Television March 5, 2013

Cricket between the ads

Watching cricket on TV in India is getting depressing because of the inexcusable and illegitimate plethora of intrusive advertisements in the cricket telecasts, with part-screen ads making it seem that there is a greater premium for infuriating the fans m
21

Can anyone see the score?
Can anyone see the score? © Ten Cricket

I had travelled to Chennai last week to watch the first India-Australia Test. The choice was obvious. Chennai is my hometown and the MA Chidambaram Stadium has given me so many happy memories I will cherish for a lifetime. India and Australia have often produced classics there; there was also the possibility of this being Sachin Tendulkar's last Test at Chepauk. I just had to be there. Over and above all these reasons, these days I have another great incentive to go to the cricket grounds because the alternative of watching it on TV is most depressing.

I have ranted extensively in the past about the horrible experience of attending matches in Indian grounds. It was pleasing to see Sambit Bal's column on the pain a fan endures at Indian grounds. For a sport which is trigger-happy to invoke management jargons in the context of the way the game is administered, the indifference to the fan (often called the consumer without an iota of irony) experience from both the administrators and the media at large is laughable.

While the atrocious ground experience is finally getting its share of attention from voices that have the reach, what is still largely ignored is the inexcusable and illegitimate plethora of intrusive advertisements in the cricket telecasts in India. BCCI honchos and its apologists in the media have been rattling out the humongous increase in cricket revenue in India as a justification for all the sweeping changes in our cricketing landscape. That most of the incremental revenue has come from either an irrational expansion of the schedule and/or illegitimate advertisements is hardly pointed out.

For those unfamiliar with cricket coverage in India: in addition to the commercial breaks between overs, there are ads between deliveries which occupy about a quarter of the screen. On inquiry, the industry insiders tell me that the cost of the part-screen ads during the over is more expensive than the full ads at the end of the over. In essence, the revenue model of cricket telecast has been turned on its head: there is a greater premium for infuriating the fans more.

What used to be 90 end-of-over ad opportunities in a day's play has now become a potential 90*6=540 ad opportunities, in addition to the existing 90. Cricket is definitely richer than before, but these riches exist in a vacuum where not only is there a huge dilution in the fundamental connect between the fan and the sport, but there is also a near total breakdown.

What should surely be a concern is that these intrusive ads are not only abominable but also illegitimate as per the laws of the land

The batsman walking out to bat isn't always considered worthy enough to be televised; ads pop up even before a ball reaches the boundary or an umpire gives his verdict for an appeal. At a time when sports telecast is getting better than ever across the world, cricket is plunging new depths when it is at its most prosperous, to the very fans who have contributed to its inflating financial might.

In my lifetime, outside of match-fixing, this is cricket's gravest crisis. When I started following cricket, the BCCI had to pay to get its matches covered. Now, the TV rights in India are the single biggest chunk of cricketing revenue all over. That the television coverage gives plentiful riches to the game becomes utterly irrelevant when you consider the fact that it's taking away the soul of the game in the bargain.

It's nibbling away at a new generation investing in the game. In a decade, you'll walk around neighbourhood grounds in India and will be confounded by kids walking to the crease without imitating their favorite stars, because they would have grown up in a world where there is cricket between ads. Would they ever understand why we looked up at the sun even when none existed, or nodded our head for no reason, or made those inelegant crotch adjustments while walking out to bat?

If the breakdown of the connect between the fan and the sport is not a big enough concern for the cricket administrators and the media (such a pity), what should surely be a concern is that these intrusive ads are not only abominable but also illegitimate as per the laws of the land.

As per the Cable Television Network Rules 1994, one of the advertising codes, is "(10) All advertisement should be clearly distinguishable from the programme and should not in any manner interfere with the programme viz., use of lower part of screen to carry captions, static or moving alongside the programme."

