* Prices may differ from that shown
So another season is upon us and autumn in the wind, football ready and willing to help us through another grim winter devoid of global warming. BT have moved into the market to show games and the transfer window raging and big moves taking place, the Rooney, Suarez and Bale tremors likely to trigger an earthquake of moves if they go. But its all about new managers this season, Ferguson gone the biggest unknown, Mourinho returning, the biggest grin. Last season was decided by Van Persie's surprise move to United. Fergies side, of course, famously lost the league on goal difference in 2011-12 with 89 pts and +56 to City's +64 and so needed ten more goals, and won the following year with the same 89 points but just +43, but Man City just +32, .halved in a year. You have to have the Blue Chip striker to win the Premier League. City didn't go hard enough for him. It's the toughest year for many to call who will win the Premier League. The pressure on Moyes to win something early will be huge, United buying a hybrid of Ferguson somewhat questionable. Man City are on their 36th manager since the war, Manuel Pellegrini, Chelsea their 30th, but 8 since Jose was last at the Bridge. Last year I thought City would defend it but I really don't think I'm close to placing a bet on who will win the Premier League this year. ===My Champions=== =Chelsea= ===Bookies Odds to Win=== 11/5 Chelsea 9/4 Man united 9/4 Man City 11/1 Arsenal === The Top 4=== Man United are as strong as they were last year but it takes that United way to win the league. Will this lot just back off a bit without the threat of a hairdryer? Moyes has clearly stayed at Everton as long as he did to get the United job Ferguson had promised him, a bit like Kate Middleton and Prince William. But now the ring is on the finger and nappies to change Moyes has to deliver. The Charity Shield may be it as he will not be given time. RVP will bring the goals and Chico ready to move alongside. It is time to sell Rooney and gets some hard cash back as he is not the same player fitness wise. He smokes and drinks and it's catching up with him. If he stays his relationship will soon breakdown with Moyes, a man he sued ten years ago. Get rid and bring in midfield quality with that twenty or so million is the option for me. Moyes has yet to buy. Chelsea could steel second or even top place as the addition of Hazzard and Mata with Loius in midfield last season means they don't need the blue chip striker, Andre Schrulle coming in that hope. They look the best team on paper. Getting rid of Torres is a must as he is simply not the same player he was and never will be. Marko Van Grinkel should compliment their midfield. Chelsea has bought but no real sign they are Jose type players. If the sign the right big money striker they could win the league under Jose. I do think Jose has lost his magic and he wont be worth the bounce he was but Chelsea have a ton of quality and the team going in the right way again. Without Morinhio they have been in the 70 point London club with Arsenal and Spurs, the City of Manchester the kings right now. They are surprise favorites though. Man City didn't buy well last season and so lost the championship by Christmas. They have the players but they didn't fire consistently. In fact they have too many good players and that means trouble on the bench, more coming in, Navas and Fernandinhio the latest. Lescott missing out was crazy and why buy a bench player like Sinclair if you won't even put him on the bench? They can win the title but a new and inexperienced manager won't deliver, Mancini rather unlucky to be fired last season. Negrado is the Spanish manager's luxury pick striker, in for Tevez and so, at least, he will speak the lingo. 125 goals in 284 games in Spain is eye catching. Jovetic is their other new centre-forward signing, over priced at 22 million. We all love Arsenal for the way we play but equally love sniggering when they have one of those dreadful runs. Van Persie seemed a big loss but he only cost them three points in the end, squeezing into the Champions League a massive boost for Wenger as it meant Spurs missed out and so Bale wants to leave. No Bale, no Spurs challenge for 4th place this season. Walcott stepped up last season and Corzula a revelation. But the defense remains unstable and mix and match and a top quality back four are needed to get into the 80 point bracket. Girould could come on this year but he needs an out - and - out finisher of quality alongside. Suarez has run out of options on the Arsenal move and so we await that striker. Its looks like 4th again, 4/6 to achieve that. Liverpool have been proactive and signed Aspas for big money, but not the new Suarez, hopefully the vulgar Uruguayan on his way but that now looking unlikely as the big money bid isn't out there. As good as he is, he has only played 67% of Liverpool league games because of bans so time to go. Sturridge gels with Cortinhio zinging in quality ball and they may take that 5th spot, but Liverpool a long way off 70 points with their defense and midfield. Kolo Toure and Simon Minolet are the type of player they are bringing in now as the spending is cut. Lois Alberto was a bit player at Barcelona and looks a cast off to me. Spurs without Bale are like tanks without tracks. He is the reason they finished fifth. It looks like he wants to go to Madrid. Solado has come in up front and Paulinho, Capoue and Chadli seemingly Bales replacements. They had a massive sale over the