England in India 2012-13

BBC joins Sky in BCCI broadcast wrangle

ESPNcricinfo staff

October 25, 2012

Comments: 88 | Text size: A | A

Sky commentators (back L-R) Michael Holding, David Gower, (front L-R) Nasser Hussain, David Lloyd, Michael Atherton and Ian Botham pose for a photograph as they celebrate Sky's 100th Live Test Match, England v Pakistan, fourth Test, The Oval
Sky's commentary team are set to cover England's series in India from west London Tom Shaw / © Getty Images

Sky Sports appears set to provide commentary on England's forthcoming tour of India from its west London headquarters rather than on site after refusing to pay an additional £500,000 demanded by the BCCI to work inside the grounds.

The BBC may also follow suit after being asked to pay an extra fee to allow its Test Match Special radio service access to broadcasting facilities.

On Thursday, the Times newspaper reported that Sky has refused to meet the BCCI's request. It also said that the India board had asked the BBC for an additional £50,000, with TMS commentator Jonathan Agnew later confirming the situation.

"India tour crisis deepens and involves TMS. BBC has rights but like Sky, now charged for commentary boxes - to be allowed in, in other words," Agnew tweeted. "Real danger that TV and radio commentary will all be done from home, rather than India (if we do it at all)."

Negotiations with Sky have been taking place for more than a week after a last-minute move by the BCCI to charge what it labelled "realistic costs" for use of facilities. Sky felt it had already paid this as part of its rights package, with no other governing body making such extra financial demands of broadcasters.

In response, the BCCI has maintained its stance over asking Sky to pay for the additional costs that will have to be incurred.

A BCCI official, preferring anonymity, said: "It is not as if they have only asked for a commentary box. They have demanded a full control room, just like the one that our host broadcaster has at every venue. If you have to create an additional space of 2000 sq ft, fully air-conditioned, it will bear a lot of cost. And neither the BCCI nor any of our affiliated units who would be hosting the match would bear the additional cost."

If Sky do not send their team, which includes former England captains Mike Atherton, Nasser Hussain and Ian Botham, it will be the first time in 20 years that an England Test series overseas will not have British TV commentary from within the venues.

Instead Sky will take the pictures supplied by Star TV, the host broadcaster, but will use its own commentary team, who will be based in Isleworth. It is understood that Star's commentary will also be available via the red-button option.

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by screamingeagle on (October 28, 2012, 9:51 GMT)

The comments are pretty hilarious, really. From both sides. I was wondering though, when these business hotshots sign a deal, did they actually check what they are getting? Or did they think that they can just get their way, either way? One has to wonder. I am pretty sure this did not happen overnight.

Posted by Arrow011 on (October 26, 2012, 20:21 GMT)

@ Capt. Meanster - You are right, the Sky commentators have far less experienced than Star commentators, they all combined cannot match Sunil Gavaskar's alone. Only illiterates think otherwise.

Posted by Dravid_Pujara_Gravitas_Atheist on (October 26, 2012, 14:14 GMT)

If Sky indeed demanded a whole separate control unit just like the host broadcaster rather than just a commentary box, then BCCI has a legitimate complaint. They shouldn't expect freebies for their ludicrous demands.

Posted by UndertheGrill on (October 26, 2012, 14:02 GMT)

There seem to be 3 relevant questions here: 1) Did the ECB make a similar charge to Star when India toured England in 2011? 2) Did BCCI make a similar charge to Sky / BBC when England last toured India in 2006 and 2008? Did BCCI make a similar charge to the New Zealand broadcaster during their recent Indian tour? If the answer to these is 'no', then I'd say that Sky / BBC have a legitimate complaint and should not be held to ransom like this by BCCI. The real shame re: commentary is it will mean there won't be an opportunity for there to be any crossover between the English and India commentary teams, which I always think is valuable, with the Star commentators working from the venues, and the Sky commentators working from London, so the result of that will probably be a more biased commentary experience for the viewer than ever before whether they are watching Star or Sky.

Posted by SuperKing.Cobra on (October 26, 2012, 11:59 GMT)

Both SKY and STAR TV are owned by the same owner, you know who :). Sorry, what is the problem??

Posted by TontonZolaMoukoko on (October 26, 2012, 11:47 GMT)

Darpan Chandaliya - It's something that Sky offers occasionally with live sporting events that allows you to press a button on your remote and watch a different match or the same match from a different angle or, in this case, a different commentary team. We're pro-choice over here pal!

