akira2291
Club Cricketer
1450, signed (im the only one living in germany from us?!)
keepcricketfree.com
- Thread starter Stephen Bailey
- Start date
Stephen Bailey
Executive member
Does anyone know the Channel 4 e-mail address? Can't find it on their website.
[email protected] mate. Its the i used. Never had a reply though.
Stephen Bailey
Executive member
Cheers Danny, I thought it might have been [email protected] but guess I was wrong!
taimurasad
Club Cricketer
i signed up for uk viewers. btw count now reads 1732.
Good luck with it!
Good luck with it!
bharat
Panel of Selectors
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2001
- Profile Flag
- India
haha...India has had this problem 3 years back itself.
I didn't get to see any matches in 2004-2005,because Ten Sports & ESPNStar were not free.
Luckily DD Sports(free sports channel) got the rights to telecast ODI matches played by India from Oct for free.
I didn't get to see any matches in 2004-2005,because Ten Sports & ESPNStar were not free.
Luckily DD Sports(free sports channel) got the rights to telecast ODI matches played by India from Oct for free.
Stephen Bailey
Executive member
Just a mention to Giles Clarke and what a prat he is. 
Those of you who listened to TMS will know what I mean.
Just a little note, coming up to 2000 people have signed the petition in less than 2 days.
Those of you who listened to TMS will know what I mean.Just a little note, coming up to 2000 people have signed the petition in less than 2 days.
Last edited:
Off spinner
School Cricketer
This is going to make me very unpopular, but I am pleased to see the ECB making a sensible decision about funding the sport through to 2009.
Imagine what would have happened if they had accepted Channel 4's offer? We would have seen funding slump in the key areas such as the England team, junior cricket and the National Academy at Loughborough and this would undoubtedly lead to a decline in the standard of England's performance over the next 4 years.
It's a sad fact of being a cricket supporter that it's a desperately underfunded sport in England and we're mostly the ones to blame for not pouring our hard-earned cash into our local teams the way football supporters do. It's no surprise the ECB have to grant TV rights to the highest bidder to keep the game afloat.
So I say, stop whingeing, sign up to Sky Sports and take comfort from the fact that the ?33 you are paying Sky each month is supporting the future of English cricket.
Imagine what would have happened if they had accepted Channel 4's offer? We would have seen funding slump in the key areas such as the England team, junior cricket and the National Academy at Loughborough and this would undoubtedly lead to a decline in the standard of England's performance over the next 4 years.
It's a sad fact of being a cricket supporter that it's a desperately underfunded sport in England and we're mostly the ones to blame for not pouring our hard-earned cash into our local teams the way football supporters do. It's no surprise the ECB have to grant TV rights to the highest bidder to keep the game afloat.
So I say, stop whingeing, sign up to Sky Sports and take comfort from the fact that the ?33 you are paying Sky each month is supporting the future of English cricket.
Stephen Bailey
Executive member
Off spinner said:
What if you can't afford Sky, or already spend ?33 a month somewhere else (the main package I do believe is nearer ?40 a month)? In the home's where Sky is (which according to Giles Clarke is around 8 million homes, but not one of those necessarily has the full package, which you'll need for Sky Sports), it's not guaranteed that the children get the freedom of choice, which means they won't get the choice of whats on the TV, so therefore, less children will know what exactly cricket is, let alone who plays for the England team. Those children will grow up wanting to be Wayne Rooney, Shaun Wright-Phillips or whichever young players are coming along in the next few years.
Cricket isn't popular enough to stick it away on pay TV, with highlights on at the time when alot of parents will want to watch soaps! Nothing captures kid's imagination more than action and quality entertainment, highlights won't do this.
At the club i'm at now (Bristol CC for those who are interested or are looking for a club), the numbers in the youth sides has increased each year, will this happen if coverage is stuck away on pay TV. There is no point in the extra money if the clubs at grassroots level don't have players, afterall, you need players to survive, players bring money to the club, therefore the club survives.
Cricket needs as much exposure to younger people as possible, or it will die.
andrew_nixon
Chairman of Selectors
I see you've been suckered in by the ECB's spin.Off spinner said:
What will happen when the sponsors all realise that they're not getting as much exposure? That's right, the ECB will lose money!
And what happens when there is no "shop window" for the game? The counties will lose money!
And now kids who's parents don't have Sky won't be exposed to the game, so less players in future. Cricket loses again!
This is a lose-lose situation for cricket. It really is sad that the ECB have done this.
How much does that 33 quid fund the ECB? Probably less than ?1 per subscriber.
Ste
Executive member
stevie said:
Although you could also argue that Football is also on Sky and it hasnt stopped people wanting to the Gerrard et al.
