India v England, 1st Test, Ahmedabad, 1st day

News agencies boycott first Test

ESPNcricinfo staff

November 15, 2012

Comments: 62 | Text size: A | A

MS Dhoni tries to operate a camera, New Zealand v India, 2nd Test, Napier, 1st day, March 26, 2009
Many media outlets are not using live photographs during the first Test © Getty Images
Enlarge
Related Links
News : BCCI photo stand-off goes on
Series/Tournaments: England tour of India
Teams: England | India

Major news agencies have boycotted the first Test of the series between England and India in protest at media restrictions imposed by the BCCI.

UK newspapers including the Times and the Telegraph will not use live pictures of the Test after the BCCI barred several agencies, including Getty Images, from the ground. ESPNcricinfo will also not carry live images.

Others agencies, such as Agence France-Presse (AFP), Reuters and the Associated Press, have taken the decision to boycott the match in protest. The Press Association (PA) will continue to provide its text service but has withdrawn its photographer. While the BCCI has accredited some news agencies, they refused to allow Getty Images, Action Images and some India agencies into the stadium on the grounds that their pictures were not used only for editorial purposes.

The BCCI are providing images that are downloadable from their website, but most media organisations are declining to use them, fearing the action sets a precedent along the road towards censorship.

The episode is the latest dispute between the BCCI and media organisations in the run-up to the series. Sky TV, which owns the television rights for the tour in the UK, decided not to send its team of commentators to India after the BCCI demanded £500,000 for hosting them in the grounds. Sky refused to pay and are instead commentating from a live television feed in London. Sky's small reporting team has also been asked to film only outside the ground despite having bought rights to the series.

The BBC, which owns the rights for audio coverage in the UK, was also asked for an extra £50,000 in costs ahead of the series but reached an agreement with the BCCI.

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.

Posted by Nampally on (November 18, 2012, 17:08 GMT)

It is best in the interest of Cricket that BBC & BCCI come to a fair & reciprocal agreement & stop washing the dirty linen in Public. There is a very important "C' word called "Compromise". This has been the major format to a fair & amicable solution to many major issues. It is always great to show a good "Bottom Line" but it is equally important that the popularity of the game is not sacrificed by 2 self serving Boards!

Posted by path_finder_13 on (November 17, 2012, 15:38 GMT)

@Michael Dickson u may be true....but even as an indian fan ..mate u can not fight with BCCI...

Posted by shaan77 on (November 17, 2012, 14:13 GMT)

BCCI is acting too much.. Lets see how many days it goes on. BCCI has forgotton Newton's 3rd law of motion!!!

Posted by   on (November 17, 2012, 6:15 GMT)

@Robin Kaul "that is paying 150 pounds for even buying a TV, or if u see it on internet... so watching live cricket streams on laptops is practically illegal in UK... " You're wrong there actually. If you've purchased a TV and only use it for playing DVD or video games, you don't pay for a TV license for it, ergo your claim that just for purchasing a TV you have to buy a license is actually false. You do pay for live broadcasts regardless of the method of broadcast, but if you are watching something on your computer after it has already been broadcast then you don't pay for a license for that either. FYI, India used to have licensing as well, but they withdrew it. Licenses simply cover a majority the cost of funding so that very little advertisements are needed. Judging by what cricket streamed out of India tends to look like, with the occassional bit of cricket between ads, I'd go for TV licensing anyday - and I'm a kiwi, we don't have TV licensing in NZ anymore.

Posted by torsha on (November 16, 2012, 23:53 GMT)

The Big Boss = The BCCI !!

Posted by Dravid_Pujara_Gravitas_Atheist on (November 16, 2012, 21:01 GMT)

Wake up people. BCCI only banned those firms who sell images. They didn't ban if firms use them for their editorials. People are just myopic and jump onto the BCCI bashing bandwagon. Getty images or whoever you are get a life. Will ya? I support BCCI on this issue.