Posted by   on (October 26, 2012, 10:18 GMT)

It doesn't matter to me where the commentators are based. I just wanna watch cricket. BCCI have forced Sky into a win/win scenario. They won't pay the £500k and they'll save money on sending a broadcasting team to India. Sky bosses must be rubbing their hands together.

Posted by CricketingStargazer on (October 26, 2012, 10:07 GMT)

@fguy, I think that you are missing the point. BBC Radio requires very little in the way of special facilities and is still being asked to stump up 50000GBP for access to a commentary box. Can you imagine the chaos at Lords if you have to present your credit card at the entrance to the media centre to be allowed in? Maybe the BCCI is cash-strapped and cannot afford more than an absolute minimum of broadcast facilities, which is fair enough, but even the BCB, which is one of the poorest in the world, were proud to host the TMS team at their grounds and supplied excellent guest commentators to boot!

Posted by   on (October 26, 2012, 9:56 GMT)

The Basic Question is WHAT IS RED BUTTON OPTION...

Posted by bored_iam on (October 26, 2012, 9:27 GMT)

Lets get one thing clear here. BCCI holds PRODUCTION rights. STAR, SKY hold BROADCASTING rights. SKY has the right to BROADCAST the feed that the BCCI, as producers, is providing. SKY basically wants a small chunk of the PRODUCTION control, which is why the BCCI is charging a whole lot more (much too much, if u ask me). but ya, a simple solution would be: Star, on loan from Sky, get Gower, Holding & Lloyd on board with Bhogle, Manjrekar and Gavaskar. (Throw out Shastri Hussain and Siva!) Problem solved. :-P

Posted by roarster on (October 26, 2012, 9:13 GMT)

The best thing about listening to the likes of Shastri and Gavaskar commentate is that you can get a pretty accurate feel for the prevalent attitudes and mores of the BCCI as Ravi, Sunny et al never stray to far from mothers apron (and purse) strings!

Posted by   on (October 26, 2012, 5:49 GMT)

At £25000 per day for a 15m by 15m room the price is exceeds the most expensive hotel in London on a square metre basis. You could stay in five star luxury for less than the BCCI wants for an empty room.

Let's face it do viewers really give a damn where the presenters are anyway? I personally don't care if they are in Mumbai or the Mumbles. It's the cricket that is important. Leave the presenters at home and forget the whole issue.

That way we get to see the cricket, and the BCCI gets a £25000 empty room to hire out for karaoke.

Posted by   on (October 26, 2012, 4:19 GMT)

Harmony111 from reading your post I understand you are most likely based in India. In UK Sky (which interestingly is owned by New Corporation just like STAR) provides additional options during live sports telecasts through the RED button, e.g. choosing the camera etc. I am not sure why you thought after reading the article that this facility applies to viewers in India! About the delay they would synchronizes the STAR commentary to the video for viewers that would like the STAR commentary. This is to accommodate the large number of Indian cricket viewers in UK. I am sure how you did not get something that simple!

Posted by S-A-M-1994 on (October 26, 2012, 3:06 GMT)

Sky Sport is Far superior than Star's ch and comentary team....

Posted by fguy on (October 26, 2012, 1:40 GMT)

ha ha i find it funny how everyone's ready to jump on bcci on the smallest pretext. bcci has sold broadcast rights to star which in turn has sold uk rights to sky. bcci owes sky nothing but are ready to provide them with commentary box for free. now if they want all those additional facilities they're going to have to pay for it. they cant expect to waltz in, demand whatever they want & get it for free. @PanGlupek when star was in uk they only got the feed from sky & a commentary box. they didnt have their own broadcast facilities. & in fact if u saw the "facilities" they were given it was literally a box in which they had to squeeze themselves into. i can bet if the sky team got a box of similar dimensions here there would more articles on their "mistreatment" by bcci.

Posted by Ulcer on (October 26, 2012, 0:36 GMT)

Can't imagine cricket without Nasser,Athers, Gower, Bumble and holding commentating. Will not be using the red button for next three months. SKY and ECB should wait for the next indian tour of UK.

