|
Post by Balladeer on May 19, 2016 8:00:32 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nemouk on May 19, 2016 8:28:01 GMT
I'm conflicted re: tests on TV because the Sky money really, really helps fund genuinely good stuff like the women's team and disability teams. I think a nice compromise would be one test per summer on terrestrial, but I think it's much more important that highlights get out there.
|
|
|
Post by Balladeer on May 19, 2016 8:32:37 GMT
My problem is a deep and abiding hatred of Murdoch that means I will never pay a penny for SKY, however good some of the effects may be.
|
|
|
Post by nemouk on May 19, 2016 10:14:20 GMT
Innuendo bingo alert...
"Rachel's had an operation on her shoulder, which means Sir Geoffrey has had to some very unfamiliar things in recent weeks"
(I think they meant washing up...)
|
|
|
Post by MrStabley on May 19, 2016 12:02:15 GMT
I am also conflicted because I believe the Sky money is good for the game at all levels, but I resent funding football. I refuse to pay and have 95%+ of that fee go straight into football. Allow me to pay directly.
For many years I watched cricket by dubious means of questionable legality, but my girlfriend's sister was kind enough to take pity on my pixellated tetris-coverage and gave me her Sky login. Now I get good quality legal streams for free. It slightly breaks my principles, because money has still found its way to football, just not mine.
There does need to be something on freeview though. This is exactly how I got into cricket as a child in the 90s. I might not have found it otherwise - none of my family are that interested.
|
|