Well written Mr Samir.

I don't own a TV therefore I can't get a Pay TV subscription. I would gladly pay $3 to watch a streamed cricket match. I would even put up with the ads. IP television is the future whether sports administrators like it or not. there is a goldmine out there just waiting for someone to make a fortune out of.

On a day when the media are reporting that the so-called "anti-piracy" issue has been described by senior U.S. political aides as "toxic" and not something any politician dare associate themselves with, given the enormous public reaction... Yes, that's right, there's Giles Clarke sticking his giant three-toed foot into his mouth.

Still, it's given occasion for this excellent short piece by Samir, which is perfectly said. Let's hope some Cricket Administrators read this.

Thanks Samir, I take my hat off to you sir.

Well said Samir! I do not have too much regard for the Cricket Administrators of any ilk, especially the BCCI with their posturing and power brokering. But even the BCCI had the IPL streamed on youtube, admittedly not the best quality, but it was an effort in the right direction. It is ironic that the guy who brought upon the Stanford fiasco now talks about the "dangers" to cricket.

Great article Samir. I made this comment elsewhere but this seems like a more relevant place so here it is again: A lot of people watching on the internet can't afford pay TV so Giles isn't actually missing out on much money - from them. He is however missing out on the opportunity to charge the TV advertisers who are currently benfiting by having their commercials placed in front of the 'illegal' internet audience. If he had an ounce of imagination he'd be whipping up his own website, charging the TV advertisers for the extra people who were watching it and tempting them with a high quality pay-per-view subscription link. No need for high quality video on the net just yet, just show the came quality as the illegal sites on a professional site (with a solid stream) and none of those irritating ads that sit on top of the video and I'll be the first one there - and then he could show ads for stuff that can be bought in the country I live in (NZ)- and he'll make even more money.

I hope he reads. Cricket administrators need to get their priorities straight, they need to understand they are not corporates and the game doesn't want to go that way.

Wholeheartedly agree with everything in this article.
I am currently following the Pak/Eng series in France. There is NO television coverage available. TMS radio coverage is blocked outside the UK, forcing me to use an internet proxy. Online streaming and/or highlights is the only way I can see any images whatsoever. And before anyone says that no money is coming back into the game, I have been so inspired by BEING ABLE TO SEE England performances online in recent years that I forked out the best part of £200 (two hundred!!) for an absolutely fine third day's play of the England/India Lord's test with my Dad.
So stop trying to divide the cake up into as many "profitable" pieces as possible and practising broadcasting apartheid; just bring cricket to the masses and the masses will flock back to you!

Brilliant! A well written and sensible article. Here's hoping that someone passes this on and its read in the right places.

Is the author one of the open-source evangelists from the RMS school of FUD? Or is he a plain communist and thus hates capitalism and individualism? Why should cricket fans not want to put something back to the game they enjoy so much? After all, are they prepared to do their jobs for free? Don't they want a paycheck at the end of the month?

Dear Samir
Agree that Giles clarke is unnecessarily paranoid. However, instead of quoting the music industry which dies actually stream video content you could have mentionednthe NFL and the NBA both of which allow viewers across the world to access live games thru the Internet for ancost. Works really well adni can testify since I subscribe to both india

he can learn from BCCI - they stream free all the home matches

Nice read Samir. You are gradually emerging a voice to be heard on Cricinfo.

Great article. Dinosaurs is a very apt word for this sort of nonsense.

So true. We need to embrace the fact that people want to watch cricket and use it in a good way

Touche and well said. I am a remote old timer being driven away from the game. Radio commentary is more than adequate and I would be happy to pay for it. Even that is denied.

The ECB made a massive mistake at a crucial stage of the game's evolution by taking Sky's money and sending the Ashes to pay TV.

The 2005 series reinvigorated the game domestically - beating the Aussies obviously helped, but it was a tightly contested series broadcast live on free TV. Afterwards, the England team went on an open-top bus parade through London in front of thousands of fans before visiting Downing Street.