Posted by stulch on (October 26, 2012, 0:10 GMT)

Before Sky came along England games abroad were not broadcast live things have come a long way since the days of having no option but to listen to the radio (even if you could have afforded Sky had it been then available).

Whether it should only be on Sky or whether it is too expensive is another debate but I think Sky's coverage is the best in cricket and I despair when it is not avaible at ICC events, in my eyes it really makes a difference.

To provide the coverage they do they require the space they do. In other sports you would expect the required facilities for the home TV of the two completing nations and I'm sure England provides the facilities if they are requested (at no extra cost).

If no facilities were available Sky would even put in place their own temporary facilities as any British TV company would if they weren't available at a football match they were covering.

Posted by Harmony111 on (October 25, 2012, 20:53 GMT)

I wonder what technology these broadcasters use that allows the viewer to change the feed itself with the press of some RED button. My box has a blue button that allows me to change the language and subtitles (if any) but that audio option is supplied by the channel itself. Star owns ESPN, Star Sports and Star Cricket so why would Star provide Indian viewers with the Sky feed? This would be stupid for Star to do. But hang on, there is more to this. There is a technological issue too. Sky would take Star's feed, send it to their studio in UK, add their own audio to it and would then broadcast it to the channels willing to use it. It would be alright for UK but by the time all this happens the video being broadcast by Star in India would have mode ahead by 1-1.5 seconds. I may be completely wrong here but 1) I don't think Sky's feed would be available in India and 2) Even if it is then there would be some adjustments needed and Star may not agree for a delay to let Sky catch up.

Posted by CricketingStargazer on (October 25, 2012, 20:43 GMT)

@Miles Cookman, having used the BBC commentary box at two grounds I can vouch for that! With a minimum of 6 people in the Lords box it must be getting close to positively unhygenic!

Posted by MrNriyan on (October 25, 2012, 20:18 GMT)

Star and Sky can easily solve their problem as both of them are Murdoch's company. If you want extra facilities, pay up BBC.

Posted by yorkshirematt on (October 25, 2012, 20:09 GMT)

@cpt meanster Have you ever heard Gower commentate. He is the most impartial english commentator on sky. Certainly more so than Bumble

Posted by georgian3767 on (October 25, 2012, 20:09 GMT)

I would love to see someone like our own Harsha Bhogle who is superb with words and judgment in place of someone like Nasser who sometimes are so vocal in their judgement that they have to eat their own words later.

Posted by Wynand80 on (October 25, 2012, 19:54 GMT)

@PanGlupek - fair enough if ECB did not charge Star for the use of stadium facilities, mighty generous.Question tho is whether the contract between Star and ECB covered off such costs? Even if it did not and ECB was generous in allowing Star use of stadium facilities, I query whether such generosity is justified when the party benefiting is a private enterprise making money out of broadcasting the sport (nothing wrong) - I think we are missing the basic point here BCCI is not asking ECB for the money,its asking SKY,a pvt enterprise making money out of the sport (and fair enough) to pay what it costs to house them and feed them (i.e. wifi, connectivity etc.).If Sky have no contractual right (as they seem not to have as they are not implying a breach of contract), I do not see why English supporters are getting their undies in a twist-be cross with SKY (not BCCI) who would rather have £500k extra profit margin than ensure proper commentary from the venue.

Posted by   on (October 25, 2012, 19:52 GMT)

I'm sure most british cricket viewers couldn't care less about Sky being asked to cough up money to take over half the media facilities but BBC is something else. BBC's TMS is a global institution that regularly shares its commentary with other radio stations around the world.They don't need/get a huge amount of room (as anyone who listens regularly will know all too well) so why charge £50,000 all of a sudden? It's pure greed. Is this the way cricket is going? How deeply sad.

Posted by 200ondebut on (October 25, 2012, 18:54 GMT)

FYI @Cpt.Meanster - just because Sky wont be in the ground doesn't mean they won't be commentating.

BCCI need to lose the chip on their shoulders. Their insecurity which was once amusing is now a bit of an embarrassment. Its time they started acting commensurate to their status and not like some obnoxious lottery winner.

Posted by Sakthiivel on (October 25, 2012, 18:45 GMT)

If you want special facility they you need to pay more. Nothing wrong with bcci. even star tv commentator are good.

