Crowd in Test Cricket

[Skater]

I blame TV. Why sit at a ground for a whole day when you can have it running at home?

I would always choose going to the ground. Soak up the atmosphere, being close to the action, enjoying yourself. It might just be the English. The main points raised here:

• Stadium comfort - in England you can see from every seat, plenty of legroom, great facilities such as toilets and food and drink (although overpriced).
• Heat - we rarely have a problem with that in England, and if we do, we enjoy it.
• Determination - thousands upon thousands of people brave freezing midweek night temperatures to watch their football teams play, even if they are in the lowest leagues. The English are determined to be there, no matter what!

Poor TV coverage isn't the reason for good crowds either, as in England it is second to none.

 

[Gilly Fan]

Well I can see English cricket struggling in the future. Not as many people can watch it because it is on Pay tv. So more people go to the ground to watch it as they can't see it at home.

Why don't England have an anti-siphoning list.

 

[Skater]

Well I can see English cricket struggling in the future. Not as many people can watch it because it is on Pay tv. So more people go to the ground to watch it as they can't see it at home.

Why don't England have an anti-siphoning list.

The situation hasn't been as black and white as you say. You see, all live England cricket has been on Sky Sports since 2006. I don't have any figures, but I believe viewership of it has increased year on year. With the credit crunch, more people are staying at home instead of spending money going out. Mostly this involves watching TV, and as a result subscriptions to Sky are on the rise, which means it is growing and has shedloads of cash. The contract running currently is worth £300m, far more than a terrestrial channel could ever offer. Sky has therefore invested heavily into cricket, so in that respect I don't see English cricket struggling.

EDIT: We do have an 'A' List here, which are events that must be shown live on terrestrial TV. There is also a 'B' List, of events that must be shown highlights of on terrestrial TV. Test match cricket was removed from the 'A' List for financial reasons.

 

[Precambrian]

I would always choose going to the ground. Soak up the atmosphere, being close to the action, enjoying yourself. It might just be the English. The main points raised here:

• Stadium comfort - in England you can see from every seat, plenty of legroom, great facilities such as toilets and food and drink (although overpriced).
• Heat - we rarely have a problem with that in England, and if we do, we enjoy it.
• Determination - thousands upon thousands of people brave freezing midweek night temperatures to watch their football teams play, even if they are in the lowest leagues. The English are determined to be there, no matter what!

Poor TV coverage isn't the reason for good crowds either, as in England it is second to none.

Aye. No wonder English footy fans are not permitted in many stadiums world over.

Seriously I admire their tenacity to slug out a couple of hours in freezing rain just to watch a Tranmere match.

 

[ZoraxDoom]

In India and UAE the conditions are terrible. In UAE it is the heat, in India the stands. I'd prefer to stay at home at watch it TBH.

 

[angryangy]

The problems I think face cricket in general, take for example the crowds in the Caribbean during the World Cup. Mismanagement can result in any form of the game failing, but with the complexities of Test cricket, it is a lot easier and more obvious.

It has been noted that gate takings make up a small portion of revenue from Test matches, as little as 5% for a well televised event. The vast majority of course is in the TV rights. However, circumstances suggest that those in charge value gate takings far more than they appear to be worth.