davieG Posted 24 August 2015 Posted 24 August 2015 Broadcaster BT Sport says it has secured the live rights to the 2017-18 Ashes cricket series as part of a five-year deal with Cricket Australia. The deal means it will show all Australia's Test matches, one-day internationals and T20 games. Delia Bushell, BT TV and BT Sport boss, said they were "delighted" to be adding international cricket to its line-up, and to cover the next Ashes tour. England won the Ashes series 3-2 this summer against Australia. They will travel down under to defend the Ashes in 2017-18. BT Sport will also show free-to-air daily highlights of international matches and from the Big Bash League. As Sky holds the rights to the 2019 Ashes series in England, it means that UK-based cricket fans will need to have access to both Sky Sports and BT Sport if they want to watch the 2017-18 and 2019 contests with Australia. Future challenge? The rights acquisition, the latest salvo in the battle between BT and Sky for sports viewers, also includes the Big Bash League and the women's Ashes. However, as well as the next Australian tour series to England in 2019, Sky also has the rights to the cricket World Cup that year. As part of its deal, BT Sport will also show free-to-air daily highlights of internationals and the Big Bash League. Sports broadcasting rival Sky signed its latest deal with the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) in 2012, but may face a challenge from BT Sport when the next contract comes up for grabs. The ECB's current agreement with Sky ends in 2019 and its next contract will be the most valuable deal in its history. 'Compelling bid' Cricket Australia's executive general manager, Ben Amarfio, said BT Sport's reach into more than five million UK homes was a factor in signing the deal. "BT Sport put forward a highly compelling bid for the rights to broadcast cricket from Australia to audiences throughout the United Kingdom," he said. The new agreement will start in October 2016 with Australia's home Test series against South Africa. BT is paying a reported £80m for the deal. The broadcaster's growing sports portfolio includes all Uefa Champions League fixtures, as well as 38 Premier League games this season. That figure will increase from 2016-17 to 42 PL matches, compared with Sky Sports' 126.
ramboacdc Posted 24 August 2015 Posted 24 August 2015 just saw this. they got the exclusive rights to cricket in the middle of the night but sky sports will keep the english series in 2019? seems a bit redundant to me. I listen to TMS when we are playing down under anyway.
davieG Posted 24 August 2015 Author Posted 24 August 2015 As Sky holds the rights to the 2019 Ashes series in England, it means that UK-based cricket fans will need to have access to both Sky Sports and BT Sport if they want to watch the 2017-18 and 2019 contests with Australia. So this so called competitive market is supposed to be for the benefit of the consumer?
Captain... Posted 24 August 2015 Posted 24 August 2015 As Sky holds the rights to the 2019 Ashes series in England, it means that UK-based cricket fans will need to have access to both Sky Sports and BT Sport if they want to watch the 2017-18 and 2019 contests with Australia. So this so called competitive market is supposed to be for the benefit of the consumer? Aye it's becoming a joke, even if prices do come down, it will still be more expensive to have Sky Sports and BT than just paying for a Sky Sports monopoly. If they wanted competition they should have both channels showing all available football matches and cricket and then it is down to the consumer to choose who provides the best coverage. At this rate I'm not going to bother with either and just steal it from the internet.
RowlattsFox Posted 24 August 2015 Posted 24 August 2015 Really enjoy Sky Sports coverage of Cricket, nearly all the commentators and pundits know their stuff and are interesting when listening too. Andrew Flintoff will be all over BTs team. This is getting ridiculous now and not fair on loyal sports fans.
leicsmac Posted 24 August 2015 Posted 24 August 2015 As Sky holds the rights to the 2019 Ashes series in England, it means that UK-based cricket fans will need to have access to both Sky Sports and BT Sport if they want to watch the 2017-18 and 2019 contests with Australia. So this so called competitive market is supposed to be for the benefit of the consumer? Yep. In this case - as in others - the idea of competition and a free market is a total illusion, and not even a very good one at that.
Voll Blau Posted 24 August 2015 Posted 24 August 2015 Worried about what the coverage will be like, but it's nice to see someone challenging Sky's monopoly on the sport. Need a terrestrial channel to come in for home Ashes series now.
ScouseFox Posted 24 August 2015 Posted 24 August 2015 it's not paying the extra that's the main issue, worst comes to the worst you can stream it or find someone who's bt pass you can use. the bigger issue is how undoutably shit the coverage is going to be. i quite like test cricket and could watch a whole day without getting bored (even a boring day), but there's some times when literally nothing happens for half an hour, and the sky team make that seem like the best half an hour of tele you've ever seen just by talking about nothing. bt will have some goons and probably jake ****ing humphrey and it will all be very depressing.
Guest MattP Posted 24 August 2015 Posted 24 August 2015 As above, the Sky team is just unrivalled when it comes to cricket. The talking is as good as the action at times and only they can get the access people like Ian Ward can. BT won't be anywhere near as good. Presume we'll lose the verdict as well which is a double disaster.
leicsmac Posted 24 August 2015 Posted 24 August 2015 As above, the Sky team is just unrivalled when it comes to cricket. The talking is as good as the action at times and only they can get the access people like Ian Ward can. BT won't be anywhere near as good. Presume we'll lose the verdict as well which is a double disaster. Agree with you regarding the coverage of the action (comprehensive and excellent), but as Giles Clarke (and by extension the ECB) are utter cvnts to anyone who doesn't toe the Establishment line regarding coverage rights and the like I'm not that bothered about the access personally. Have you seen Death of a Gentleman, Matt? Think it would be something that would interest you.
Lionator Posted 24 August 2015 Posted 24 August 2015 Only way BT Sport can do this is if they get the likes of Aggers commentating.