Posted by raj3423 on (October 25, 2012, 18:05 GMT)

its as simple... english play cricket and lose and go away...... dont cry like a baby.. we dont want to listen to any of ur commentators.. at the most .. david llyod can be welcomed.. all other commentators take a break

Posted by Cpt.Meanster on (October 25, 2012, 17:56 GMT)

THANK GOD ! No biased commentary at last. I LOVE our Indian commentators who are a lot more neutral and appreciative of the opposition compared to Hussein, Atherton and co. who are simply pro-England. Perhaps, Bumble and Holding are a bit like the Indian commentary team. I feel the BCCI should hire those 2 at least for the tour. They are better than their colleagues.

Posted by Cpt.Meanster on (October 25, 2012, 17:53 GMT)

@landl47: India is still a great country. We have one of the world's BEST cultures, best hospitality and tourism industry, best beaches, best hill stations, best resorts etc. You can always visit India as a tourist. Just leave boring test cricket out of it. Most Indians simply don't have time for boring test cricket. Besides, you say "India used to be a great country". Well, we ARE still a great country. I guess you meant to say it was nicer when India was a poorer nation in terms of cricket finances ?!! Times change my friend.

Posted by Cpt.Meanster on (October 25, 2012, 17:45 GMT)

@Gary Denton: Haha ! Do you think the world's most POWERFUL cricket board will be affected by the BBC not paying ?!

Posted by Mahesh4811 on (October 25, 2012, 17:45 GMT)

Article clearly says: "no other governing body make such extra financial demands of broadcasters." BCCI is degrading itself every day and every possible way.

Posted by Cpt.Meanster on (October 25, 2012, 17:44 GMT)

@sandy_bangalore: NO I don't prefer SKY's commentary. And I am sure BILLIONS of Indians don't either. We want our own commentators !!

Posted by Cpt.Meanster on (October 25, 2012, 17:43 GMT)

It's utterly RIDICULOUS to see so many of my fellow Indians here call Shastri, Gavaskar, Harsha Bhogle, and Manjrekar as 'mediocre'. In what way are OUR commentators LESS compared to Hussein, Botham, Gower, Atherton and David Lloyd ? In what way are they less knowledgeable about the game of cricket ? WHY do Indians always show a lot more appreciation towards foreigners when we have individuals as good if not better in our own country ? I demand respect from you folks. I rather listen to STAR commentary than biased and 'PRO England' talk from the SKY commentators.

Posted by Selassie-I on (October 25, 2012, 17:38 GMT)

I find this audacious now the BBC have had money demanded,(SKY aside) surely any old charlie can commentate and broadcast commentary on the radio without paying for the rights? Surely this is what the BBC paid for in the first instance? otherwise the rights they have paid for are basically meaningless. There is an arguable case against SKY, but surely not the BBC? It is certainly interesting that no other board, ever, has demanded this though... another sad detraction from the cricket. What now if SKY backed out on the rights, would the advertisers in the stadiums be able to claim money back as their branding will no longer be shown over int he UK?

Posted by PanGlupek on (October 25, 2012, 17:37 GMT)

The more I think about this, the less I care actually. If you're watching on TV, you'll barely be able to notice the difference anyway. It'll be the same commentators, just doing it from an office in London. Would be a shame if BBC radio didn't cover it because of this though.

Posted by Munkeymomo on (October 25, 2012, 17:32 GMT)

To be honest it does sound like the BCCI are charging more for more facilities, which is perfectly reasonable if it's more facilities than most broadcasters get. It's like when you go to KFC and you can choose to get more chicken for more money, fair enough. £50K is a lot for the BBC though, doubt they would be asking for too much.

Posted by   on (October 25, 2012, 17:22 GMT)

Sky has asked for a commentary box, full control room and a studio for their pre and post shows at each venue. Under these circumstances BCCI is justified in asking for additional payments. Even ESPN-Star has to play the BCCI for all these facilities utilised at the ground.

Posted by ShanTheFanOfSachin on (October 25, 2012, 17:18 GMT)

@Jamie Castles, its stupid compare two different countris. Do Sk pay for same money to show Bundesliga as they do for La Liga??. Logical comparision is: Do SKY charge Star or any other Indian broadcaster for SIMILAR facilities when the matches happen in ENG? or Do they in fact provide such facilities??. If answer is NO, then either SKY must pay up or keep quiet. I am no fan of BCCI, but I wont get into slam BCCI for everything mode.

