Quotehanger

  • "In his case, I think we got him like free for something we bought."
    TC Mathew, the Indian team manager for the tour of Sri Lanka, isn't impressed by Paddy Upton, India's mental conditioning coach

    Sep 7, 2008

  • Recent Posts

    Try DVD rental for £3.99 per month!

    The headlines

    The news

    TWC



    Technology of covering and following cricket

    By Will 2 years ago, mid-December Leave a comment on this post

    Technology has moved on massively even in the short time I’ve followed the game. Back then, in the familiar gloom of the 1990s, few people bothered with Sky. It required a “dish” which implied a small and unobtrusive space-age work of genius. In fact, they were the size of a small car and were concreted onto the sides of flats which almost collapsed under the weight. They were also bright white, or they were until the pigeons took aim.

    All change. The dishes are now properly unobtrusive - digital, even - and are sucked onto the walls of every estate in Britain. And here is the BBC’s Test Match Special producer, Caroline, with their own version.

    Caroline from the BBC with a satellite dish

    I miss the old days sometimes. Ceefax, waiting for the colours to change (not out batsmen were in white, I think, and those dismissed turned green. Appropriately.) Can’t remember what blue meant. But there was a thrill in watching the screen, if the radio was knackered, waiting for it to change. And there was usually (but not always) a delay in updates if a wicket had fallen…so you’d sit there, sweaty palmed, and wait for the batsman to turn green.

    This was all before Cricinfo came along. Now that we’re doing ball-by-ball commentary editorially - with more of a voice, colour, interesting facts etc - the response has been incredible. We even get emails from fishermen at sea…in the middle of the bloody sea, reading our website and following commentary. It’s ridiculous.

    So I don’t miss the old days that much. There is too much cricket being played; the game is played at a new, frenetic pace (except when Collingwood’s batting); Zimbabwe are, well, whatever. But the coverage, and access of cricket news for the fans, is unprecedentedly broad. It’s pretty damn good.

    What do you miss from the dark old black-and-white (or white and green) days and what modern marvels do you like the most?

    Tags: , , , , , , |

    3 Responses to “Technology of covering and following cricket”

  • Ollie wrote:
    December 11th, 2006 at 11.17 pm

    I usually use a combination of old and new when following cricket: TMS on the wireless and Cricinfo ball-by-ball on the computer. Cricinfo is more there for quickly glancing at the score than anything. I’ve made no secret of the fact that I’m no fan of Sky’s coverage and particularly thier commentary, but i’ll often dash downstairs at the fall of a wicket or a century as you simply can’t better seeing the pictures.

    Unfortunately, when at home with the parents (as I will be over christmas), there is no broadband and no sky, so it’s back to good old teletext!

  • SpryCorpse wrote:
    December 12th, 2006 at 5.59 am

    “What do you miss from the dark old black-and-white (or white and green) days and what modern marvels do you like the most?”
    I miss the old ABC television coverage in Australia where they had cameras only at one end and you got to see play from behind the batsman. And what was happening between overs.
    I love the modern coverage I have while at the office. Live commentary over the web, supplemented by cricinfo’s ball-by-ball, and with the tv a short walk away for emergency fixes! :-)

  • Justcoz wrote:
    December 14th, 2006 at 10.41 pm

    I moved to the US in 85, and for the five years the closest you could get to cricket was a two day old Daily Telegraph:

    Then the 1992 World Cup came along - first PPV on cable in NY - and computers! I was user #1179 on the old cricinfo, and we kept up via internet relay chat - the forerunner of the current cricinfo text commentary.

    This was when the shortwave broadcasts ended too. The World Service decided that more news was better than 15 mins of cricket every 2 hours and ABC only tried to reach the outer reaches of Micronesia with their signals.

    Computers can be blamed for many things, but I believe cricket (in spite of itself) has benefited immeasurably from the technology.

  • Comments

    Receive email updates on new comments


    « Murali’s dismissal - unfair? (poll) | Main | Are you Ashley Giles in disguise? »