With the recent One Day International series between Australia and South Africa now over, Australia has moved to the number One ranked ODI team in the world and are in prime form ahead of the World Cup. Apart from a few issues.
Firstly, the World Cup doesn’t start for nearly 3 months, so
a lot can change in that time.
Secondly, though Australia did win, it hardly was convincing
as a settled unit and neither was South Africa.
Both sides dropped their best players at different times, making it more
of a test to see if certain players could play certain roles. This wasn’t about obtaining the all-important
“M” in modern sports; Momentum.
Given that it was more of a test and learn series, there can
be little confusion as to the small crowd sizes, which seems to have taken up a
lot of the medias attention.
Some in the media were quick to defend the series, and by
extension Cricket Australia, pointing out the high TV ratings for the contests.
Nice and smug there Malcolm |
TV ratings are great and important, particularly given that
is where Cricket makes most of its money, but crowd numbers indicate public
interest and excitement about the sport.
The head of Cricket Australia, James Sutherland, has come
out and launched an investigation into the small crowd numbers, though (as
adroitly pointed out by Titus O’Reilly) this is a little like a murderer
investigating his own crime.
If CA are serious about engaging the public and ensuring
interest in Cricket is something more than an alternative to repeats of M*A*S*H
on a Wednesday night, it would seem that looking at the positioning of the game
would be a great starting point.
<
Eyes you could swim in for hours>>
That is, what does the “C” in “CA” stand for? At the moment it isn’t Cricket, so is it…
Confusion
Sorry, I just love using this one. |
There is a lot of cricket being played in Australia this
summer, not least the Matador Cup (already finished), the Big Bash League,
another ODI series against England and India and a Test series against
India…before the World Cup begins.
What are fans to think?
There is almost too much going on and none of it seems to relate to each
other.
I have put forward my thoughts on making the Cricket Calendar more relevant to fans before, but perhaps this could be expanded to include
short form games in the same way as the Womens Ashes; so that all games are
worth points that lead to an out-right trophy that can be easily
understood? Too simple?
Calendar
Some pundits are claiming that poor attendances are due to
too much cricket being played, specifically citing that most fans aren’t used to Cricket (particularly ODI Cricket) in November.
Well, the A-League didn’t even exist 10 years ago & fans
certainly weren’t used to having soccer on mid-week, but they have gotten used
to it.
Make the game accessible and relevant, and the fans will
turn up anytime of year. They certainly
seem happy enough to switch on.
Thanks again, Malcolm. |
Children
Despite being unable to set a sporting Calendar or
Competition that fans can follow, CA certainly are good at getting children
into the game.
Census data shows that 951,933 people participated inorganised Cricket in 2012-13, which is a startlingly high number. Regardless of everything else it is inept at,
Cricket Australia is good at getting young people interested in Cricket, even
if this seems to equate more to TV audiences rather than match attendance.
Unfortunately pocket money doesn't stretch this far anymore. |
Complacency
In all, CA seems like it really doesn’t give a shit about
the game, fans, or a long-term future.
They are making a ton of cash for doing a crap job, so why start caring
now?
This attitude seems to have carried over to the national
Test team, supposedly the pinnacle of Cricketing excellence in the land, who
not only lost a Test-Series comprehensively against Pakistan, but did so while
picking players who wouldn’t normally get a game.
Not naming names. (photo courtesy of Getty Images) |
The performances of young players coming through is also
evidence of a lack of proper investment.
While Australia has been able to produce good fast bowlers in the last
ten years, the number of spin bowlers and specialist batsmen (roles that
traditionally require more time to develop) has declined.
Dave Warner is an obvious exception to this rule, but he is
an exception to all rules, starting as a T20 slogger and developing himself
into a successful test opener.
So what has Cricket Australia done to help produce better
players or attract more to the game?
Nothing it seems. Young
Australian sportsmen are leaving Cricket to play other sports in greater
numbers than ever, after all, why would you play a sport with a confusing
schedule in front of 14,000 people when you could play 22 games a year in front
of 40,000?
Just ask him. |