Cricket Australia’s new TV broadcast deal provides a double-edged sword – more of the game being shown but a considerable amount of it behind a paywall.
The deal ends a near four-decade monopoly by FTA’s Channel Nine.
It also represents the first time in the history of the sport in this country that the fan will have to pay a premium to watch the Australian team, in its entirety, on home soil.
What impact that will have is currently an unknown factor, but safe to say it will have one.
What we do know is, despite the fact that the likes of the AFL and NRL have games exclusively aired on subscription TV, the uptake of Foxtel is only around 30 per cent. It remains to be seen what impact cricket will have on that percentage.
The sport in this country has taken a hammering as a result of the recent ball-tampering scandal. In the immediate wake of the incident, many fans on social media were saying their disenchantment would see them turn their back on the sport.
(AAP Image/Brendan Esposito)
The broadcasters – who between them are shelling out $1.2bn over six years – will be hoping that time heals those wounds, none more so than Foxtel where the punter will have to be wooed back and then asked to pay for the opportunity to watch many of the matches Australia plays.
The quarantining of one-day internationals and international T20s behind a paywall means both forms will have a greatly diminished audience.
That creates an interesting scenario for ODIs in particular. Many see that format as the least attractive of the three on offer and the fact that Seven has not expressed an interest in covering them has allowed Foxtel to get around the anti-siphoning legislation.
With it appearing exclusively on pay-TV from now on, the television audience will be diluted significantly.
This summer’s home schedule will feature five ODIs against South Africa and three against Sri Lanka. Those matches will be used as key warm-up fixtures ahead of next June’s 50-over World Cup in England where Australia will be looking to defend its title.
That World Cup will be shown on Channel Nine as part of an existing contract with the ICC.
But, unless you have a pay-TV subscription, you will not see Australia in that format again until it plays its first match in England in the middle of next year.
What that will do to the profile and interest in the one-day game remains to be seen. While all Test matches over the duration of the new deal will be simulcast on both Seven and Foxtel, the latter will have exclusivity on 16 of the 59 BBL matches.
In terms of what the fans were able to watch over the 2017-18 summer, the number remains the same with the BBL expanding from its existing 43-game fixture to a total of 59, inclusive of two semi-finals and the final.
The big winner out of the new arrangement is the women’s game. Every home international played by the Australian team will be shown on FTA television, a first for the sport.
Both Seven and Foxtel will simulcast every Test, ODI and Twenty20over the lifespan of the six-year deal.
Twenty-three of the scheduled 59 WBBL matches will be shown on Seven with the remainder being carried on CA’s Live App.
The volume of women’s matches being shown on FTA television is a massive coup for the sport. The number of girls taking up the game has grown exponentially in recent years on the back of matches being shown on FTA television.
Had the new deal taken women’s fixtures behind a paywall it would have greatly diminished the continued growth of the female game. The new deal is also likely to see an increase in women in the commentary boxes.
(AAP Image/Dave Hunt)
As participation rates continue to swell, it would be remiss of the broadcasters not to include female voices in their coverage of the male game.
The likes of former Australian players such as Mel Jones and Lisa Sthalekar, who have both transitioned from the field to the commentary box in recent times, are prime candidates to be involved in the new look commentary teams.
Just who both networks choose to be behind the microphone has already lit up social media.
By dint of its AFL coverage, Seven has numerous commentators on its books with the likes of Bruce McAvaney, Hamish McLachlan, Basil Zempilas and Brian Taylor all front and centre.
None of them have a background in cricket broadcasting and none have played the sport to any significant level.
From a personal perspective, and having been a sports broadcaster for nearly 30 years, I have always maintained that sports like cricket and tennis are best served by former players or coaches when it comes to actually commentating the sport.
In the various football codes and other sports like basketball and hockey, the commentator describes the action as it happens.
In tennis, commentators are silent while the ball is in motion, and simply add analysis once the point has ended. Hence, from a commentary perspective, the sport is best suited to those with a strong background in it as a participant.
Cricket is quite similar in the way it is called.