By contrast, the 2009 series flew below the radar, despite another England victory. There was no parade for the victors and a far smaller cultural impact.

A lot of this has to be because the series took place in the vacuum of subscription television. The ECB made this decision based on a short-term financial gain rather than a long-term legacy. A successful team accessible to all creates new fans - the next generation of cricket lovers.

Well said. The decision in the UK to take all test cricket away from free-to-air instantly wiped some 6 million off Ashes viewing figures in the UK. How are future generations supposed to experience the pinnacle of test cricket in England and develop a love for it without a Sky subscription? A few quick bucks now, then what?

Love the comment above - "hope he reads this" - what planet are you on? He and his colleagues clearly demonstrate every day that they don't give a monkey's ass about cricket or spectators, so why on earth would they visit a site populated by cricket fans?
I'm sure when he leaves his role, he will be proud of his legacy - I'm sure he honestly thinks his job is to screw as much cash out of cricket fans in as short a time as possible.

Hope someone at the ECB reads this article - how exactly are pirate stations taking revenue away from cricket when there is no way for viewers to actually pay to see test matches over the internet. I live in Japan and would gladly pay to watch England's test matches for a small fee rather than doing so illegaly, but i just don't have that option.

Useless limitations will only end up hurting sentiments rather than improving audience.. Live streaming never hurts anything. Doing a lower quality feed supported by Ads and a high quality Ad-free version will always prove worthwhile. Territorial broadcast rights are meaningless for Sports especially in this day and age. A lot of broadcasters (BBC) are sitting on a pile of great historical matches which can be put to use through highlights/ ad supported video streams instead of sitting on backup tapes in some building basements..

I have to admit to watching a few highlights and the odd day of streamed video. I'm a huge fan, but object to paying £30 a month to sky, most of which goes to pay for the obscene wages of footballers (not a fan). Would gladly pay £5 - £10 to watch a test. Or a couple of pounds when I have a whole day to spare.

Nicely written Sir!!

Wondering whether ESPN would take any bit of notice on relaeasing some classic footages on the Super Highway. As you were treading upon the vault and gathering dusts. Fat Chance!!

Very well said. I tried to raise this same issue by emailing TMS during his interview, but no luck. Clearly the BCCI and IPL organisers have realised that there's serious $$$$ to be made through internet broadcasting and associated adverts. By replacing the current Sky monoploly with such a structure would actually make money for the ECB, rather than loose it. Sky could still be comissioned for the actual making of the programme (though I wouldn't mind if it was C4, the BBC or whoever). In the UK, only a tiny fraction of the population get to watch live cricket. By introducing global free-to-air broadcasting via the net, the market will be huge. I think the stories of the decline in test cricket popularity are hugely inflated. It's just the cost of watching a live game which keeps punters away, be it live (approx. 100GBP for a day at Lord's) or on TV. As another poster has already stated, it's incompetent administrators who are killing cricket, not illegal streaming.

Some good points here, Samir.

I'm spoilt in that I can listen to TMS for free (other than the TV licence fee, but I'm happy to pay that if it means another 6 years of TMS - not that I really have a choice), but in places where TMS is unavailable and there is no other coverage (echoing Derw's point above), either you watch it on a blocky stream that's been piped through six servers and drops every 10 minutes, or you don't watch at all. Mr Clarke would rather you didn't watch at all. Nice way to treat your audience.

TMS is good enough for me, and I'm certainly not paying Mr Murdoch so I can watch cricket 4 times a year - but there's no middle ground.

Make it available, legal, so people can pay for it. We want to watch it, and the fact that there are so many dodgy streams means that there is a huge market. That's your market, Mr Clarke - use it. Don't just try and squash it.

Giles Clarke is out of touch with cricketing fans. The biggest threat to cricket is match fixing, empty stadiums, meaningless cricket matches, impotent cricketing national bodies. If you try and milk a cow before she's mature, then you won't milk anything anyone is willing to pay for. Let the game grow, push for its expansion.

