ONE of the best things about our building in Dubai is that you can see any international cricket live. The events that we’re not showing in India are always shown on one of the channels we produce for the Middle East or North America.
It makes us uniquely positioned to look at the different styles of presentation and commentary from cricket broadcasters worldwide.
There are plenty of things in common. Our cricket director Gavin Scovell is off to do the IPL and has worked with Sky UK, Sky New Zealand, ESPN, Nimbus and TWI. The same is true of many of the specialists in our crew, yet the style and content of each channel remains distinct.
The South African based Supersport is understandably widely, if illegally, viewed throughout the Middle East and Pakistan. It provides a great service, it simply shows all the sport that matters and its style reflects the country’s sporting attitude – uncomplicated and to the point. The match coverage from South African cricket is paid for by the cricket board and provided by Octagon SA, who have to cope with the same racial integration issues that occasionally trip up the team selection.
Sky New Zealand’s cricket is absolutely overshadowed by the amount of money and attention they spend on Rugby Union. Despite that apparent lack of resource, the quality of the production is remarkably high with the commentary unfailingly of a high standard. Main presenter Ian Smith is an unfortunate absentee from some of the big cricket events as he’s now got a “proper job” as a television host that rules him out for the international tours.
Sky Uk have led the way ever since David Hill left his ground breaking spell with Channel 9 for Sky in the early nineties. The top two management at Sky Sports, Barney Francis and Rik Dovey both have strong roots in cricket production, so no suprise that Sky continue to set great store by their cricket standards. Their international coverage is based on 30 cameras in HD including four super motion cameras, and their commentary team has been revitalised in recent years with Atherton, Hussain and the magnificent David Lloyd leading the way. The blimp cameras that are used so well for aerial analysis are promised at the IPL this season and should be a great addition.
The ICC coverage and Champions League productions come under ESPN/Star Sports. They hit the heights of 34 cameras at the Champions League, including the wire cam above the pitch, that is normal at major European football occasions but still runs the risk of upsetting the batsmen in cricket.
TWI are paid by the West Indies board and by the IPL to produce their coverage, continuing their tradition of taking on and defeating the biggest logistical challenges. By necessity, they follow the demands of their clients, which is why you see the focus on the commercial requirements of the IPL (and its organisers!).
Ten Sports produce all the cricket out of Sri Lanka, Pakistan and the UAE. Our coverage obviously scales up depending on the value of the tour, but we’ve tried to build on the “serious analysis” of Straight Drive pre and post game in the last year. Mike Haysman has added some real quality to the presentation team, and it’s been excellent to see him back on the world circuit after his period working for Allan Stanford in the US.
Channel 9’s coverage has its own unique feel. Despite the presence of Mark Nicholas, it’s clearly flag wavingly Australian in its commentary and it’s match coverage is as distinct. Notably the high 45 degree angle shot is something always identified with the way they present cricket, making the most of the magnificent Australian stadia. One of the advantages of seeing their coverage in our building direct from the ground is you see some of the excellent tea interval interview material that is lost to the international audience.
The Indian home cricket is currently produced by Nimbus and paid for by the BCCI in a contract separate from their broadcast rights agreement. As such the number of cameras and obligations are specified by the board. Indeed even the commentators (including the likes of Sunil Gavaskar and Ravi Shastri) are now contracted by the board.
Worldwide the trend is clearly moving to the cricket board paying for their own production and as a result, the coverage supporting a distinct editorial line.
India, South Africa, the West Indies, Zimbabwe, Bangladesh and the IPL now all pay for their own match production. The English board pay for the run-out cameras at their home grounds. In Sri Lanka, the home board nominates the local commentators.
There are two implications of all this as a trend, firstly that the production becomes less critical of the home team and its board. The second is that the commercial obligations of the home board become increasingly blended into the production of the cricket.
The key next decision will be the upcoming discussion over who pays for the referral system, if it is made compulsory at all cricket. The broadcasters argue that it is the responsibility of the boards to pay for the obligation to increase the technical costs to produce cricket. (The referral system makes no sense without the extra cost to add “snicko” and a virtual replay system – as South Africa v England showed). That discussion is not far away now and will be the next cricket broadcasting landmark, further blurring the lines between broadcaster and cricket board.