Posted by ShankarAnand on (October 25, 2012, 16:59 GMT)

Perfect question by Wynand80: " If Star had rights to feed from SKY and Star also decided to enter Trent Bridge and seek link ups, wifi, etc. who would bear the costs of providing these - ECB or Star?" - Please answer this SKY, BBC supporters.

Posted by   on (October 25, 2012, 16:37 GMT)

hail Bcci.... next.. 7 ipl teams in champain league ..1 assured directly final entry 50 overWorld Cup Format to ensure India reaches at least the final T20 worldcup india to have direct semi final entry No IPL contracts for player doing well against india in any format of the game. may more...clause to come :-)

Posted by sandy_bangalore on (October 25, 2012, 16:36 GMT)

@The ENglish fans here: Barring a few, most of us in India can't stand the BCCI high handedness, whether its IPL or CLT20 or these contract issues. The richest body and we dont even have a team that can compete overseas! And like i said earlier, most of us Indians who love our cricket would rather listen to Sky, than some of the ex-players here!

Posted by   on (October 25, 2012, 16:33 GMT)

Complete farce!!! Don't pay it, BBC. Time the BCCI got the message!

Posted by sandy_bangalore on (October 25, 2012, 16:33 GMT)

Please, Please BCCI resolve your differences with ECB for once. Millions in India prefer the commentary of the likes of Atherton,hussain and bumble anyday over some of our paid patriots.

Posted by CricketingStargazer on (October 25, 2012, 16:31 GMT)

This is a varient on the CricInfo text commentary (also given from in front of a TV)! Maybe CricInfo and the BBC should come to an agreement to share a TV set and commentary from the CricInfo house. For what it is worth, a standoff in broadcasting Spanish football on the radio has just been resolved after more than a year where clubs refused to late radio broadcasters enter stadia without paying a special fee. In the end matches were commentated on from bars around the stadia with pay-TV. Finally the charge has been reduced to a token fee and games will now be commentated on from inside the stadia. Can you imagine Aggers and co sat at a table in a cafe next to the stadium broadcasting "live" off the TV ;-)?

Posted by roarster on (October 25, 2012, 16:25 GMT)

Got to love the good old BCCI! Always looking for a new and interesting way of flexing their clout and testing how far they can go with the latest belligerent and whacky whim that takes hold in their corridors of certainty! Sky are no strangers to bullying tactics themselves so I'm looking forward to seeing how this pans out! The losers here are Aggers, Tuffers and the TMS lads who would surely have been game on for a sub-continental beano!

Posted by amitrathod on (October 25, 2012, 16:17 GMT)

When you buy a car you don't get free fuel or other additional for free you pay for it, sky/tms(bbc) should check their contract before moaning if these additional were mention in their contract or not(no more freebies) and all other user who are blaming bcci get a reality check nothing is free any more in this world.... sky/tms should pay the asking amount if they want to get required facilities to do the parallel commentary from the ground or else do it from outside the ground or from uk.

Mind games are already started..... India going to win the series 4-0

Posted by   on (October 25, 2012, 16:03 GMT)

This is the reason why we don't want monopoly in cricket. Its high time ICC has to make an attempt to make cricket a global game and not just a commonwealth game...BCCI with the economic might it has now and sole urge to accumulate more with ICC virtually ceremonial, may some day even ask umpires to wear saree and perform mujhra in between overs hehehe

Posted by Indunil76Shantha on (October 25, 2012, 15:56 GMT)

I am sorry, I am a Sri Lankan and never ever had like any move of BCCI. But in this case it seems Sky and BBC are demanding for facility and BCCI rightly asking them to pay for that. "You are promise chicken curry in the package, if you need roasted beef apart from that just because people in the other table having it, I am sorry you have to buy it, it is not in your package." Hats off to BCCI.

Posted by zimmby on (October 25, 2012, 15:52 GMT)

@Jamie Castle, I suggest you read the complete article and not the bits that suits you.

BCCI has made it clear that if you want EXTRA facilities, then you should pay the extra amount.

Why do English fans assume that it's BCCI's responsibility to cover the expenses of Sky or BBC? They don't share their profits with BCCI, do they? BCCI is giving them the commentary box for free. But if you want more, pay for it on your own.

Posted by cricmad81 on (October 25, 2012, 15:48 GMT)

For all those commenting here without any facts please get the correct picture.This is Bilateral series but sky wants to have a UNILATERAL coverage.

