Cricket Australia shoots down suggestion Nine will influence selection

[Daemon]

The link in the OP has updated, apparently it's a non issue?

 

[vic_orthdox]

The scheduling thing is understandable, and probably expected with that amount. Ch 9 in both AFL and NRL have wanted to be able to choose the prime time games to maximise ratings.

There's got to be something more at play. If Browne thought that he had this at this stage, he wouldn't have made this statement publicly.

 

[Furball]

The selection thing is understandable to a point; why bid big bucks for the rights to show ODIs when the top talent gets rested?

 

[Jono]

The selection thing is understandable to a point; why bid big bucks for the rights to show ODIs when the top talent gets rested?

Long term its stupid if the players burn out and the team starts losing more and then people switch off.

Having said that Australia are losing enough already doesn't make a difference

In any case I am confident C9 have something here. As Jack said, you wouldn't say this in such a public forum (this isn't jus a comment to a journalist!) if there isn't influence there. CA just able to make their statement since there isn't an iron clad agreement. But there's obviously influence. Let's not kid ourselves here.

 

[Dan]

The selection thing is understandable to a point; why bid big bucks for the rights to show ODIs when the top talent gets rested?

Because Nine will undoubtedly put short-term ratings first, instead of forgoing some of their ratings for long-term benefit.

If they select, they pick Michael Clarke in every meaningless game to maximise their ratings vis-a-vis 7 and Ten (because that is seemingly the only goal). It works short-term, but in the long run they lose out on far more Michael Clarke-related ratings because he completely ****ed his back and retired at 33.

I reckon it hasn't happened in the past because Nine knew they would reap those long-term rewards, but now that their position as Australian international cricket hegemon has been challenged, they want to get the most out of their 'resources' (the players), because if they forego ratings now for the sake of Clarke's back, they aren't guaranteed to reap the rewards later on - a rival might end up with the rights.

 

[ajdude]

so what we're saying is that CW needs to hold a fundraiser to pay CA in order to never let glenn maxwell play test cricket again

 

[Expressway76]

1. Barry Humphries
2. Kylie Minogue
3. Crowded House
4. Daryl Somers
5. Michael Clarke
6. Phar Lap
7. Lionel Rose
8. Hamish and Andy
9. Bert Newton
10. Graham Kennedy
11. Don Lane

No Kath and Kim? For shame...

 

[straw man]

I reckon it hasn't happened in the past because Nine knew they would reap those long-term rewards, but now that their position as Australian international cricket hegemon has been challenged, they want to get the most out of their 'resources' (the players), because if they forego ratings now for the sake of Clarke's back, they aren't guaranteed to reap the rewards later on - a rival might end up with the rights.

Yeah can we please not refer to players any more and use the term Strategic Monetization Units instead; Human Resources sounds too personal and humanizing. ;-)

C9 are just pissed because they had to pay far more than they wanted to for the rights, so now they want to rationalise to themselves that they're getting more out of it than they used to and, counter to all logic, the price they paid was justified - hence the pressure on CA to give them a few cherries on top. Sounds like standard Buyer's Remorse.

 

[Backlash]

Long term its stupid if the players burn out and the team starts losing more and then people switch off.

Having said that Australia are losing enough already doesn't make a difference

In any case I am confident C9 have something here. As Jack said, you wouldn't say this in such a public forum (this isn't jus a comment to a journalist!) if there isn't influence there. CA just able to make their statement since there isn't an iron clad agreement. But there's obviously influence. Let's not kid ourselves here.

I said at the time this new TV rights deal would end in tears. It's been about 3 weeks now and there's already tension! Nine paid well over the odds so they are going to have a lot of things go their way to get their money. The product is already pretty crappy right now thanks to Cricket Australia and won't be getting much better anytime soon if ever. Doing what they did last summer with the ODI selections won't help Nine with the ratings. As if the cricket public (what's left of it) aren't already enraged at the selections and the selectors over the last 5 years, Nine coming out with this is the worst possible news for Cricket Australia for their public image (which is at an all time low already).

Cricket is in a very dark place right now and there's no light at the end of the tunnel.

 

[Jono]

Cricket is in a very dark place right now and there's no light at the end of the tunnel.

 

[Ruckus]

Ellyse looks a bit manly there...should have used this one

 

[Backlash]

 

[Jono]

nsfw

 

[the big bambino]

1. Barry Humphries
2. Kylie Minogue
3. Crowded House
4. Daryl Somers
5. Michael Clarke
6. Phar Lap
7. Lionel Rose
8. Hamish and Andy
9. Bert Newton
10. Graham Kennedy
11. Don Lane

With Clarke they'd beat our current squad.

 

[Red]

Strongly object to the thread title. No way you'd dare call it Allah *$%# Mohammed.

 

[uvelocity]

what if it was shaolin ****ing monk