I have Sky and I don't watch county cricket. Not because of any reason other than when I watch it, it feels like I'm watching a match being played in a local park. No fans, no passion, no background noise, no party. Just boring monotonous bowlers against, average batsment. Premium buck.

Did Giles really call it the "BIGGEST" evil facing cricket? What about match fixing, corrupt players, corrupt officials, cricket losing popularity to other sports, IPL, death of test cricket, monopolization of all power and money to 1 cricket playing board etc. You don't see one or several of these issues as bigger problems than illegal internet streaming?

Sure there are sites that legally (supported by the ICC) stream games to many countries. But you cannot access these sites if you are in certain countries! And of course, cable in these countries does not make cricket available. So if you are a cricket fan in these countries, these illegal sites are all you have to watch a match.

Well written, you hit the nail on the head!

Living in England and being a cricket nut, I happily pay out my £40 per month to be able to watch cricket on Sky, however, it would appear that there are only 2 test matches happening in the world of Murdoch, once England v Pakistan is over, I would like to watch the final session and a half of Zimbabwe v New Zealand. I can't do this legally, since Murdoch Mansions don't consider it worth broadcasting, hence I can either not follow this game or follow it on a streaming site, but since Sky have the rights to internet broadcasting in this country, I can only watch it through an "illegal" site. Surely, if a broadcaster in a country does not want to show a match, it can be put out to online tender for a small charge (I'd pay £2-3 for the chance to watch Brendan McCullum go agricultural for an hour or so) actually bringing MORE money into cricket, not less. Mr Clarke makes no sense telling us not to stream, what he should be doing is encouraging the world of cricket to embrace the internet.

I might very well be the one and only Belgian cricket follower (since about 1984). After the BBC lost broadcasting rights, i wasn't able to see any more cricket for many years.

Until I finally found espn to see England v Pakistan, reasonable fee.

But... this turned out to be a one-off. Most matches cannot be seen legally from mainland europe (and probably very many other parts of the world).

Why should ensuring cricket reaches people be less of a priority than ensuring nobody watches it without paying: atleast ensure the possibility that people CAN pay for it first.

The facts speak for themselves:
1. Cricket is NOT for the fans.
2. The Lords of Cricket do NOT want fans in the US to see or hear cricket (full stop).

Dear Old British Monarch Minded Stagnant Person. First question why should we pay extortionate money to private business like who charge huge sums to watch. I hail to those channels which stream freely on air this is for a greater good for cricket. You are very selfish and do not know how people lead life or you would not be interested as you are sitting in high castle. Come down you poorly knowledge person and be positive. Make all these cheap, affordable and reasonable to watch. You cut your pay and give your money to me.

Giles How much money do you earn? Is it proportionate to other employees who work with you, around you? If not why don't you give your money back and say I will live from now on drawing moral and proportionate salary? Have you got balls? Are you truly a leader? Are you positive? Can you challenge your boss Sky? Can you challenge your other bosses I mean Sponsors? Can you live in real world? Are you Blind? Put a Lip on your useless tongue and for once use your Brain If you love Cricket and more importantly their fans? Well done Brother for your wonderful article.

Thanks to the writer who has clearly said message of many people think and wish to. Giles Clarke, You do not understand cricket and you do have been foolishly misformed by your organisers. You should fight against commercialism and bring back cricket to National Streaming and also make innovative and cheap ways to watch cricket on internet. Firstly may be £1.00 per Test Match, One day and £0.50 for twenty twenty is the best possible way to move forward. If you think you can stop Internet - You are day dreaming. First of be positive and let it be open market not Monopoly and that is the exact reason why millions are not watching cricket. SIMPLY PEOPLE CANNOT AFFORD TO PAY TOO MUCH MONEY.

