MCC Members

The loss of terrestrial television coverage of live international cricket matches ca used a public outcry. The events are scandalous and are sufficient evidence to indict the ECB management who very clearly betrayed the implicit understanding entered into by the Chairman ECB Lord MacLaurin and the Minister of Sport. The facts are these:-

Lord MacLaurin wrote as Chairman of the ECB to Chris Smith (Minister of Sport) in June 1998 requesting his authority to relax the rules governing A List Sports. This was done in order to attract more money into cricket from pay to view providers who were allowed to bid on the understanding that a substantial amount of live terrestrial broadcasting remained. The terms of the bids were sent to Chris Smith for approval before acceptance.

Lord MacLaurin made it clear to the new Chairman of the ECB David Morgan that the ECB had to gain approval from the Minister of Sport in advance of any new cricket contracts being signed and that substantial live terrrestrial coverage had to be guaranteed as a result of his negotiations with Chris Smith in 1998. This advice was ignored and the understanding dishonoured.

Tim Yeo MP asked the question "Is the ECB fit to be the governing authority of the game of cricket"? - from this evidence the answer has to be No.

Here is an unaudited extract from the evidence given by Lord MacLaurin to the DCMS Select Committee on 29 September 2005:-

Lord MacLaurin of Knebworth: "I wrote to Chris on 23 June 1998 when it was agreed that Test cricket would go from the A list to the B list and on the second page of my letter to Chris, I said, "As you will recall, I have given my personal reassurances to you and the Prime Minister that in such an environment, the ECB would wish to keep a substantial amount of live coverage on the BBC". We did not know that Channel 4 was going to get involved in those days and we were obviously talking to the BBC, so I am absolutely quite clear that in the deal that we did, Chris and I, we had to keep a substantial amount of cricket on free-to-air television.From my point of view it is very clear indeed. I did the deal with Channel 4 and Sky and I had to confirm it with the Secretary of State before I was allowed to announce it. You could not have anything much clearer than that.

I think we can only surmise. I presume that the ECB was talking to the Department and getting clearance that they could deal with any broadcaster exclusively. I know that when the deal was going through I spoke to my successor, David Morgan, the Chairman of the ECB, and reminded him of our conversation and I reminded him of the deal that I had done, so he knew exactly what that was.I had a conversation with Chris which was very clear; he would not allow me to announce anything until he was satisfied with the deal that was on the table. So I phoned Chris and said "This is the deal" and he said, "Okay, you can announce it." In my letter it quite clearly says that a substantial amount of live coverage would be on free-to-air television. I do not have any doubt about that. I presume that happened, I do not know. Certainly David Morgan, the Chairman, knew of the deal. As to what has happened over the last negotiations, I really do not know."

The ECB/BSkyB deal is a hot topic that has caused a public outcry. The grass roots game will suffer and so will the pensioners and young aspiring Freddie Flintoff's who cannot afford to pay for BSkyB. What are the ECB thinking about? Surely the greatest asset for the game is millions of fans having access to a variety of live broadcasts from free terrestrial TV and all other forms of new media coverage such as the Internet and Wi-Fi networks?

25 February 2009