summer with 18 guys leaving or sacked, perhaps to fund a new stadium down the line, guys going including Gallas, Huddlestone, Caulker, Dempsey and forgotten man Bentley. Yes they will be top six but no more than that. You need a world class attacking player to be top four in the Prem. Everton without Moyes will probably get a good start, notorious slow starters. Martinez maybe over-rated but the football will be good, ten players in and ten players out so far, bringing with him the exciting Kone and club captain Alcaraz. But can he hold on to his best players as Moyes presses the speed dial? Fellini stays and Baines waits for Fergies call. Swansea have bought well and Bony impressive pre season alongside Michu. If you want a crazy Each/Way on Premier League top scorer behind RVP then Michu is 66/1(top 4 places). ===Bookies Top Scorer Odds=== Van Persie 4/1 Aguero 8/1 Bale 14/1 Bentake 16/1 Negrado 16/1 Relegation wise you have to include new boys Crystal Palace and Hull City. I think Cardiff are more serious and will stay up. Fulham and WBA have work to do and Lukaka going back to Chelsea puts the pressure on the West Midlands team for goals. I think Norwich have bought there way out of trouble with their new strike force and my handicap bet at +40 (to finish within 40 points of the winners). Stoke City seem to have lived the Premiership and Cup dream and ready to fall now Pulis has gone and Southampton having a rocky time of it to. Sunderland's Di Cannio bounce was brief and they will be right in the mire. ===My Tips To Go== Hull city Crystal Palace Stoke ===Bookies Odds To go=== Crystal Palace 8/15 Hull City 4/5 Cardiff City 13/10 Norwich city 2/1 Stoke City 10/3
For most of you this will be a boring, dull, tedious and lifeless piece of writing but for those like me who bulk buy hundreds of blank discs each year (or month) and pretty much burn them faster than you would on a bonfire, getting the right blank media is a very important task. As a DJ i often burn mixes i did at home to play on the night, DVD's filled with folders of music, mix tapes, back ups and even word documents with lists of what song is on what CD... it gets frustrating then, to have rubbish discs, so here is my guide to buying some good ones. I have already reviewed a fair few blank discs and am still continuing to so, so please take a look if you're still unsure after reading this. @ Work Out what you want from a disc @ Do you want to burn media like movies and music? Do you want to just burn 10mb of word documents? if you just want to burn documents you just want some cheap CD-R's and done with it, but for DJ's burning music you dont want CD's that skip, have rubbish sound quality, or stop working completely after lightly brushing them leaving the worlds smallest scratch... >> DURABILITY << TUFF DISC is a brand that has been around for a number of years if you want durability. >> PHOTO'S/PRECIOUS DATA << DATAWRITE is a brand that i have known to give excellent buffering, and have never lost or corrupted data. >> AUDIO << RIDISC is a brand which is classed as a AAA+ Burning quality and has given me uncompromised sound quality, even on 64KBPS mp3. >> AUDIO & VIDEO << SONY is a brand which offers high quality audio playback like RiDisc but actually offers very high quality and high FPS video playback too. >> GOOD VALUE & DOCUMENTS << TESCO offer the cheapest CD-R's i've ever seen. the sound quality is poor and audio skips regularly, video playback is not good. Ideal though for cheap throw away discs and documents (which are not that important if they corrupt that is) @ A brief explanation of the +R -R ±R and RW formats @ +R DVD's are simply a write-once optical format with 4.7 GB of storage, used for non-volatile data storage or video applications. -R DVD's and CD's are the generally accepted format by most DVD players and Pioneer did make a dual layer version in 2005 although the original discs came about in 1997 and hold 4.7GB of data. ±R and the ± symbol (plus or minus) is generally seen on spec lists and not on DVD/CD's and means the player can play both plus or minus type discs. +, -, or ± RW Means the disc can be written over again and again although they do break eventually. Say if you don't want to keep buying discs you can burn then burn over the top later. These discs are much more expensive and if you are permanently burning photos or CD's its best NOT to choose RW format. @ Disc Properties @ Choosing the amount of space is crucial for cramming lots of data onto a disc. For the odd document however, don't waste your money! CD-R - Good for: Documents, mp3, music discs, small stuff 700MB - 80 MINS - CHEAPEST DVD±R - Good for: movies, large files, lots of documents (thousands), MP3's, MP4's, Large data, software 4.7GB - 120 MINS - CHEAP CD-RW Good for: See CD-R and Burn over and over to the same disc SEE CD-R - AVERAGE DVD-RW - Good for: see DVD-R + Burn over and over SEE DVD-R - PRICEY HD-DVD - Good for: HD Movies, vast number of documents and data 8-12GB - EXPENSIVE Blu Ray - Good for: HD Movies, colossal number of documents, MP3's, most other media files 25 - 50 GB - INSANELY EXPENSIVE The most common tubs available for each of these discs are 5, 10, 25, 50, 100 (You are unlikely to find 50 or 100 Blu-ray's though since you are looking at hundreds of pounds here.) Drop me a dooyoo mail if you ever want to know about blank media, what is the cheapest and what you need etc, im happy to help. I know where you can get dirt cheap discs and very high quality ones. Thanks for reading.