Sky's wish is to have independent and unilateral coverage of the India-England series. The cost includes, among other things, studio space and a commentary box for Sky's own panel of commentators, a TV control room, audio and video feed, a scoring monitor, as well as space for satellite up-linking from the venues for 30 days of cricket. All this at no additional cost when such demands where not there at the time of signing the contract.They just assumed that all these facilities would be provided FREE OF COST to them.Sorry Mr.Murdoch but you don't own the BCCI like you own the ECB.Sky and BBC have to pay up the going rates for all these facilities or else they can share the feed and the press box like it is done in all bilateral series.But no,they have decided that their ego would be satisfied by not flying here and commenting from UK.

Posted by mumble_myopia on (October 25, 2012, 15:42 GMT)

Can't say it worries me - might be able to hear the commentary above the crowdnoise for once.

Posted by PanGlupek on (October 25, 2012, 15:40 GMT)

To anybody saying sky & BBC should have to pay this: Ask yourself why Sky were not charged this fee last time they were in India? To allow them to have it without all this last time & now expect them to pay more is moving the goalposts, unless the TV deal itself has been renegotiated, which it hasn't.

Then ask yourself why no other national board has asked for extra money to use in-stadium facilities. Then ask yourself what kind of precident it sets to the rest of the world.

BCCI are shooting themselves in the foot here - if they do this to every TV company that visits India, they won't be able to complain when the other boards do the same when they play away.

@wynand80 - nice try, but ECB didn't charge star a penny when they were in England last (and as the article said, no board has ever had the cheek to do that before).

Maybe they are just skint & desperately need that extra 500K :-)

Posted by sams235 on (October 25, 2012, 15:34 GMT)

BCCI, please stop embarrassing the rest of us Indians. Your greediness is killing cricket.

Posted by pb10677 on (October 25, 2012, 15:34 GMT)

it's taking the mick - what a shamefully greedy lot the BCCI are. Good on Sky and the BBC not pandering to them like everyone else (ICC included) is.

It's not like this is the first time Sky have been to India when England are playing. The last tour was in 2008, and also 2006 before that - so why all of a sudden do they need to charge extra? Probably to help pay for the costs of redeveloping their stadia for the world cup.......

Posted by   on (October 25, 2012, 15:30 GMT)

Its not BCCI vs ECB. So Please stop commenting that ECB will return the same favour. Its a whole lot of longer and heavier contracts and BCCI vs SKY and the interests of home broadcaster, that is, ESPN Star.

Posted by ankit_barry on (October 25, 2012, 15:28 GMT)

Full support for BCCI here, believing what Sky & BBC are saying & not what BCCI is, is nothing but cognitive bias against BCCI. Agreed that Sky has the broadcasters right but additional space within stadiums with all gadgets will have costs & without going through the details of the contract i'll accept the Null Hypothesis. Richest or not BCCI is not a charity organization.

Posted by   on (October 25, 2012, 15:28 GMT)

This is too funny...I understand the concern of "using facilities", even though this is an unprecedented concern for sporting tours...but my word the amount they are asking for is what? 500,000 euros?? BCCI is clearly trying to compensate here for losing money in other ventures..what a disgrace

Posted by Texmex on (October 25, 2012, 15:26 GMT)

Did the Indian commentary team have to pay anything extra when they went to England 2-3 years back? I wish cricinfo reported on that.

Posted by Engfasttrackwimp on (October 25, 2012, 15:19 GMT)

Why do Sky and BBC think they can perch in the stadium, demand 2000sqft, wifi, aircon etc etc??? all for free? I pay for my TV, now can I watch Sky for free? Even BBC needs to be paid a TV license fee (very expensive one at that!). Sky and BBC only have "broadcasting rights". Nothing more. They don't own the stadiums. It's not BCCI's problem that "no other governing body making such extra financial demands of broadcasters". Maybe the reason is no one else can take on the broadcasting bully boys? Need a bully to take on a bully!! Well done BCCI :)) If Sky/BBC don't want to pay that's fine... they can stay home.

