Quotehanger

  • "I think their minds were already on the plane home. I am just not sure they were here to play today."
    Jamie Siddons on Bangladesh's performance in the last league match of the Asia Cup

    Jul 4, 2008

    • Recent Posts

    Try DVD rental for £3.99 per month!

    The headlines



    London 2009

    By Jonathan Liew 5 months ago Leave a comment on this post

    The inaugural Twenty20 World Cup is coming to England in 2009, which means a bumper summer of cricket for the whole country. As long, that is, if you live in London. Two of the three grounds chosen to host matches will be Lord’s (group games, super eights and the final) and The Oval (warm-ups, group games, super eights and a semi-final). Which leaves one semi and change for another lucky, lucky ground. The Rose Bowl, perhaps?

    Now I live in London, and personally, this suits me down to the ground. In addition, there’s no doubting that the two grounds in question are superb venues. But London is not England. Cricket fans in the Midlands and the North have every right to feel aggrieved at this.

    Apparently, if you believe Steve Elworthy, it’s all to do with travelling distances, which was a major factor in last year’s tournament. But a short trundle up the M6 isn’t really the same as 1600 kilometres from Durban to Cape Town. London to Nottingham to Manchester to London in the space of two weeks isn’t going to jet-lag anybody.

    It’s not just this, either. Why, for example, is London is guaranteed Tests a summer out of seven (when it has about 15% of the population)? You have to wonder whether the predominance of Lord’s and The Oval is due primarily to the quality of their facilities, or the quality of their lobbyists.

    Tags: , , , , , , |

    10 Responses to “London 2009”

  • Mark Tripp wrote:
    February 6th, 2008 at 6.33 pm

    Why, for example, is London is guaranteed Tests a summer out of seven (when it has about 15% of the population)?

    I think the main reason for this is the fact that for 3/7th’s of the population (thinking of the population of the home counties and London of course), The London test matches are the closest for them.

    Also, the capacity of these two grounds are the largest in the country therefore more people are able to access the games.

  • Nick wrote:
    February 6th, 2008 at 11.54 pm

    To be fair, while London itself has, as you say, around 15% of the population, it’s also the nearest and quickest-to-get-to test venue for Kent, Essex and Sussex fans, as well as those from the home counties. The other - real - alternatives - Leeds, Birmingham, Hampshire, Durham, Manchester, Nottingham, Cardiff - have a much smaller catchment area in terms of population.

  • Chris wrote:
    February 7th, 2008 at 12.12 am

    As I live in Albany West Oz, I find that playing all the games in London inconveniences me greatly. I think we should set up a board and hold an inquiry.
    :-)

  • Marcus wrote:
    February 7th, 2008 at 4.57 am

    If this is the “inaugural” T20 World Cup, then what was the one in South Africa last year? Was that a different event?

  • Jonathan Liew wrote:
    February 7th, 2008 at 10.28 am

    For some ICC reason, the one last year was the ‘World Twenty20′, and so 2009 is the first ‘Twenty20 World Cup’…

  • india_fan wrote:
    February 7th, 2008 at 1.55 pm

    Maybe if London had only a single summer test they would be forced to charge £200 for a ticket. Also, it is quite expensive to catch a train to London if you don’t buy a ticket well in advance.

    I wonder what the ticket prices for the 20/20 will be, especially as the main success has been in getting families to the ground.

  • Damien wrote:
    February 7th, 2008 at 4.32 pm

    Maybe it is a supply and demand thing. The London Tests and 1 Day games are easily the most difficult to get tickets to, indeed they are pretty much always sell-outs.

    From a commercial point of view as well, sponsors likely prefer the sights and sounds of London as a milieu within which to entertain clients / contacts etc. Not saying it’s right, but it’s probably true.

    Of course, it does not help that it is grim up north. (I jest, I jest!!)

    I shall be busting a gut to get as many tickets as possible to all the games. Looking forward to it already.

  • Marcus wrote:
    February 8th, 2008 at 3.38 am

    Thanks for clearing that up, Jonathon- one thing’s clear, you can’t rely on the ICC to do anything that makes a great deal of sense.

    Just out of interest, where will the next T20 World Cup be held? As Australia and New Zealand were ruled against for the regular World Cup in favour of the subcontinent, I was hoping that we’d get some consideration- not that I hold any great hopes, of course.

  • IPL wrote:
    February 8th, 2008 at 3.35 pm

    Oh! then all that fuss that the Indians about their team winning the T20 cup was for nothing? I thought India had won the inaugural event. I guess ICC has ‘done us in’. :-(

  • Reverse Swing wrote:
    February 8th, 2008 at 8.50 pm

    In an average year, The Oval gets around the same allocation of international days as one of the ‘regional’ grounds - TB, Edgbaston, Old Trafford etc. A test and an ODI = 6 days.

    It’s Lords that skews the London-wide figures. After all, they get a test for each side touring (normally 2) plus an ODI against each as well - plus any final match of any triangular tournament played. Around 14 days.

    • Comments

    Receive email updates on new comments


    « Pillock of the month | Main | Cricket’s wealth in Australia »