More »
At the outset, I would like to declare that I have not
worked for cricinfo or any of the other cricket broadcasting companies. I am
what the management consultants will refer to ESPN-cricinfo bosses as their
end-user. Nothing more than that.
In a day and age when the traditional media are given a run
for their money by the transparency of the internet and the strength of
crowdsourcing, cricket coverage has been sadly left behind. Office with
dedicated internet lines, access to twitter and FB on mobiles, it is way easier
to know the live score today compared to smuggling an old transistor radio into
class in the olden days. The success of internet has been widely accepted. When
ESPN runs a #CLT20 to show on their live coverage, you can be sure, opinions
and popularity of them on the internet is not taken lightly.
This brings me to my question. Do we have good cricket
coverage in India? The television channels have become experts in showing 5
ball overs, footer tracker ads, intrusive ads and insipid commentary. So, that
means from purely a business perspective, there is a chance for the internet to
stand up and provide a good viewing experience of a cricket match. Has anyone
succeeded in doing this ?
This bring me to cricinfo, easily the ‘home of cricket' on
the web. Today, it is ESPN cricinfo. A bunch of us frequently rant on twitter about
the double standards practised by CI. Even a cursory glance at some of the
articles on CI will tell you that IPL is the root cause of the great bubonic
plague and the great economic depression. I am not here to defend the IPL. But
a logical extension of this attitude should lead to the same treatment for the
‘Nokia CL T20’, but that isn’t the case. Also, remember IPL is never the DLF
IPL, but CL T20 is Nokia CL T20. If you are searching for answers, well, ESPN-star
has coverage rights for one of them. I will let you decide which one. It is
neither a DLF maximum nor a Toshiba power hit, it is a bloody six. That’s all. My
issue is picking on one and leaving the other.
I remember Sambit Bal talking on one of Harsha's podcasts
about Advertisement on TV and how it was irritating him, apparently pop-up Ads
on CI home page are not considered cringe worthy. There was a post some months
back By Sharda Urga that suggested Dhoni was an illiterate village boy, hence
doesn’t understand DRS. The tone in all these dishonest editorial pieces is one
of projecting the site as the holy saint and saviour of cricket. I have no problem
with biased coverage but at least don't take the moral high ground that you are
here to save cricket. Cricket will evolve and save itself. It doesn’t need your
help. Thank you.
Other examples of this dishonesty in coverage and editorial
pieces can be seen in how news item related to RCB/KSCA are dealt with. Mazhar
Majeed and the whole fixing saga, Conflict of Interest of administrators and
ex-players, selection issues. CI never tries to give the news as it is and
present all sides of the stories and its interpretations in a balanced way. Do
we need one such cricket website ?
For the lack of an alternative, it is still the biggest
cricket site. There are numerous other cricket service website/blogs around, pitchinv,
holdingwilley, thecricketcouch, boredcricket, twitter feeds of a whole lot of
folks and many, many more. Not all of them are error free and perfect, but the
readership that they enjoy and the ‘market demand ' says something about the
biggest player. We are as a nation used to such products. Everyone has an
agenda - the media, politicians, sports administrators, selectors, board –everyone.
Maybe I am wrong to expect honesty from a cricket website. Maybe.
by Girsubra
you can follow him @girsubra on twitter