Posted by   on (October 25, 2012, 15:17 GMT)

SKY probably has one of the best cricket commentary teams. But now instead of that we re gonna have to make do with "karbon kamaa" sivaramkrishnan and perennial commentator curse ridden ravi shastri. Already with the immensely greedy BCCI and its broadcaster you probably only get to watch 4 balls in an over. Wonder when the bcci is gonna finally realise that they re just embarassing the entire country. O and pls do not hire rameez raja. That would just push all of us to watch the cricket with the audio muted.

Posted by PrasPunter on (October 25, 2012, 15:12 GMT)

Never thought I will be on the side of the English, but this time , yes. Come on England, just put it back on their face by doing nothing other than winning this series. Best wishes from an Aussie ! Ashes can happen later !!

Posted by whatawicket on (October 25, 2012, 15:07 GMT)

i hope they dont use some of the so called indian experts that we have had in the latest championships they are so poor. i cannot understand how the indian supporters put up with such drivel. the worst one is gavaskar followed by shastri if i said what i thought cricinfo would not print it.

Posted by sachin_vvsfan on (October 25, 2012, 15:05 GMT)

@Jamie Castles I am not a fan of BCCI. But since you asked to read the full article for a balanced view i read this statement

"They have demanded a full control room, just like the one that our host broadcaster has at every venue. If you have to create an additional space of 2000 sq ft, fully air-conditioned, it will bear a lot of cost."

If this is the first time BCCI has to provide this facility and if no body is going to pay the cost then iam with BCCI. ENG can do the same next time and mostly star will pay for them.

So why all this FUSS? Don't IND players pay the tax when they play in Australia?

Posted by landl47 on (October 25, 2012, 15:00 GMT)

It's all part of the BCCI's plan to make test cricket in India so unattractive (no drs, no commentary, T20 tournaments overlapping with tests everywhere) that in the end no-one will agree to play India and the IPL will be the only form of cricket left for Indians to watch. Now why should that be? Oh, yes- England 4, India 0 followed by Australia 4, India 0. When the BCCI has made such a total disaster of running a test team, better to hide its own failings by simply making test cricket irrelevant in India. Goodbye, India , been nice to know you. You used to be a great cricket country. Now you're just an IPL circus country.

Posted by Paul-in-Finland on (October 25, 2012, 14:58 GMT)

@JKF : here here ! @ Carlus , exactly !

Posted by whatawicket on (October 25, 2012, 14:55 GMT)

some seem to think that this payment is for broadcasting rights it is not. this is an addition fee the BCCI have brought in, its nothing to do with either SKY or the BBC showing or wireless presentation. its similar were an indian supporter buy a ticket to watch the game live, then on trying to gain entry you are told sorry we have added a surcharge of 10% to your ticket price. if it happens i hope SKY as host broadcasters when india are next in the UK a similar charge is added. now this will open a can of worms

Posted by   on (October 25, 2012, 14:53 GMT)

simply Rediculous..I dont want to write more than that but this Cric info wants me to write 25 characters..

Posted by   on (October 25, 2012, 14:51 GMT)

its £25000 per day as there are 4 tests given they last all 5 days. BBCI gone Mad. Sadly no one can opose them. I am sure even the indian players feel embaressed.

Posted by Wynand80 on (October 25, 2012, 14:51 GMT)

@Carolus Sturge and others blaming BCCI for the current impasse - may I just point out that SKY may hold rights to the broadcast feeds coming from Star but do they hold the rights contractually to enter the stadium where the matches are taking place and perch themselves at prime positions with wifi, sattellitte link ups etc.? Without reviewing the contract in question it is a bit rich blaming BCCI. I am not absolving BCCI but merely pointing out that this is not a simple BCCI is a villian story! To give you an example if Star had rights to feed from SKY and Star also decided to enter Trent Bridge and seek link ups, wifi, etc. who would bear the costs of providing these - ECB or Star? Frankly, this moan about BCCI is so evil and responsible for the recession, global warming and Aunt Penny's broken limb is getting a bit tedious really!

Posted by threeslipsandagully on (October 25, 2012, 14:51 GMT)

I never thought I'd side with Sky, but them and the BBC have my full support here. The arrogance and greed of the BCCI is astounding, they've agreed the broadcast rights but are now effectively holding the broadcasters to ransom because they think they can. Sky and the BBC are entirely correct to refuse to pay.

