-
-
Latest Discussions
-
By David Peckham · Posted
You don't need to do the research. I had to know the numbers as a TV buyer. I analysed the potential advertising revenue and Channel Four didn't cover their costs. They had some nice 'Channel Four' signs when someone hit the ropes but, In all honesty, a lot a potential revenue was lost because most old knackers were pissed off because they couldn't perve at Carol Vorderman on 'Countdown'. Sorry, cross-post. I was replying to Malumbu. Give me a minute, if you will. -
By Peckhamgatecrasher · Posted
"PGC, do you reckon this 'Anderson -Tendulkar' series could make Tests a bit more interesting to the wider word?" Alas no. Until it comes back to terrestial telly, I think it will always suffer from elitism(?). Excepting The Guardian, cricket is barely mentioned in other press. I am fortunate in that my daughter has just added me to her subscription on NOW TV. It has been great to watch this test; it really could have gone either way, eariler in the day, which always makes it more exciting. The only bugbear is that I am a TMS afficianado, and they are about eight deliveries ahead of the tv! I thought Tongue was excellent in mopping up the tailenders, and Duckett was a delight to watch. Bumrah and Jadeja were brilliant to see. I'm sure the Edgbaston crowd will have tremendous supporters for both sides. PS: I don't think Jofra will be back on the strength of one county wicket. -
Why it a strange first post Sue? We all have to start somewhere! These kids have created a situation where they have been very unpleasant. Surely their physical appearance etc is a key factor in identifying them? I don’t understand. Are you defending these kids? -
I can do the research but are more people watching cricket on TV now it went to the higher bidder or in 05 when it was on Channel 4? I think that less kids are into cricket since it went off terrestrial. I suppose I should have had TMS on.
-
Recommended Posts