As if the existing regulatory guidelines were not clear enough, TRAI (which has recently taken over as the regulatory authority for cable television in India) made it absolutely unambiguous and targeted the sports broadcasters directly with the following guidelines:

"In case of live broadcast of a sporting event, the advertisements shall be carried only during the breaks in the sporting action. Every broadcaster shall ensure that the advertisements carried in its channels are only full-screen advertisements and there shall be no part-screen or drop-down advertisement."

In a reasonable and sane world, it should never have come to this. If not for the BCCI's implicit permission to let the intrusive ads in, the broadcasters wouldn't have been able to hijack the viewing experience of the fans who have invested with the game for years. That clearly establishes where the BCCI's priorities lie, when it comes to administering the game in India and their commitment to the patrons.

It's been an interesting month for BCCI. Competition Commission of India has come down hard on its efforts to stifle competition by abusing its dominant position with a bill of INR 520 million; the IT department is chasing the BCCI with a tax overdue bill amounting to INR 23000 million; Enforcement Directorate has found multiple transactions of the BCCI and some of the IPL franchises to be in violation of existing FEMA (Foreign Exchange Management Act) norms.

If TRAI decides to join the party and pull up the cricket broadcasters for consistent violation of the existing regulatory guidelines for cable television in India, it can send the post-IPL cricketing landscape into doldrums. The illegitimate riches accumulated over the last five years can be brought to a naught in little time. Boy, will I be delighted to see that!

If it never comes to that, as it probably will, one day I hope to become rich enough to be able to buy the television rights for Indian cricket and choose not to broadcast it at all. The BCCI gets the money it wants. Some of it will percolate down to the players and hence most of them will shut up. Fans will move on. Cricket will be left in a vacuum….a vacuum of riches…at least more legitimate than the ones it's bathing in right now.

When he's not watching / talking / tweeting / reading cricket, Mahesh Sethuraman works in a bank in India to pay his bills. He tweets @cornerd

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • on March 5, 2013, 14:44 GMT

    Spot on Mahesh, I find it surprising your fascinating column appear in a remote page in cricinfo. I can't agree with you more.The coverage of cricket by BCCI is shameful to say the least. The everlasting ads popping up during live play is disgusting. Our proud BCCI applies the same formula to IPL as well. It is like watching a photo inside a garbage. If you watch Sky Sports or Channel Nine, they telecast it with utmost professionalism. Yes, you can put your ads in between overs, but popup ads during live play is fraud consumerism, but doing illegal things in not new to BCCI. They will take the art of telecasting to good old days of our own Doordarshan.

    No cricketing geniuses (Former players as well) sitting in front of the camera to give analysis have some common sense to put this issue to the technical section of broadcasters.

  • on March 6, 2013, 17:47 GMT

    Bloggers fury expressed in the last para is understandable. Deacdes ago Raju Bharathan, the veteran journalist had written an article about how Doordarshan made the first and last ball of an over given a miss by prolonged and premature ad inserts. At that time I had a weird suggestion to DD. Why not insert ads every part of the game except bowler's actual delivery of the ball, batsman making a stroke, ball reaching the boundary or fielder taking catch? All else anyway dont seemed to be play in progress for DD. The greed of public sector DD has paled into insignificance with this intrusion and my weird thought is turning out into nightmarish reality. :(

  • Sinhabahu on March 6, 2013, 12:47 GMT

    The problem is just as bad in Sri Lanka. The satellite TV channels here are mostly taken from the Indian feeds, so we have to endure the same deluge of ads as our neighbours across the Strait. Even our local TV networks have gotten in on the act, some of them run a constant stream of ads on the side of the screen permanently!

  • MrKricket on March 6, 2013, 9:20 GMT

    I thought it was bad enough in Australia with the ads between overs we've had for years but now we get these ads for Channel 9 TV shows superimposed on the electronic scoreboard in the background. However I have seen some streamed coverage from India and I was shocked at the between balls ads. I quite enjoy the ads between overs as it gives us a taste of another land but the 'frame' ads are just awful. What next? Ads between when the batsmen hits the ball and it reaches the boundary?