Due to the desire for clean ‘ins’ when it comes to cutting highlights, there is no real commentary as the broadcasters are actually silent when the ball is delivered and generally only make comments in a past tense when the play has concluded.
Most of the commentary work in television cricket is about analysis rather than description.
Globally, there are very few commentators who have not played the game to a high level. As long as those chosen are articulate and fluent in their delivery, I believe that is the way to go.
The Nine commentary team has been pretty much exclusively made up of former international or first-class players over the past four decades.
That is likely to be the way both Seven and Foxtel approach it as well.
The odd commentator may make the move from Channel Nine to one of the new broadcasters but, in the main, I doubt we will see many of them again in the summers ahead.
The likes of Mel McLaughlin – who was a host on Ten’s BBL coverage before moving to Ten – may well be used in some kind of capacity but the commentators are most likely to be former players, both male and female.
One thing is guaranteed: whoever the networks choose, they will all have their critics as it is an area where total consensus is a non-event.
We are entering a whole new era with respect to the coverage of the sport in this country and it is very much a case of watch this space in the months ahead.
By this time next year, fans will have made their assessment on just how both networks have fared.
And, by then, we will also know just what sort of audiences both Seven and Foxtel have garnered for their coverage.
Cricket Australia, in particular, will keenly await those figures.
Cadfael
Roar Guru
Agree MM. I'm more of a red/pink ball fan so I'm not too worried about the white ball game.There are some great benefits from the new deal. More coverage of women's cricket, tour games (we used to get these with the old C7) and the Shield final. I'm looking forward to it.
Cadfael
Roar Guru
I thought the ODIs and international T20s were still up iun the air as far as FTA goes. I didn't think the government had made a decision yet on whether the T20 and ODI would have to be shown on FTA or not.
Chris Kettlewell
Roar Guru
Yeah, I always thought the point of anti-siphoning legislation was that it didn't allow pay-tv to just out-bid free-to-air TV. So if another TV channel was willing to pay a significant amount to show them but was trumped by a bid to put them behind a pay-wall, and then simply argued that the FTA channel that was part of that bid didn't want them, therefore it frees it up for Foxtel under the legislation is incredibly dodgy. I would think the legislation would require no networks to want to broadcast the matches for the pay-tv network to get them. It's all very dodgy.
mad monk
Guest
The anti siphoning list was a sop to the FTA's when they felt threatened by the emergence of PayTV. It will and should be dismantled as PayTV will collapse without sport. What is odd is that the sports themselves haven't kicked up a stink about it. They are the ones being denied revenue by this anti-competitive fix.
mad monk
Guest
I am trying to imagine the Venn diagram of people who care about ODI cricket passionately and are not already Foxtel subscribers. When was the last time an away ODI was on FTA.
mad monk
Guest
I've got a gut feel that the value of the CA central player contracts will close to double, so no.
mad monk
Guest
Much confected outrage over this decision. The Australian public have lost interest in ODI cricket and T20 international has always been an odd concept. CA and Seven know that Tests and BBL are the main game. I doubt CA see this deal as anything other than upside for cricket. The rest is a perfect fit for Foxtel, a niche sport for a large enough fanbase that already subscribe or would pay to see it.
Akkara
Roar Rookie
This deal is clearly against the anti-siphoning laws of Australia. Based on the law, it is the right of the Australian public to have specifically all 3 forms of cricket played by the senior Australian team, available on free to air, and precludes an exclusive agreement. 75% of the Australian public are affected by this, as they do not subscribe to foxtel. It is fine for foxtel to have exclusive pay tv rights, but the free to air legal right of the public must be upheld. The Minister of Communication Mr Fifield, is responsible for ensuring the laws of the nation are upheld. If for what ever reason, he feel he cannot do so, he should resign. If you feel strongly about this, now is the time to ROAR!! You should email him on Minister@communications.gov.au and let him know, as I have done.
qwetzen
Guest
But what was "anti-siphoning" anyway? One could easily argue that it was a self-interested and cowardly government doing anti-free enterprise work to protect existing stakeholders. I don't have much sympathy for the FTAs, they treated us poorly and with contempt for decades. Like taxies, if they'd been more inventive and less collusive then they probably wouldn't be drowning now.
