for once and not choking at the big moments. And in Steyn, Amla, de Villiers, Duminy and Morkel they have some real stars in the making and should be a strong team for some time to come. Australia's struggles on the other hand were not surprising after their performance in India. The same guys, i.e. Hayden and Lee continued to underwhelm and with the inexplicable selection of Symonds made things worse for Ricky Ponting. They were a l...

Season ending review

Well, officially the season hasn't quite ended since the last one-dayer between Australia and South Africa still remains to be played but given that its a dead rubber, the season is as good as over. And what a season its been. Probably as much action off-field as on it, but its been riveting throughout and the quality of Test cricket overall (apart from the WI-Eng series) has been top-notch and a welcome reminder of why I like the 5 day format the most. The two Aus-SA series have in particular been fascinating to watch though a lot of it has been driven by Australia waiting too long to make much needed changes. South Africa though has truly come on in leaps and bounds and though they will be losing Kallis and Ntini sooner rather than later, their decreasing reliance on them over the last year or so has meant that they won't be missed much. Their one-day game has come along strongly too and they should have a genuine shot at the World Cup this time. Australia on the other hand h...

Of backward selections and England's future

A couple of interesting selectorial decisions recently by England and India (and actually as its turning out Australia as well!). For once I think the England selectors didn't panic and showed the right thinking by not picking either Key or Ramprakash for the Oval Test. And luckily for them, both Bell and Trott have performed well enough to vindicate the decision. India on the other hand have actually gone the other way bringing Dravid back to the one-day squad. I'm a bit ambivalent on that one. While the decision to leave out Rohit Sharma and retain Raina was certainly the right one, bringing back Dravid is questionable. It would have been a bolder decision to pick someone like Kohli or Rahane who both played really well in the Emerging Players Trophy recently, mainly because Dravid is quite unlikely to feature in the 2011 World Cup so why bring him back now? As for the Aussies, they will certainly be regretting not picking Nathan Hauritz for the Oval. A defensive decision if...