  • on March 6, 2013, 7:58 GMT

    In Pakistan the situation is more or less the same, ads often come occupying a quarter of the screen and it looks like the companies are just waiting for an excuse to run another ad weather it be a drinks break, injury to a player etc.

  • Cricket_Fan_And_Analyst on March 6, 2013, 2:47 GMT

    I am not sure how you can pull up BCCI for this. BCCI sells the right to broadcast and the broadcasting companies get the ad revenue , not BCCI. BCCI can dictate the terms of broadcast but they don't have to and I guess they don't.

    If anything you should hold TV channels responsible for this.

  • on March 5, 2013, 21:41 GMT

    With digitalization and dth services, things are improving. There are HD channels telecasting the match break free (no breaks between overa even). And what a experience it is watching them in HD breakfree. The flip side, HD service comes at a premium- you need a HDTV, HD DTH connection plus you have to pay premium (around 100 bucks per month) for subacribing to that HD channel. But I the experience you get, its worth the cost!!!

  • on March 5, 2013, 19:44 GMT

    I have been in USA for the past one year. While watching tests keeps me awake all night due to the excellent net speed here I am able to stream all the matches through sky sports. I was very shocked at the quality of their telecast. They have their own analysis panel even when England is not playing and there is no advertisements between or at the end of the over. Only during the drinks break and that too only a couple of commercials. The broadcasters need to take note of this. I am surprised that ESPN also doesn't take measures to improve their broadcast in India despite this article being posted on their website

  • on March 5, 2013, 19:04 GMT

    Very well said, Mahesh!! being outside the country (I live in the US), I've the luxury of choosing my own stream and couldn't be happier if I get SkySports or FOX Sports. The way they broadcast is miles better than our local channels. ESPN/Star Sports used to be an exception in India, but sadly that is changing too! wonder what else the common man watching Cricket in India has to endure...

  • SarfBD on March 5, 2013, 18:33 GMT

    @ venkateswarlu84 , I think you did not get the point. Mahesh is not against ads. He is not against earning money. Surely no channels are running an charity and so they'll try to maximize the profit. But viewing experience should not be compromised. Imagine you are reading an article in cricinfo and after each paragraph, there is a huge ad. Will you like it?

  • on March 5, 2013, 14:44 GMT

    Spot on Mahesh, I find it surprising your fascinating column appear in a remote page in cricinfo. I can't agree with you more.The coverage of cricket by BCCI is shameful to say the least. The everlasting ads popping up during live play is disgusting. Our proud BCCI applies the same formula to IPL as well. It is like watching a photo inside a garbage. If you watch Sky Sports or Channel Nine, they telecast it with utmost professionalism. Yes, you can put your ads in between overs, but popup ads during live play is fraud consumerism, but doing illegal things in not new to BCCI. They will take the art of telecasting to good old days of our own Doordarshan.

    No cricketing geniuses (Former players as well) sitting in front of the camera to give analysis have some common sense to put this issue to the technical section of broadcasters.

  • on March 6, 2013, 17:47 GMT

    Bloggers fury expressed in the last para is understandable. Deacdes ago Raju Bharathan, the veteran journalist had written an article about how Doordarshan made the first and last ball of an over given a miss by prolonged and premature ad inserts. At that time I had a weird suggestion to DD. Why not insert ads every part of the game except bowler's actual delivery of the ball, batsman making a stroke, ball reaching the boundary or fielder taking catch? All else anyway dont seemed to be play in progress for DD. The greed of public sector DD has paled into insignificance with this intrusion and my weird thought is turning out into nightmarish reality. :(

  • Sinhabahu on March 6, 2013, 12:47 GMT

    The problem is just as bad in Sri Lanka. The satellite TV channels here are mostly taken from the Indian feeds, so we have to endure the same deluge of ads as our neighbours across the Strait. Even our local TV networks have gotten in on the act, some of them run a constant stream of ads on the side of the screen permanently!