Posted by dave1954 on (November 16, 2012, 16:43 GMT)

Please remember BCCI what goes around comes around

Posted by vikasrajchauhan on (November 16, 2012, 16:16 GMT)

indian cricket has two words " indian" "cricket"... however indian government has no direct involvment in it . just make urself clear here .indian cricket is run by BCCI , which is private ltd company . So private ltd has right to protect his interest. bcci is no meant for charity. But since indian are involve in BCCI , simply misunderstood by all it is indian government running sports body like hockey, boxing etc. BCCI is like other private ltd company in india which sells cricket. so they keep their right to sell everything related to cricket. which is wrongly termed by media "as ban of freedom". u will have to pay for anything as u buy product from any shop.

Posted by rob_damn on (November 16, 2012, 14:41 GMT)

@yorkshirematt... something like that is allready happening in your country... Its called TV licence...

Posted by   on (November 16, 2012, 14:35 GMT)

@ path_finder_13.. look at who is asked to pay more... THE RICH... cricket ground tickets are still among the cheapest in the world... and why should be there any free perks for these news agencies(like bbc) who lobbied in their own country to pay for a TV licence.. that is paying 150 pounds for even buying a TV, or if u see it on internet... so watching live cricket streams on laptops is practically illegal in UK...

Posted by path_finder_13 on (November 16, 2012, 11:42 GMT)

i feel that it is very mean of BCCI........in future it is going to tax the breeze flowing through the stadium too......

Posted by raghavmadan on (November 16, 2012, 3:51 GMT)

I request all those who are villifying BCCI to read the article again. Only organisations like Getty Images, which sell images for a profit, have been banned from grounds. Clicking pics for editorial purposes is allowed. Secondly, this media boycott smacks of cartelization. Finally, I'd like ESPNCricinfo to reveal their beneficial ownership with respect to SKY and conflict of interest regarding this issue.

Posted by dunger.bob on (November 16, 2012, 1:20 GMT)

@ Haleos: "@ Biggus - ... without Indian input cricket is dead. Period. Your cricketers come running to IPL to make money as your respective boards do not have enough to pay them." ... that may be the case for some countries, but not all. .. one of the problems is that more and more people are becoming concerned that cricket might die because of Indian money and influence, not be saved by it. That might seem a strange thing to say, but having a strong, powerful leader isn't much good if you think he's marching you straight off a cliff. .. this photo thing is a tiny but illustrative example of what I'm talking about. ... cricket is a tiny game in the global sense so why on earth would you make it harder for the media to report on it. .. obviously the BCCI has thought this through and they have their reasons, its just that they aren't that obvious to us outsiders. It looks more like sabre rattling than anything to do with the good of the game. Hopefully I'm wrong about that.

Posted by TontonZolaMoukoko on (November 16, 2012, 1:14 GMT)

Lahori92 - This is an article about freedom of press, not a claimed catch. Back to the real issue here, I could understand the BCCIs quibble with Sky (although not the BBC who had no extra demands as far as I'm aware) but this smacks of censorship rather than any moneymaking opportunity, which could be setting a very dangerous precedent.

Posted by Lahori92 on (November 15, 2012, 23:26 GMT)

any comments on trott trying to claim a catch that wasn't?

Posted by Lahori92 on (November 15, 2012, 23:17 GMT)

Trott tried to claim a catch that wasn't, let see what sort of action icc take against him, does any one remember rashid latiff was given a lengthy ban when he claimed a catch against bangladesh few years ago. None of the english commentators criticised him, I remember Ian botham jumping up and down when Phillip Hughes claimed a catch off alistair cook at short leg when england were down under two winters ago botham had lot say at the time.

Posted by   on (November 15, 2012, 22:58 GMT)

Is it me or does the cameraman look like mahendra dhoni?

Posted by gsingh7 on (November 15, 2012, 18:15 GMT)

i support bcci for earning money from getty images ,etc . good for indian cricket( from an indian cricket fanatic)

Posted by grizzle on (November 15, 2012, 17:37 GMT)

Madras boy - Going by your logic, the Government should charge the newspapers money if they want their reporters to attend their press conferences. The role of the BCCI is not merely that of a for-profit organization. They have been entrusted with the care of cricket in India, which includes helping news media popularize the sport.

Posted by yorkshirematt on (November 15, 2012, 17:33 GMT)

Amazing how many Indian fans are on the side of the BCCI here. If this was the ECB (who i have absolutely no time for whatsoever) I would be furious with them for acting in such a petty manner

Posted by deol84 on (November 15, 2012, 17:05 GMT)

Well done to the media, bycott the whole series BCCI is just greedy but nothing else.

