ESPN acquires Cricinfo !!!

[siddharth2002]

Of course most you would have read the news by now but I am a bit surprised actually. It all happened so suddenly like in a flash, not even a hint anywhere. I personally like ESPN's cricket coverage but never liked browsing to their site. Most of the articles are also poorly written and sometimes take ages to load up. Maybe they felt the strong competetion that Cricinfo offered. I still remember watching on the TV when cric-info.org got formed and even than ESPN had a well established Internet presence. All in all I just hope this is for the best and Cricinfo must continue to function the way they are and especially the influence-free articles and cricket coverage they provide. These days I do not even trust news channels but Cricinfo. :cool:
Any thoughts from Planetcricketarians would be good.

Links -
http://content-nz.cricinfo.com/ci/content/current/story/297655.html
http://content-nz.cricinfo.com/ci/content/current/story/297654.html

ESPN STAR's original website and has been like this for donkey years -
http://www.espnstar.com/

 

[Sureshot]

I'm sure Andrew will agree about the brilliance of CricInfo....

 

[andrew_nixon]

I'm sure Andrew will agree about the brilliance of CricInfo....

Aye, cricinfo is great. Their stats are completely perfect. They wouldn't make ridiculous mistakes like missing 300 wickets from someone's first-class career.

No wait....

http://content-uk.cricinfo.com/southafrica/content/player/44167.html
http://www.cricketarchive.co.uk/Archive/Players/12/12921/12921.html

 

[Almost_Austwick]

That's a glaring howler but isn't it down to a dispute as to the first class status of some cricket in South Africa during the 70/80's?

I'm sure I read that they were now recognising certain games. Would explain the differences.

 

[andrew_nixon]

That's a glaring howler but isn't it down to a dispute as to the first class status of some cricket in South Africa during the 70/80's?

I'm sure I read that they were now recognising certain games. Would explain the differences.

There is no dispute, it's just that cricinfo can't be bothered updating their database. They even have incorrect stats for a player as high profile as Basil D'Oliveria.

 

[Sureshot]

Average of under 12?

Still not as good as Super Afridi though!...

 

[siddharth2002]

Some of their stats do need corrections then. But I always like their articles, makes for a good read every morning.

 

[evertonfan]

Yeah I love Cricinfo. It's the best cricket site out there in my opinion.

 

[andrew_nixon]

Yeah I love Cricinfo. It's the best cricket site out there in my opinion.

Each to their own...

I actually interviewed their managing editor (the names I have in my address book ) recently, read it here if you like: http://caughtbehind.com/btb/interview-with-martin-williamson

They do have one writer who is a bit of an idiot though. Will Luke is his name, and once left a comment on my site saying that any cricket writer worth his salt checks every cricket website every single day. A couple of weeks later he wrote an article about the associates in the World Cup, saying that John Davison was born in Australia and that Dougie Brown played for England in the 1999 World Cup (both wrong), despite me pointing this out on my site, which I know that he reads, it took him two weeks to fix the errors. And there's more that I'm not willing to reveal in public.

 

[Bilal91]

i think cricinfo is an ace cricket site...possibly the best in cricket stats and articles on the net...i just love it's articles...

 

[madmusician]

That's another loss for Wisden Group then, after letting The Wisden Cricketer go to BSkyB Publications last month. Hope it doesn't change too much...

 

[Will_NA]

It's the only cricket site I visit for information. Has everything you need to know. Stories, stats, scores, sibilance

HowSTAT is pretty good too for pure stats but Cricinfo is head and shoulders above the rest, in my opinion. Although, I haven't see that many cricketing sites to judge.

 

[andrew_nixon]

For statistics, cricinfo is a LONG way from being top, as should be clear from my example above. Cricket Archive is your site for stats, seen as it is run by the Association of Cricket Statisticians.

 

[Almost_Austwick]

There is no dispute, it's just that cricinfo can't be bothered updating their database. They even have incorrect stats for a player as high profile as Basil D'Oliveria.

Fair enough, I just noticed that the guy was South African and that article sprang to mind as a possible explanation. I probably should have put that they have now recognised a number of games as first class that were previously not considered rather than disputed.

Personally, I find Cricinfo adequate and a starting point but as with any form of media it's always best to check a few sources so that you get a good range of opinions. No-one source will be the definitive.

 

[ZexyZahid]

I read it on cricinfo's homepage. Let's hope nothing changes.