  • MrKricket on March 6, 2013, 9:20 GMT

    I thought it was bad enough in Australia with the ads between overs we've had for years but now we get these ads for Channel 9 TV shows superimposed on the electronic scoreboard in the background. However I have seen some streamed coverage from India and I was shocked at the between balls ads. I quite enjoy the ads between overs as it gives us a taste of another land but the 'frame' ads are just awful. What next? Ads between when the batsmen hits the ball and it reaches the boundary?

  • on March 6, 2013, 7:58 GMT

    In Pakistan the situation is more or less the same, ads often come occupying a quarter of the screen and it looks like the companies are just waiting for an excuse to run another ad weather it be a drinks break, injury to a player etc.

  • Cricket_Fan_And_Analyst on March 6, 2013, 2:47 GMT

    I am not sure how you can pull up BCCI for this. BCCI sells the right to broadcast and the broadcasting companies get the ad revenue , not BCCI. BCCI can dictate the terms of broadcast but they don't have to and I guess they don't.

    If anything you should hold TV channels responsible for this.

  • on March 5, 2013, 21:41 GMT

    With digitalization and dth services, things are improving. There are HD channels telecasting the match break free (no breaks between overa even). And what a experience it is watching them in HD breakfree. The flip side, HD service comes at a premium- you need a HDTV, HD DTH connection plus you have to pay premium (around 100 bucks per month) for subacribing to that HD channel. But I the experience you get, its worth the cost!!!

  • on March 5, 2013, 19:44 GMT

    I have been in USA for the past one year. While watching tests keeps me awake all night due to the excellent net speed here I am able to stream all the matches through sky sports. I was very shocked at the quality of their telecast. They have their own analysis panel even when England is not playing and there is no advertisements between or at the end of the over. Only during the drinks break and that too only a couple of commercials. The broadcasters need to take note of this. I am surprised that ESPN also doesn't take measures to improve their broadcast in India despite this article being posted on their website

  • on March 5, 2013, 19:04 GMT

    Very well said, Mahesh!! being outside the country (I live in the US), I've the luxury of choosing my own stream and couldn't be happier if I get SkySports or FOX Sports. The way they broadcast is miles better than our local channels. ESPN/Star Sports used to be an exception in India, but sadly that is changing too! wonder what else the common man watching Cricket in India has to endure...

  • SarfBD on March 5, 2013, 18:33 GMT

    @ venkateswarlu84 , I think you did not get the point. Mahesh is not against ads. He is not against earning money. Surely no channels are running an charity and so they'll try to maximize the profit. But viewing experience should not be compromised. Imagine you are reading an article in cricinfo and after each paragraph, there is a huge ad. Will you like it?

  • treskarthik on March 5, 2013, 17:24 GMT

    It's shocking that there's such a blatant violation of the TRAI guidelines. I didn't know (and wouldn't have thought) that there were such explicit rules discouraging advertisements during live broadcasting of sports.

    As an aside, why are all the screen shots in this article from TEN Cricket? With the writer here talking about the Ind-Aus series, I would have thought there would be a few shots from that series. Oh right, ESS doesn't show ads.

  • on March 5, 2013, 17:19 GMT

    Stop watching, stop going. Tell your friends. A parasite requires a host.

  • on March 5, 2013, 17:11 GMT

    Funny! Why isn't there no screen-grab from Star Cricket? Obviously Ten Sports/Cricket is atrocious when it comes to content-ad balance. Having said that, Star Network is no angel.

  • on March 5, 2013, 17:03 GMT

    One little nuance that should be added to this post is the screencaps above are from ten sports. Aside from the fact that the quality of the broadcast suffers quite badly on channels besides espnstar the series being shown in the screencaps is not an Indian tour. Which implies that the broadcast rights for it weren't sold by the BCCI. The BCCI can only sell rights for tours that India is involved in and more precisely for tours of other teams to India. And for the next few years all of those games would be broadcast on espnstar. And the only points from the post above which are applicable to the espnstar broadcast are about shoving in too many ads in between overs.