Posted by   on (October 25, 2012, 14:42 GMT)

I really wish those people who support the BCCI in this would learn to read the whole article and not just the bits that suit them. Which bit of "no other governing body making such extra financial demands of broadcasters" did you not understand. I am no lover of Murdoch or the Sky monopoly in the UK but at the end of the day why should they pay extra in India than they pay anywhere else in the world.

Posted by venkatesh018 on (October 25, 2012, 14:41 GMT)

What a mess? why should we the viewers be denied the wonderful balanced commentary of Atherton, Hussain and Bumble for this marquee series. All this for half a million ! BCCI sucks!

Posted by JKF_ on (October 25, 2012, 14:38 GMT)

Obviously the Indian broadcasters will be afforded the same "courtesy" by the ECB the next time India tours England.

Posted by   on (October 25, 2012, 14:35 GMT)

Why do all the Indian fans think 'sky should pay' - They already have. They have the RIGHTS....ECB didn't make Star pay extra on the last tour of England. It just shows that India has no real concept of business. No wonder the BCCI/India is so unpopular with Cricket fans.

Posted by nursery_ender on (October 25, 2012, 14:32 GMT)

Have I got this right? BCCI have sold the rights to the broadcasters and are now saying "oh, by the way, that doesn't actually give you the right to enter the stadium. That'll cost £50k/£500K more".

What next? £50k a game for the England team to rent the dressing rooms?

Posted by yezdi70 on (October 25, 2012, 14:27 GMT)

This is rubbish. Why should there be an additional charge when broadcasting rights are already paid. Why should the BCCI do something different to everyone else on the planet?

Posted by electric_loco_WAP4 on (October 25, 2012, 14:21 GMT)

Carry on BCCI. Keep the cash coming! Make hay while.........You never know how long things will last.

Posted by   on (October 25, 2012, 14:18 GMT)

The English will finally get a taste of mediocrity from our very own Gavaskar, Shastri and co.

Posted by   on (October 25, 2012, 14:15 GMT)

It is 50,000 or 5,00,000 Euros..???

Posted by   on (October 25, 2012, 14:14 GMT)

I suppose that when India plays in UK, they are quite happy to have the sky feed with sky commentators? Anyway, it will mean the sky team have their own weather to contend with, and no brighter Indian winter skies :-)

Posted by   on (October 25, 2012, 14:13 GMT)

bcci is beggar and want only money suck all monrey, example ipl

Posted by Yevghenny on (October 25, 2012, 13:58 GMT)

can't see what difference it makes. Don't know why so many pundits need to go on these 3 month expeditions anyway

Posted by nish86 on (October 25, 2012, 13:58 GMT)

It better to have Star's commentry because I am sick and tired of listening Nasser Hussain and Bumble, half the time no one understands what he is on about and rest of the time he moans about the food,weather or pitch. So its better this way !!

Posted by ChrisKOTW on (October 25, 2012, 13:53 GMT)

"It is understood that Star's commentary will also be available via the red-button option. "

I don't know if records of this nature are kept, but if so this will be the least used red button option in the history of television. What a farce this whole situation is thanks to the BCCI.

Posted by DeepakSarathy on (October 25, 2012, 13:52 GMT)

this just keeps getting better and better!!

Posted by UK_Chap on (October 25, 2012, 13:51 GMT)

Ahhhh.. What a lovely situation... I am tempted to say "it`s just not cricket" but that is just too apt and maybe literal for this situation.

Posted by   on (October 25, 2012, 13:51 GMT)

BCCI is not a charity. Sky - if you want to use the facilities you have to pay for it.

Posted by CricketMaan on (October 25, 2012, 13:47 GMT)

I support BCCI fully. Sky, BBC and et all should pay..simple..the obvious pain will be listening to Ravi, Sunny, Siva..but i dont mind ear buds:)

Comments have now been closed for this article

Email Feedback Print
Tour Results
India v England at Dharamsala - Jan 27, 2013
England won by 7 wickets (with 16 balls remaining)
India v England at Mohali - Jan 23, 2013
India won by 5 wickets (with 15 balls remaining)
India v England at Ranchi - Jan 19, 2013
India won by 7 wickets (with 131 balls remaining)
India v England at Kochi - Jan 15, 2013
India won by 127 runs
India v England at Rajkot - Jan 11, 2013
England won by 9 runs
More results »
News | Features Last 3 days
News | Features Last 3 days
Sponsored Links

Why not you? Read and learn how!