Link: Copy link
Moderator: Assistant Moderator
I suppose sky can be a double edged sword, in it can stop people from going who otherwise would have travelled to watch it at the ground. Although it was a popular decision on here to have it on sky and many would like more 4 day cricket on tv. If there was more cc televised i wonder how much it would affect attendances?what would make me travel to Lords?
Well its a matter of what caused me not to travel.
2 things really,
1. it was live on sky
2. cost and distance.
I did look into it. overnight accommodation £120 plus fuel/train fare pushes the cost to over £200 for a maximum of 6 hours cricket. Thats over £65 a session. Not counting peripheral expenses such as parking/tube costs, food, drinks etc.
Having said that, I would probably have gone had it not been live on sky.
Had I been in London anyway, I would certainly have gone. With a population in London of over 7 million, only 6000 bothered to pay a fiver to watch it.....and this was the highest county attendance at lords for 50 years? no wonder the 4 day game is disappearing.
"well i thought the whole attendance was extremly disappointing.well i thought the whole attendance was extremly disappointing.
less than 6000 at the home of cricket for a season showdown between the two top clubs.
...and that with the admission set to a fiver and free for kids and oaps on a nice warm day.
what more can 4 day cricket do to get bums on seats?