Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott-Wozniak  The ECB should be working hard to make Test Cricket financially accessible for the people who want to enjoy it rather than trying to jump on the franchised T20 bandwagon, which as things stand at the moment will not be successful in this country and will be seen as simply another 'cash cow' for the Cricket administrators. |
I'm not sure what the ECB can do here. They could reduce ticket prices at the test grounds (maybe: they are set by the host venues, but the ECB could perhaps apply pressure). But all that would achieve is a loss of income to the ground. From the ECB's viewpoint, no-one is being priced out of test cricket who matters - because the fact is that they sell all the seats even at the present high prices. In England, we just don't see empty grounds any more before the fourth day of a test, do we?
Your point about Sky is taken - but the issue here is the bundling of sports packages. It's not £300 per year to see cricket: the lion's share of that is siphoned off to the majority interest sport you mentioned in your post. As is well known by regulars here, football bores the pants off me, and I wouldn't pay 300p to see a game. The fact that I would have to contribute to that sport (and to a significant degree) to see a few days' cricket each year is what puts me off the TV packages. Sky can address this easily enough: I'm back to pay per view TV. That would make cricket affordable to those who want it: buy it by the day, or buy a season ticket - but at least you won't wind up paying also for football and the SE Asian Women's Ten Pin Bowling which I saw on Sky Sports Three one night many years ago.