they could have Game 1 of each ODI or T20 on FTA & the rest on of the series on Paramount+, to show people the cricket is on and to gain people’s interest?
Sorry, yeah that’s what I meant. Simulcast Game 1 (or selected games…weekends etc) on 10 and P+, rest on P+
2 Likes
Yeah they can have flexibility with it & it doesn’t need to be the same for all series.
E.g they can show game 1 on FTA, the rest of paramount & if the series goes to decider then show that on FTA as well,
Or big series like Eng or Ind they can show 2 out of 3 / 3 out of 5 etc on FTA
2 Likes
That is one of the potential advantages of going with one provider; not needing to define in advance the exact split of broadcasts. That might also be a sticking point for CA - they might want to be trying to force a particular split like the current arrangement but P+ wants to be more flexible.
6 Likes
I understand what you’re saying… But CA needs a firm contractual agreement on what games will be provided on what platform. CA need to insure that their product is going to treated correctly. Flexibility doesn’t cut it.
Again, this won’t work. This needs to be confirmed in the final agreement between CA and Paramount.
2 Likes
Yeah I think there needs to be some certainty for the viewer too, so they know which matches will be televised and which are online exclusive.
4 Likes
They would likely be confirmed before each season at the announcement of the fixtures, with minimums in place (like the NZ arrangement does, but obviously a lot more on FTA), but the ability to put more on FTA when they feel like it, and put less when needed. (e.g. they may choose to put more T20s against England on FTA but just the first game against the West Indies or Ireland etc.)
3 Likes
Yep exactly.
2 Likes
Yeah, this is what I mean with flexibility. They would have a minimum in place but they can change it to add extra games with each series before they start.
That way CA does have certainty but there is also flexibility with a chance of more games on FTA
1 Like
There also needs to be some level of protection from late changes from FTA to Streaming too
4 Likes
Well yeah, you’d set a minimum for all seasons, then at the start of each season you’d announce the FTA matches for that year. You wouldn’t have any late changes.
2 Likes
Today it’s opposite, 7 at the ground in Cairns while Fox is at their studio
5 Likes
Cazaly Stadium only has room for 1 broadcast team.
4 Likes
In 2018 Nine and Ten offered $900m to broadcast cricket for 6 years before Seven and Fox swooped
Did they? Wasn’t it 10 who offered the most?
1 Like
I think it was close to a billion dollars offered by 10 but CA wanted that magic figure of 1B
2 Likes
It was a very small amount at the end of it all.
1 Like
Originally Nine wanted Tests and 10 were gunning for the rest, limited overs. In the end 10 went alone. An agreement was made with 10 by CA somehow it wasn’t to be the case.
2 Likes
What could have been. Still a doozy.
3 Likes
I hope its not like the AFL scenario where 10 had no chance in getting it. All along AFL wanted 7 and Fox. Even that was a small margin.
2 Likes