• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

the anti-giles clarke

uvelocity

International Coach
The Cricket Sadist Hour | Cricket Blogs | ESPN Cricinfo

fantastic blog post from Jarrod Kimber, stumbled across from a robelinda channel comment. thought it deserved a thread.

Amazing to me that when there is no product available, that establishment stakeholders can be against alternative sources. As he wrote illegal streaming is annoying. And there is clearly a market.
 

benchmark00

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Please don't discuss illegal streams. The police watch CW very very closely and are looking for a reason to close this site down.
 

Viscount Tom

International Debutant
Found the article from the comment on the Langer 6 of Sami video just like me I take it.

Cricket broadcasters should either authorise the streams of videos unavailable in certain countries, or provide them with adverts or something.
 

uvelocity

International Coach
yep I did viscount tom.

There's a few sports with internet subscriptions like nba & motogp and cricket should get on board
 

wellAlbidarned

International Coach
Streaming is very much a last resort for me. Unreliable, dodgy, and grainy as ****. If there's ever any way of getting live cricket in NZ which doesn't involve paying an arm an a leg for 100 other channels I don't want I'll be onto it in a flash.
 

Furball

Evil Scotsman
Yeah, good article.

Surely the technology exists to make Sky Sports' content available on a pay-per-view basis? IIRC in order to get Sky Sports, the minimum cost is £40 per month once you add in the other packages you need to take in order to get sports, but whilst I understand the market forces behind that particular model, surely an alternative model can co-exist so that for example next summer, you can pay a fee to Sky in order to get coverage of the Ashes series without getting any of Sky's other sports content?
 

Spark

Global Moderator
Yeah once again we'll get the silly situation where people half a world away get it on FTA (because any Aus cricket against England in England is on the anti-siphoning list) and the people an hour's drive away don't.
 

GIMH

Norwood's on Fire
An hour's drive? How small do you think this country is?! Goes up as high as 3 or 4 at points!!!!
 

Top