I am not sure if it is all that much of a surprise to learn that that the England cricket captain Alastair Cook is less well known to young people than WWE wrestlers. I don’t think there’s anything new about it, either. I am pretty sure that, at least among the working classes (like me), when I was growing up professional wrestling was of far more interest. Everyone knew who Mick McManus and Jackie ‘Mr TV’ Pallo were, but not everyone knew who was batting at number five for the England team.
My own interest in cricket has declined over the years. Where I could usually identify the entire England team from their photos, there are plenty I would not recognise if they turned up in my local pub. In fact, I would go so far as to say that if Cook walked into my local, the vast majority of people would not have a clue who he was.
Part of the decline in the public recognition factor of cricketers is of course down to the fact the sport is no longer on terrestrial TV. In the 2000s, even my partner knew who Freddie Flintoff, Michael Vaughan and Kevin Pietersen were because they were on telly all the time. In 2016, with TV audiences as low as five figures at times, there are people being called up to play international cricket whose names I don’t know, never mind that I wouldn’t recognise them in the first place. Someone called James Vince was called up to the national side this summer, as did Jake Ball. I had never heard of either of them and I subscribe to the Dirty Digger’s cable channels. If someone like me doesn’t have a clue about the emerging stars of cricket, what price the casual audience and the youngsters with a million other interests to think about?
The authorities are aware of the issue and are thinking what to do about it. But my money is on them doing nothing useful at all.
One remedy is the introduction of another T20 competition, to be played between eight teams (Franchises? City teams? Existing counties?) on the lines of the Australian Big Bash or the IPL. Okay, fair enough: if it is done properly so that ALL areas of the country are incorporated – and how do you do that with just eight teams? – it might just work. But the big questions are these: would it be affordable to young people and which TV channel would it be on? If it was on Sky, as all other live cricket is, then what’s the point? You would be merely providing extra televised cricket for the people who already subscribe to Sky. Perhaps a few more people might subscribe, but not millions like would happen if it was on peak time BBC.
Another issue is the very set up of cricket as it is. Local cricket is thriving in some areas and collapsing in others. In my area, our club has to compete with two clubs who field nine teams between them every week. We have had to go down from two teams to one and to enter a new limited over competition instead of the usual format. This is happening everywhere and within a decade local cricket will consist of the very big clubs playing each other every week and the small clubs will die a death. Youngsters will end up watching WWE instead.
Cricket, thanks to Sky, is swimming with money but participation in the game is plummeting. I do not expect the game to return to terrestrial TV because money matters more to the authorities than developing and spreading the game.
Much wrestling is on the pay TV channels and young people, with a multitude of alternative media to view and participate in, are going with the muscle men than the staid old cricketers.
If I know the cricket authorities as I think I do, they will stay with the money and to hell with the best interests of the game. No one reflects the establishment like they do and expanding the game to working class kids will be of no interest to them when Rupert Murdoch comes along waving a big fat cheque.