Posted by   on (November 15, 2012, 16:56 GMT)

Whatever money BCCI earns from these strategies , they are going to put it for the development of cricket in India in a much larger scale. And every board would like to do so..So guys there is no problem in doing sooo...

Posted by Selassie-I on (November 15, 2012, 16:44 GMT)

Just been on the BCCI website, there is a huge ammount of photos from today's play - 8! yes, 8, that's about 1 per hour, 8 not very good photos as well. thanks BCCI for stragling the coverage.

@IndiaNumeroUno on (November 15 2012, 14:35 PM GMT) Acutally the BBC has several different charities within it, children in need for example. It is a non-profit organisation(Unlike BCCI), funded in a unique way (It has no adverts on it). Say what you will about SKY but don't speak ill of the BBC without knowing how the organisation is structured. They also have Boycs commentating which is worth tuning in more than anything else, when I switched on the radio before work today, Rahul Dravid was also commentating, a real treat!

Posted by Andre2 on (November 15, 2012, 16:31 GMT)

Answer to KapilJoshi : what you are proposing is ... censorship ! BCCI is charging a high fee to news agencies. If they refuse to pay, BCCI says : I can provide the pictures which will have taken myself ! This is exactly the beginning of censorship and dictatorship !

Posted by   on (November 15, 2012, 16:26 GMT)

Dear bMike on (November 15 2012, 13:56 PM GMT) try using one of the GettyImages on your website, they will charge you a hefty amount for a single image, then what's wrong if BCCI charges them for the same?

Posted by Cricketfan08 on (November 15, 2012, 16:06 GMT)

Shame on you BCCI for repeatedly putting your own benefits on top of the agenda and not caring for the beautiful sport that is cricket. Enough is enough. Stop lining your pockets and start caring about the game. Don't try to exploit the media to your advantage.

Posted by waheed1233 on (November 15, 2012, 16:05 GMT)

hahaha at BCCI......their team cant play test cricket and here they are trying to show their arrogance...nobody cares about a below average team like india playing what against whom....

Posted by Selassie-I on (November 15, 2012, 16:01 GMT)

@madras_boy on (November 15 2012, 13:56 PM GMT) - Yes they do, indirectly. Cricinfo I believe buy their images from agencies, eg. Getty Images, these agencies send their photographers into grounds, after buying passes for them from the grounds/board. Thus the BCCI are already profiting from it. Now they want 100% of the money. This is viewed by some as greed, rather than sticking to governing the game in India, working on development etc. they are looking at making money as their 1st priority. The other issue, perhaps the bigger one, is that now we only see the pictures that the BCCI want us to see - this is censorship.

Posted by umairasgharbutt on (November 15, 2012, 15:51 GMT)

bcci your money not gonna work here !

Posted by Mahaanama on (November 15, 2012, 15:41 GMT)

I apologized from those news agencies on behalf of BCCI. I don't understand how BCCI forgets that they earn all the money because of cricket.

Posted by bMike on (November 15, 2012, 15:28 GMT)

@IndiaNumeroUno: Though they are not charity organizations their first priority is cricket NOT money.

Posted by   on (November 15, 2012, 14:50 GMT)

Nothing wrong in earning money. CA or ECB will be worse if they'll given the same scenario.Why always target BCCI when it comes to dictatorship in cricket ? Carry On BCCI ... Great Job !

Posted by India_ANY_track_bully on (November 15, 2012, 14:35 GMT)

@bMike : BBC and Sky are charity organisations.. right!

Posted by   on (November 15, 2012, 14:13 GMT)

Dream cam of mine. Canon EOS 1D.

Posted by shillingsworth on (November 15, 2012, 13:57 GMT)

@Rajesh Gopalakrishnan - There is nothing 'smart' about it. What 'other sporting bodies' exclude organisations who promote their sport?

Posted by bMike on (November 15, 2012, 13:56 GMT)

It seems like for BCCI everything is a deal with money but they don't see it's a big shame for humanity. Shame on you BCCI

Posted by madras_boy on (November 15, 2012, 13:56 GMT)

I don't blame BCCI here. Media agencies who make revenue by using the pics should share the revenue with BCCI. Lets take cricinfo - they put live pictures in their website, ppl watch it, cricinfo earns money from adverts as more ppl visit the site. Do they share the revenue with BCCI ? Haha with the shareholders !!!