Bob
Guest
So rather than being able to watch the men's t20 and odi games we get to see all the women's matches.... Yay....
Liam
Guest
If Basil Zempilas ever commentates a test match, I think I'm done.
JamesH
Roar Guru
They had a chance and they elected not to. That ship has sailed.
Simoc
Guest
Hopefully they will select someone like Glen Mitchell who was the best at it on radio (way better than the old timer, Jim currently calling like a pensioner on the ABC). Whoever it is will cop heaps of criticism whatever they say or do. I prefer pro commentators and exs like Clarke, Chappell giving opinions.
peeeko
Roar Guru
this is going to be really interesting. With an expert report ealy this season claiming that nine loses a stack on cricket we see Foxtel come out and pay way overs. Pay TV is in real trouble and has never been able to get high subscription uptake in Australia. I can't see a lot of people getting foxtel because of the cricket. there is enough on 7 and i don't think that cricket has the hard core support of the football codes where people will pay to watch. pay tv is basically extinct now without sport and this is a last ditch move by foxtel. not sorry to see the back of channel 9 commentators but i generally feel that channel seven is a melbourne network. as long as KP and Clarke aren't on, ill be watching
Glenn Mitchell
Expert
That, I can assure you, will not be the case.
Jackpott
Guest
You stated that "The Nine commentary team has been pretty much exclusively made up of former international or first-class players over the past four decades." "That is likely to be the way both Seven and Foxtel approach it as well." I personally hope you are wrong. The format of having the same commentators on each game makes the commentatory stale. I hope there are more commentators giving a fresh approach to the game. I would like to see if a test match is played in Brisbane we see commentators from Brisbane doing the coverage. Likewise in Perth, Melbourne, Sydney and Adelaide.
Matt H
Roar Guru
An interesting sideline to this is what happens for a national team ODI/T20 specialist? Someone like Aaron Finch. His marketability to sponsors etc will be impacted by all his cricket for his country being behind the paywall. Would players like this even have more incentive now to just go on the T20 franchise circuit? The BBL will be in free to air after all, so the top players there will be more famous than our best national players, who will have to play on Foxtel at the same time.
Nudge
Guest
With a broadcast deal as big as this, channel 7 and Foxtel are pretty confident old Ken is in the minority. Onya bike mate.?
DaveJ
Guest
Actually this is cheating on a scale much worse than any ball tampering. CA have colluded with Seven and Foxtel to get around the antisiphoning legislation, whose clear purpose is to ensure that events like ODIs and T20Is are available on free to air. It’s ludicrous to say that Seven doesn’t want it. Firstly, we can surmise that the whole idea was to ensure Foxtel got the ODIs, without which they wouldn’t pay the big pricetag, thus outbidding Ten and Nine. Secondly, Ten and Nine never had a reasonable chance to acquire the rights once it was packaged with the Big Bash and Foxtel was effectively allowed to bid against them. Minister Fifield has indicated nonetheless that it’s ok, which is highly dubious at best, corrupt at worst (in the sense of done in order to keep the Murdoch media onside). But this is not a done deal - ODIs haven’t officially been taken off the siphoning list yet, and there is no justifiable reason to do so, despite Fifield’s assurances. All cricket fans who don’t want to pay for Foxtel should be complaining in no uncertain terms to their MPs to raise this issue, and point out to CA the hypocrisy of banning players for a year for ball tampering while they collide with commercial interests to subvert the purpose of the legislation and cheat cricket fans. And all the Roar “Gurus” and “Experts” might want to look seriously at the issue rather than just swallow CA’s spin on the deal.
KenoathCarnt
Guest
I was actually going to buy Foxtel now the online Foxtel but I couldnt just buy the sports package ($30) they said i have to add another package on top which was 15 bucks absolutely rediculous.