    I remember a time when espnstar would have maybe 2 ads at max between overs and maybe 3-4 if a wicket falls. But during the recent India Aus series I am seeing upto 4 ads in between overs. So even espnstar is going down a slippery slope.

  • on March 5, 2013, 16:00 GMT

    Cricket has sold its soul to advertisers.ABC could not broadcast live from India due to BCCI charging a few thousand dollars.Even Akashvani which by law is the only authorised medium to broadcast news on radio in India and Cricket commentary is news is forced to pay to air live coverage.even though there are plenty of commercials, one is spared the ordeal of advertising between deliveries.Having listened to cricket commentary from Australia, NewZealand, England, Australia, various carribean nations, Pakistan and Bangladesh, it is only ABC Grandstand and the BBC which broadcast commercial free cricket.Advertising pays for the radio but Television has an easy way out.there could be a ball by ball clean feed may be even without commentary through DTH for a fee, say Rs.500 per day.With even only 10lakhs watching,it can fetch up to Rs.50 crores a day for a Test match.Countries with more favourable Time zones for the Indian DTH market can auction DTH rights straight away.Problem over.

  • on March 5, 2013, 15:48 GMT

    Iam glad , finally some one pointed out tis ,did some one seen the Demort reeves , spot on article,

    did any 1 seen the Demort reeves comedical analaysis on touch screen tv

    i sincerely belive that is a part to advertise the Touch screen tv other than the cricket analysis

    shame on bcci, but they simplay dont care abt these things ,

    watching cricket from australia and englad are simply the great experience

  • venkateswarlu84 on March 5, 2013, 15:42 GMT

    Mr. Mahesh what are the links below ur title of the column? Not ads? For that matter cricinfo(The column that u sent) not containing any ads? Everything is after money. Money rules the world. Cricket itself is not clear tr is no point in discussing this.

  • on March 5, 2013, 15:22 GMT

    It was extremely pleasing to watch 2011 world cup commercial free on what was then trial runs of HD channels of Star cricket & ESPN. To an extent that at some dull moments I missed the commercial breaks. I must agree with the writer that blatant exploitation of the on-screen display for commercials during a live sporting event; at best; dilutes and at worst; ruins the pure enjoyment. I guess; it is in our culture to over-exploit and over-hype. On a lighter note; just do not buy any products of such brands who tend to interrupt our live fun.

  • dwblurb on March 5, 2013, 14:40 GMT

    Wow. I didn't realise it was quite THAT bad. What, with that and the Indian commentarors effectively being shackled by the BCCI (most obvious when umpiring decisions and any suggestion that the DRS might have been useful is concerned), I pity the poor Indian cricket follower.

  • on March 5, 2013, 13:58 GMT

    I think, it's mainly Ten Cricket that is really bad in this regard..! Star Cricket a little better but I really wish this annoying act will stop sooner, or may be not!

  • on March 5, 2013, 13:50 GMT

    I absolutely agree and in fact i feel sorry for the India fans trying to watch their national team. I used to watch some Indian games through online streams and they were completely saturated with commercials for some rubbish. After a while it became unbearable. Commercials before the ball reached the boundary. Commercials right after wickets. Commercial only finishing when a bowler is in his final delivery stride. That is quite pathetic and a shame that no agency can stop this. I never watch Indian games anymore even if they play against my home country. I cannot handle the non-stop distraction. I find watching such a broadcast far more stressful than it is. These days I try to download entire games from bit torrent, but there is a limited supply. Hopefully this will change over time.

  • on March 5, 2013, 13:50 GMT

    I absolutely agree and in fact i feel sorry for the India fans trying to watch their national team. I used to watch some Indian games through online streams and they were completely saturated with commercials for some rubbish. After a while it became unbearable. Commercials before the ball reached the boundary. Commercials right after wickets. Commercial only finishing when a bowler is in his final delivery stride. That is quite pathetic and a shame that no agency can stop this. I never watch Indian games anymore even if they play against my home country. I cannot handle the non-stop distraction. I find watching such a broadcast far more stressful than it is. These days I try to download entire games from bit torrent, but there is a limited supply. Hopefully this will change over time.

