THE GOLDEN DROOL

Back-to-back Ashes to have the fans and money men salivating

AUSTRALIA will not have long to wait to regain the urn should they lose again in England in 2013 with Cricket Australia yesterday confirming there will be back-to-back Ashes series from that year.

This move has been in the wind for some time now. England in particular have wanted to avoid playing Ashes in the lead-up to the World Cup. Russ (in the comments) is right that it was therefore either push the Ashes back and lose money or pull the Ashes forward. As Paul Keating once said: "Never get between a cricket administrator and a bucket of money."

There will be a log jam for a few months, but if the ensuing schedule shakes out neatly then short term inconvenience will soon be relegated to quiz questions about the quirky ten consecutive Tests.

That's assuming, as we all do, that T20 is still flavour of the month; something that might not be the case if this summer's poor attendance and ratings for the Big Bash is part of a greater trend:

Twenty20 given a big bashing at the gate and on TV in a strong summer of Test cricket

THIS summer might have been terrible for the Australian Test team, but it is proving to be something of a triumph for Test and one-day cricket over the Twenty20 format.

Of course, there's jargon:

ECB dismisses fears of Ashes overkill from 2013 to 2015

ECB marketing boss Steve Elworthy said the changes would "maintain momentum".

Whatever the prevailing sentiment, someone ought to tell Spanky:

After some Big Bashing, generation next begins falling out of the tree

If these roosters are fit, the Ashes could be reclaimed in 2014-15.

How tall are Pat Cummings and Sean Abbott? Are they they two new Glenn McGraths?

Update!

Not sure Colin Smith has a full grasp on cricket scheduling. No one is suggesting Australia & England play back-to-back Ashes series every year... although, now that I think about CA and the ECB thinking about it:

Successive Ashes series a big risk, says expert

ONE of Australia's leading experts on sports broadcasting, Colin Smith, has warned that back-to-back Ashes series could dilute interest in the oldest rivalry in cricket.

Smith, who helped broker Cricket Australia's current telecast agreement with Channel Nine, which expires in 2013, said there was a risk of there being too much of a good thing.

"You've got to be really careful of swamping the game, because that can be a real issue,'' Smith said yesterday. ''The concept could be you give it a fillip to television audiences in Australia and in the UK, that's the upside of it. The downside of it is that it's basically two series in a row - it becomes less attractive and there's less public interest. I just think in terms of how you promote, you've got to be really careful of it. You don't get the market causing you a problem.''

Andrew Wu mentions the back-to-back Ashes in 1974/75. Those two series did not kill the golden geese.

Comments

[Russ]

Some wishful thinking from Lalor on the comparative decline of T20. The T20 internationals still pulled in a much larger attendance than the ODI games, although the ratings weren't as good.

Victoria's BB crowds started well, but dropped after they didn't play at home for 3 weeks and were out of finals reckoning before they returned during the AusOpen. That one 43k last year game accounts for half the decline in average crowds. The BBL remains a bit of an unknown until they try playing it when there is no international cricket on FTA tv over the same period. Although I fully expect CA to make the schedule confusing and uneven to fit games onto tv every day.

[Tony]

You're right. I forgot to add the obvious: that PL was exaggerating his mooted decline in T20, and that I'm not exactly confident the assorted cricket bodies can b e relied upon to organise a snag-free, balanced and fair world cricket schedule.

[David Barry]

Maybe I did know what I was talking about when I said that Big Bash crowds would go down. Only Hobart and Pollardville maintained the crowds levels of last season. Of course Brisbane should be ignored because of the rain and flooding here, but overall they weren't a great set of attendances.

I'm more disappointed with the drop in TV ratings. Sometimes I feel like a median sports consumer, but not this time - I reckon I watched more of the Big Bash than I did last season.

The T20 internationals still pulled in a much larger attendance than the ODI games, although the ratings weren't as good.

Wasn't one of the T20I's during the flood? Ch9 were doing continuous news coverage that day, at least in Brisbane.

[Tony]

Dave, I have barely watched any Big Bash, whereas I have watched quite a bit of the F50 internationals. Mind you, the Australia Day match in Adelaide and the three pending matches to close the summer are really testing my levels of endurance.

Tacked on another article to the bottom of the post.

[Russ]

Actually it is more complex again: both attendances and ratings vary by day of the week, holidays, etc. The Wednesday T20 rated 1.29m, the ODI (AusDay) 1.32m. The Friday T20 rated 1.31m, the ODI 1.24m. I don't see any drop in the Brisbane figures, although Adelaide was very low when the T20 was on there. The Sunday ODIs rated 1.72 and 1.51. The ODIs also pull big afternoon numbers, compared to daytime tv. The relative attendances in Adelaide were T20: 32k and ODI: 34k. In Melbourne, Friday: 59k, Sunday: 35k. Much of a muchness. A cynic might argue that Australians like watching cricket on tv, don't much care what the format is, but want to see certain opposition. It would be fascinating to know what the final of the Big Bash, on a Sunday night, would rate, particularly in the non-playing states.

[David Barry]

Where do you get these ratings from, Russ? I've been having a poke around the OzTAM site but can't find the level of detail that you talk about.

The Adelaide T20 was the one played near the peak of the flooding here. I could understand Ch9's ratings being strong for that night, but not the cricket - 9's coverage of that started at 10pm.

[Russ]

OzTam is pretty useless, but I found an alternative source a couple of months ago.

[RT]

Ambivalent reaction for me to the announcement of back to back Ashes. That 2 and a half year wait between home Ashes to away Ashes has you salivating before the first test at Lords. "Familiarity breed comptempt" is one of the great sayings, so not sure you need to do load up Ashes wise. Mind you, familiarity certainly breeds contempt with Clarke, Ponting, Hussey, even Katich putting the pads on continually.

Ashes is the greatest of all sporting events for Oz sports nuts, so why dilute the product. I'll be watching 6 hours a day though.

[Russ]

That's it right there RT. Chappelli made a comment a while back that he asked Indian tv producers about "too much cricket" and they basically said, "we haven't reached that point yet, no matter how much we put on people watch it".

The only real hope for reducing and reforming international cricket is something more profitable for the players to do: the IPL and BBL in other words.

[Tony]

I don't worry about too much cricket on TV because the product dilutes; I worry about too much cricket on TV because I invest so much bloody energy and emotion into the caper that I'm utterly wrecked by the end of the season.

[David Barry]

Thanks for that link Russ. I still don't really believe that figure for Brisbane viewers of the Adelaide T20I though....

[Russ]

Dave, I am not sure I do either. It looks like a transcription error with the Adelaide figure of 49k. Either that or they've listed Brisbane's tv watching on the other program onto the cricket.

Tonight's figures will be interesting, the men's final on seven, and ten has brought out the fat guns.