Read on Twitter
1/The push back online from multiple media figures somehow claiming that channel 4 with precisely 2 days to advertise it's coverage isn't pulling in huge numbers in the cricket somehow justifies the 15 years of no FTA content is ridiculous.
2/ The game has been behind a paywall for 15 years. An entire generation of children have had restricted access to the game on television. The games participation and interest has suffered because of it.
3/ So of course these aren't mind bending figures. Of course they aren't rivalling football. However the only way the game survives is inspiring new generations and having it as an option. You get precisely zero engagement if it's not an option
4/ Sky's money has fuelled the expansion of the professional game. However the cost to interest in the game is palpable and if anything not having big engagement numbers is a shameful indictment on the state of the game.
5/ Just because you can afford it, does not mean others can.
Just because you can get up on a Friday at 4am because you're WFH. Furloughed or otherwise does not mean others can
Just because you can get up on a Friday at 4am because you're WFH. Furloughed or otherwise does not mean others can
6/ The elitism palpating online about the benefits of FTA in the game is as troubling and the lack of diversity in socioeconomic background in the journalists covering the game as the players, playing it.
7/7 FTA is the only way the game can grow and increase engagement.
The pandemic has made millions redundant and millions more furloughed. Money is tight. More people watching cricket without a Sky subscription is better. Whether whopping numbers or not.
/End
The pandemic has made millions redundant and millions more furloughed. Money is tight. More people watching cricket without a Sky subscription is better. Whether whopping numbers or not.
/End