BCCI are just making hay when the sun shines. If ECB/Oz was in the same situation, they would have done more than this to earn more money (i.e with cricket being more popular in England/Oz like in India). Keep it up BCCI. Mint money from the riches and spare the poorest !

Posted by   on (November 15, 2012, 13:54 GMT)

As you get richer you get more Scrooge...its true with BCCI also,instead of using its money in good cause it is just focusing on earning more and more money no matter how deep they have to fall for it.shame on you BCCI. once i was proud that our cricket board is the strongest sporting body all over the world now i am just ashamed of it.

Posted by drei on (November 15, 2012, 13:42 GMT)

@ Biggus, it beats me as to how this is about BCCI thumbing its nose at the rest of the *cricketing* world. I don't suppose there's any changing the mind of the hate-on-India brigade... @Kapil, we'll never know because journos have decided to gang up as usual. Equally the BCCI sucks at PR, and haven't put out their own explanations on their webpage. We'll just have to wait for better reporters. On the face of it, if Getty is going to make money out of sale of the images, the BCCI should get a cut since they own the rights. On the other hand I don't want them to charge a blogger or a newspaper money for covering an event. I notice Getty's not saying their photos are Royalty free :)

Posted by Wharfeseamer on (November 15, 2012, 13:33 GMT)

That looks like MSD viewing through that camera. Is it? And are the BCCI stopping him taking pictures? : - )

Posted by Wharfeseamer on (November 15, 2012, 13:30 GMT)

There are some minor gains for the BCCI here but really this is just about posturing and power. BCCI is doing this simply because it can..."Look at us, look how powerful we are"

In terms of the fees they wanted to charge broadcasters for facilities. It would have been better had they made this clear at a neutral time, not in the immediate build up to a series, especially as they are breaking a long held precedent.

Ultimately Sky (and other broadcasters) should ensure they have water tight contracts that show clearly what is included and what is excluded for the price paid.

Posted by A_N_I on (November 15, 2012, 13:19 GMT)

So let me understand this .... Getty Photographers normally buy a stadium ticket (may be a special ticket to be allowed to take photos using big lenses).... They then *SELL* these photos to various news agencies around the world who for whatever reason dont send their own photographers to the match .... Now BCCI says ... Getty you make money based on event we hosts .... Pay some money for it....

Can someone sane tell me what is wrong with it ?

Said that there is a easy resolution, Getty why dont you create your own website and pubish all the photos with some commentary about the match on the website for free. That will qualify you as you use the pictures for "Editorial" purposes only and not commercial. BCCI will allow you in. Once in who is going to check what you really do with those pictures !!!

Posted by Haleos on (November 15, 2012, 13:14 GMT)

@ Biggus - Though I completely agree BCCI is worng in the current situation without Indian input cricket is dead. Period. Your cricketers come running to IPL to make money as your respective boards do not have enough to pay them.

Posted by   on (November 15, 2012, 13:13 GMT)

So it's OK for Reuters and others to photograph but not for Getty. So, Reuters and the like are now charities, eh? They sell their pictures through wire services to well known philanthropic organisations like News International to fill their pages. Grow up! Everything is done for commercial reasons, just because some agencies choose to monetise their images in other ways doesn't make them any more 'commercial'.

BTW, what 'arrangement' did the BBC come to with the BCCI? I'm a licence payer, I believe I have a right to know!

Posted by   on (November 15, 2012, 12:46 GMT)

Another moneygrubbing gesture by BCCI, showing a total disregard for both the spirit and the good of the game. I'm glad to see that real Indian cricket fans dislike their attitude as much as I do.

Posted by EshwarParvathaneni on (November 15, 2012, 12:44 GMT)

@Biggus - Slave mentality huh? You call a whole population slave just for referring to the general media as biased.Big words my friend.Every country has its own challenges.You cannot call names to people who live in those countries just because something is wrong.I assume u dont live in a perfect world.

Posted by emmersonne on (November 15, 2012, 12:36 GMT)

Robert Mugabe was the last person to ban the free press from an England overseas tour, wasn't he?