AKCJ Posted 24 August 2015 Posted 24 August 2015 The current Sky team followed the money when they bought out Channel 4, who is to say they won't do it again? They're the best commentators and pundits going. Absolutely superb coverage.
Guest MattP Posted 24 August 2015 Posted 24 August 2015 Agree with you regarding the coverage of the action (comprehensive and excellent), but as Giles Clarke (and by extension the ECB) are utter cvnts to anyone who doesn't toe the Establishment line regarding coverage rights and the like I'm not that bothered about the access personally. Have you seen Death of a Gentleman, Matt? Think it would be something that would interest you. Unfortunately not yet, no screening has been in Leicester though I e-mailed them a while back. If not I'll just have to wait for the DVD.
Fez of Mahrez Posted 24 August 2015 Posted 24 August 2015 Unfortunately not yet, no screening has been in Leicester though I e-mailed them a while back. If not I'll just have to wait for the DVD. I don't know whereabouts you are in Leics but in case you're very south, it's being shown in Northampton on 22nd Sept.
Guest MattP Posted 24 August 2015 Posted 24 August 2015 I don't know whereabouts you are in Leics but in case you're very south, it's being shown in Northampton on 22nd Sept. Thank you very much I'll probably go to that.
Grandad. Posted 24 August 2015 Posted 24 August 2015 The current Sky team followed the money when they bought out Channel 4, who is to say they won't do it again? They're the best commentators and pundits going. Absolutely superb coverage. Did they? When Channel 4 had the Cricket in 2005, Hussain, Botham, Gower, Bumble and Holding were with Sky. I think only Atherton was apart of the Channel 4 coverage who is currently with Sky. Ponting and Warne obviously playing.
RonnieTodger Posted 24 August 2015 Posted 24 August 2015 it's not paying the extra that's the main issue, worst comes to the worst you can stream it or find someone who's bt pass you can use. the bigger issue is how undoutably shit the coverage is going to be. i quite like test cricket and could watch a whole day without getting bored (even a boring day), but there's some times when literally nothing happens for half an hour, and the sky team make that seem like the best half an hour of tele you've ever seen just by talking about nothing. bt will have some goons and probably jake ****ing humphrey and it will all be very depressing. This. You'd never think David Gower and Michael Holding would make for such good listening when nothing is happening but they do.
Webbo Posted 24 August 2015 Posted 24 August 2015 Yep. In this case - as in others - the idea of competition and a free market is a total illusion, and not even a very good one at that. Don't the ECB have the right to sell their product to the highest bidder? Before Sky came along the BBC used to pay peanuts for test coverage. Good for us but not good for people who work in cricket.
leicsmac Posted 24 August 2015 Posted 24 August 2015 Don't the ECB have the right to sell their product to the highest bidder? Before Sky came along the BBC used to pay peanuts for test coverage. Good for us but not good for people who work in cricket. Not if they're (indirectly) shafting the end consumer by doing so. The Captain and Davie have it spot on. I guess it's the model that is broken, because allowing a highest-bidder-wins model here means that winner then gets a monopoly over this service which is then pretty rigorously enforced - and if you have someone else win a piece of the pie, then they have their own monopoly over that part of the coverage and the consumer has to pay again with no other choice. Hell, the ECB threatened a Mail journo with revoking press privileges just because he tweeted about the existence of the Guerilla Cricket independent radio coverage station, for goodness sake. Cricket is also not the only sport where this model is being applied badly.
Webbo Posted 24 August 2015 Posted 24 August 2015 Not if they're (indirectly) shafting the end consumer by doing so. The Captain and Davie have it spot on. I guess it's the model that is broken, because allowing a highest-bidder-wins model here means that winner then gets a monopoly over this service which is then pretty rigorously enforced - and if you have someone else win a piece of the pie, then they have their own monopoly over that part of the coverage and the consumer has to pay again with no other choice. Hell, the ECB threatened a Mail journo with revoking press privileges just because he tweeted about the existence of the Guerilla Cricket independent radio coverage station, for goodness sake. Cricket is also not the only sport where this model is being applied badly. You'd prefer them to shaft the ECB and the people that work for them?
leicsmac Posted 24 August 2015 Posted 24 August 2015 You'd refer them to shaft the ECB and the people that work for them? False dichotomy. Simply ensure that the rights package isn't sold exclusively to one broadcaster so that multiple ones get a crack at broadcasting the same matches. I'd be pretty sure the combined income they'd get from that would be as much as they get now. In any case, since Clarke and the ECB have clearly decided that money is more important than the sport (thanks in part to their BCCI chums) I'm lacking in sympathy for them anyway.
Webbo Posted 24 August 2015 Posted 24 August 2015 False dichotomy. Simply ensure that the rights package isn't sold exclusively to one broadcaster so that multiple ones get a crack at broadcasting the same matches. I'd be pretty sure the combined income they'd get from that would be as much as they get now. In any case, since Clarke and the ECB have clearly decided that money is more important than the sport (thanks in part to their BCCI chums) I'm lacking in sympathy for them anyway. Try running a sport without money.
The Horse's Mouth Posted 24 August 2015 Posted 24 August 2015 it's not paying the extra that's the main issue, worst comes to the worst you can stream it or find someone who's bt pass you can use. the bigger issue is how undoutably shit the coverage is going to be. i quite like test cricket and could watch a whole day without getting bored (even a boring day), but there's some times when literally nothing happens for half an hour, and the sky team make that seem like the best half an hour of tele you've ever seen just by talking about nothing. bt will have some goons and probably jake ****ing humphrey and it will all be very depressing. indeed, which is why it is a perfect fit.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.