Giles Clarke shook hands with Stanford in what to him then was the greatest thing for cricket. We all know how great a thing that was. So, now that he claims internet piracy is the biggest danger to cricket, we should know how big a danger it really is. In fact why are we even bothering with his words. He seems to have very little knowledge of what he says or does. He could not get the T20 league launched in England and in fact sabotaged the only workable solution they had. He's really not competent enough for his job.

very good article. in uk you have to pay 300 pounds a year to watch cricket on sky. while in pakistan all you need is a tv set which can be as cheap as 10 pounds and an antena and you might be able to watch it for your whole life i suppose it will be pretty much the same in india. that is why cricket is flourishing in those countries, in uk most people are turning their back on cricket because of this sky monoply

Doesnt the BCCI already stream matches in India on their site? Same for the IPL, which used to be on youtube. Strange no mention of these in your article Samir? Dont want to give credit where due now do we? How can we utter good things about the BCCI...

Wonderful Article. Giles You are bought by Government with the title, You are bought by Sky. No wonder you will talk only about your increasing your own pocket and other Capitialists Pocket. Why on earth are you still ECB Chairman? You are incapable and incompetent. You are hung back in Victorian Era. You have not tackled FIXING MATCHES, SPOT FIXING, PAY DISPROPORTIONATELY AND SQUEESING LIFE OUT OF CRICKET BY SELLING ONLY TO PEOPLE WHO CAN AFFORD. What about the majority people who support cricket. How are they supposed to pay when Private Monopolies charge huge sum. Are you Murdoch's Spoon? You have been unable to compete with BCCI with its modern approach. Why should anyone pay money to WATCH CRICKET WHILE MOST OF THEM ARE FIXED ANYWAY - WHY WHY WHY?

Crickets Biggest Danger is People like Giles Clarke, BCCI and Australian Administrators. Who are very very greedy. Crickets Biggest Danger is Monopoly on streaming. Crickets Biggest Danger is Over Selling and Too many matches. Cricket Biggest Danger is Betting, Spot Fixing and Match Fixing. Crickets Biggest Danger is lemon like you who is not with reality of worlds Income and Outgoings. Crickets Biggest Danger is making everything too expensive. You are a dying breed Clarke and good job you are.

Hello Giley, Big Danger to Cricket is England who claim to be number one and cannot play spin. Big Danger truly is not knowing the pulse of majority of cricket followers. Too many boring many and too may matches by every major nation. Some matches are fixed so do not know which one you are watching is fixed and which one is not - How can one pay fortune to Sky who are not that good anyway? I say if you want people to pay for cricket may be stream freely and with advertisers paying for it. Cricket is a national game of England and I say bring it back to BBC. Stop stopping majority of cricket fans not watching free to air cricket - Got it

I wish they would pick this story on the televised news media in the UK. The last time it was there was a lot of talk in the UK parliament. However we have had a change in government so no progress for a while.

My parents were not cricket lovers, by I grew up to be one. Infact, I used to watch almost every match, even if it was Zimbabwe playing against Kenya, when I was a child - as much as I could - such was my enthusiasm for the game. That was ONLY because it came free on TV, otherwise I would not have even known cricket's passion since I was a child and my parents would never have paid to watch cricket anyway as they were disinterested. Infact it is these paid subscriptions that drive people to move over and watch free live streaming on the internet. I mean, who would watch cricket online in low quality if it is coming on TV? Over here in Canada - to subscribe to world cup matches - you needed to pay $300 dollars to the cable providers for the channel which broadcasted the world cup. Not everyone can afford that amount of money if they are only going to watch 10-12 matches live on TV in actuality during the whole tournament. That led a lot of people to move to the internet.

Agree

Clarke is a useless buffoon who I witnessed at first-hand holding up a Test Match at the Rosebowl twice in the same over after lunch by walking about on a balcony above the pavilion sightscreen. A close look at him shows everything that's wrong with cricket administration.

Why should anyone pay to watch cricket on TV ? In earlier times all national channels ( BBC , DOORDHARSHAN , RUPAVAHINI ) used to telecast the cricket matches free .