Posted by whoster on (November 15, 2012, 12:21 GMT)

The BCCI is an absolute disgrace, and they're an insult to a great cricketing nation. What's their main concern? Cricket or money? Answers on a postcard please.

The BCCI have no interest in Test cricket whatsoever, and think they can just click their fingers and get as much money as they want. They are an embarrassment to the great cricket fans of India as well as to the rest of the world.

Posted by jmcilhinney on (November 15, 2012, 12:09 GMT)

@IndiaNumeroUno on (November 15 2012, 11:29 AM GMT), because you don;t like what you're hearing you assume that it's not the truth?

Posted by   on (November 15, 2012, 12:03 GMT)

bcci dadagiri...:) my first ques. is that why ? BCCI IS DEMANDING SUCH HEAVY AMOUNT FROM SKY TV...this is not fare at all...i think BCCI shoud reconsider on his decision and gv permission to sky tv...

Posted by Biggus on (November 15, 2012, 12:03 GMT)

@Ratul Sengupta-We'll just have to see, won't we? "Resistance is futile" eh? That's a slave mentality that doesn't carry much weight with those who are not acclimatised to passive submission to corrupt and venal bureaucrats.

Posted by KapilJoshi on (November 15, 2012, 11:33 GMT)

Are people bashing BCCI for sake of bashing it.. I dont see anything wrong here.. They are just not allowing private agencies who use the images for non-editorial purposes.. They had already allowed Reuters etc. If commercial agencies need footage they can buy it from BCCI - what is wrong here... The commercial agencies want to photograph for free ! Its good that BCCI has taken a bold stand against commercialization of media

Posted by India_ANY_track_bully on (November 15, 2012, 11:29 GMT)

I think we are being fed only half the story by media... come on guys... tell us the whole truth and nothing but the truth!

Posted by   on (November 15, 2012, 11:18 GMT)

Stop begging BCCI !!! U have already got the money !

Posted by   on (November 15, 2012, 10:51 GMT)

@Biggus... brave words... but are the other boards and their cricketers willing to take a major revenue/ salary cut while the 'tidal wave' builds up? India might have an 'okay' team... but until cricket is pastime #1,2 & 3... there will be plenty of money for BCCI and until that's the case resistance is futile...

As regards this specific instance, it might be unfair by the BCCI... it might be 'changing the rules'... but it's the new cricket world order and everyone will soon fall in like making these new set of rules standard... I might be wrong... but after many years of watching biased reporting and heavy handed tactics by international boards/ media federations... it does seem a little bit of the pot calling the kettle black!

Posted by   on (November 15, 2012, 10:12 GMT)

BCCI is probably getting smarter and learning from other sporting bodies. well should do the sport good as its only one making money in India.

Posted by   on (November 15, 2012, 9:57 GMT)

I am an Indian and I really am ashamed at what BCCI is doing! This is heights of cheapness , charging media team who have bonfide and legitimate rights being asked to pay some more money! This is really sad.

Posted by xunaed on (November 15, 2012, 9:49 GMT)

This is not cricket! This is business!! Shame!!!

Posted by Biggus on (November 15, 2012, 9:05 GMT)

All those Indian fans who relish the hollow pride of the BCCI thumbing their collective noses at the rest of the cricketing world may in due course have to cope with the rather less 'satisfying' experience of the remainder of us turning our back on this rogue board and deciding to continue without Indian input. For the good of the future of the game it may become a regrettable necessity, and the ripples of discontent are growing into a sizeable swell. Eventually the BCCI will have created a tidal wave of resistance which will sweep all financial concerns aside, those very same financial concerns that they fondly believe give them the muscle to act with such impunity.

Posted by   on (November 15, 2012, 8:57 GMT)

I feel embarrassed. BCCI have better way to make money. Not in this cheap ways.

Posted by MiddlePeg on (November 15, 2012, 8:41 GMT)

With a mixture of their pitches and their greed the BCCI seem determined to stamp out test cricket in India. I wonder why?!...

Posted by   on (November 15, 2012, 8:25 GMT)

Unbelievable, or not so unbelievable really.

Comments have now been closed for this article

TopTop
Email Feedback Print
Share
E-mail
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