Should cricket be free to air on British television?
Or is it just a silly point?
HERE’S THE pitch: why not make cricket, that most English of sports, free to air on national television? That is what Jeremy Corbyn, leader of the opposition, committed socialist and noted cricket nut, suggested on Twitter a few minutes after England won the World Cup on July 14th. The final, watched by up to 8m people, was the first England international match to be aired on free television since the Ashes in 2005, after which the sport moved to pay-TV and a far smaller audience. Making it free again could help to boost the popularity of the game, which many consider elitist or dull, the argument goes. And it would be a popular expression of Mr Corbyn’s slogan, “For the many, not the few.”
Since the 1950s the government has had the power to ensure that big sports events are free to watch. The Broadcasting Act of 1996 designates certain events that qualify, including the Olympic games, Wimbledon and the finals of the football World Cup and FA Cup. A review of the list in 2009 would have removed some events and added lots more, including home cricket matches. But its recommendations were batted away by the Conservative-Lib Dem government in 2010.
This article appeared in the Britain section of the print edition under the headline "Fielding criticism"
Britain July 20th 2019
- Wobbles in Britain’s housing market may augur something worse
- St Ives’s second-home crackdown has unintended consequences
- The Brecon by-election is a test for Britain’s next prime minister
- How phonics took over English schools
- Scotland overtakes America as the world’s drug-overdose capital
- Britain’s biggest fraud trial pits Mike Lynch against Hewlett Packard
- Should cricket be free to air on British television?
- The study of history is in decline in Britain
More from Britain
Why so many Britons have taken to stand-up paddleboarding
It combines fitness, wellness and smugness
Why Britain’s membership of the ECHR has become a political issue
And why leaving would be a mistake
The ECtHR’s Swiss climate ruling: overreach or appropriate?
A ruling on behalf of pensioners does not mean the court has gone rogue