  • on March 5, 2013, 13:58 GMT

    I think, it's mainly Ten Cricket that is really bad in this regard..! Star Cricket a little better but I really wish this annoying act will stop sooner, or may be not!

  • dwblurb on March 5, 2013, 14:40 GMT

    Wow. I didn't realise it was quite THAT bad. What, with that and the Indian commentarors effectively being shackled by the BCCI (most obvious when umpiring decisions and any suggestion that the DRS might have been useful is concerned), I pity the poor Indian cricket follower.

  • on March 5, 2013, 15:22 GMT

    It was extremely pleasing to watch 2011 world cup commercial free on what was then trial runs of HD channels of Star cricket & ESPN. To an extent that at some dull moments I missed the commercial breaks. I must agree with the writer that blatant exploitation of the on-screen display for commercials during a live sporting event; at best; dilutes and at worst; ruins the pure enjoyment. I guess; it is in our culture to over-exploit and over-hype. On a lighter note; just do not buy any products of such brands who tend to interrupt our live fun.

  • venkateswarlu84 on March 5, 2013, 15:42 GMT

    Mr. Mahesh what are the links below ur title of the column? Not ads? For that matter cricinfo(The column that u sent) not containing any ads? Everything is after money. Money rules the world. Cricket itself is not clear tr is no point in discussing this.

  • on March 5, 2013, 15:48 GMT

    Iam glad , finally some one pointed out tis ,did some one seen the Demort reeves , spot on article,

    did any 1 seen the Demort reeves comedical analaysis on touch screen tv

    i sincerely belive that is a part to advertise the Touch screen tv other than the cricket analysis

    shame on bcci, but they simplay dont care abt these things ,

    watching cricket from australia and englad are simply the great experience

  • on March 5, 2013, 16:00 GMT

    Cricket has sold its soul to advertisers.ABC could not broadcast live from India due to BCCI charging a few thousand dollars.Even Akashvani which by law is the only authorised medium to broadcast news on radio in India and Cricket commentary is news is forced to pay to air live coverage.even though there are plenty of commercials, one is spared the ordeal of advertising between deliveries.Having listened to cricket commentary from Australia, NewZealand, England, Australia, various carribean nations, Pakistan and Bangladesh, it is only ABC Grandstand and the BBC which broadcast commercial free cricket.Advertising pays for the radio but Television has an easy way out.there could be a ball by ball clean feed may be even without commentary through DTH for a fee, say Rs.500 per day.With even only 10lakhs watching,it can fetch up to Rs.50 crores a day for a Test match.Countries with more favourable Time zones for the Indian DTH market can auction DTH rights straight away.Problem over.

  • on March 5, 2013, 17:03 GMT

    One little nuance that should be added to this post is the screencaps above are from ten sports. Aside from the fact that the quality of the broadcast suffers quite badly on channels besides espnstar the series being shown in the screencaps is not an Indian tour. Which implies that the broadcast rights for it weren't sold by the BCCI. The BCCI can only sell rights for tours that India is involved in and more precisely for tours of other teams to India. And for the next few years all of those games would be broadcast on espnstar. And the only points from the post above which are applicable to the espnstar broadcast are about shoving in too many ads in between overs.

    I remember a time when espnstar would have maybe 2 ads at max between overs and maybe 3-4 if a wicket falls. But during the recent India Aus series I am seeing upto 4 ads in between overs. So even espnstar is going down a slippery slope.

  • on March 5, 2013, 17:11 GMT

    Funny! Why isn't there no screen-grab from Star Cricket? Obviously Ten Sports/Cricket is atrocious when it comes to content-ad balance. Having said that, Star Network is no angel.

  • on March 5, 2013, 17:19 GMT

    Stop watching, stop going. Tell your friends. A parasite requires a host.