How wonderfully useful is *this* category?!?!? "That Play What I Wrote" - currently touring in the UK ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------- Do you like scary movies? Nope? Well, how about funny plays? And, the funniest play showing in Manchester at the moment is the wonderfully ungrammatical ?That Play What I Wrote?. We went to see it at the Lowry earlier this week, and I have to say, I?ve not laughed that hard in ages. The play is novel in that every performance comes with a ?famous? guest star. In the past these have included everyone from Roger Moore to Liam Neeson to Helen Hunt and Jeff Goldblum, and I was eager to find out who ours would be. However, I was a tad disappointed, I have to say, when they brought our some random bloke from Corrie. I know a few of the cast, but he?s not one I?ve ever met, and I forgot the name almost immediately. The other three actors, Sean Foley, Hamish McColl and Toby Jones are semi-well known, the first two being a well-respected double act in real life, and the latter the voice of Dobby in Harry Potter among other things. The play is set in the UK (or, according to other reviews, whichever country it?s being performed in), and tells the tale of a double act who aren?t doing too badly on the comedy circuit. One has higher aspirations, though, and has been writing his own plays for years. His latest is, in his own eyes anyway, a masterpiece just waiting to be signed, and with this in mind he wants to quit the double act and start getting his own stuff out there. To try and stop him, his partner comes up with all sorts of lies and stretched-truths, with varying degrees of success. The play is in two halves, split, naturally enough, by an interval. In the first the couple argue and laugh and joke and sing, helped along at times by a third actor who plays a selection of different ch aracters, male and, being comedy, female, depending on what part of the tale they?re at. After the break the guest star comes out, and they all put on the new play written by duo member number 2. I?m too young to remember Morcambe and Wise, on whom a lot of the play, and the jokes themselves are based, but I still laughed non-stop for the entire performance. Knowing the duo and their style could have done nothing but make it even funnier. The comedy is a mixture of slapstick, physical humour, silly costumes and mad songs, and had the entire audience roaring in their seats ? quite a feat given the fact that I was by far the youngest person there, and my mother the second. Something that can appeal to 21 year olds and the 70 years olds making up most of the audience has to be a winner. The jokes aren?t (usually) rude, and none are obscene as Bottom can be ? they?re more current affairs / general knowledge based (one about Venus and Serena Williams for example), but general enough for most people to get. Sit in the front row of the stalls if you fancy leaving with a rubber duck. Otherwise sit anywhere- it?s comedy so you don?t need to see their feet (the reason I prefer front row circle seats for ballets), and almost any seat in any theatre will leave you satisfied. It?s well staged, with fantastic props and scenery (especially the topiary in the garden scene), and they move around a lot too, so no-one ends up missing out. It came across as being polished, well rehearsed and perfectly timed. In comparison with the other shows I saw in the previous 7 days (Coppelia and Fosse ? I was having a bit of a theatre week) it was outstanding. It?s not a serious show by any means. It?s humour all the way, and some of this can be childish pantomime style, but when combined with their OTT acting, dancing and singing, and intertwined with some side splitting jokes, they carry it off.. If the tour comes to a theatre near you, I?d certainly recomme nd a trip, and I think young teenagers upwards would enjoy it. It was definitely the best £10 I?ve spent at the theatre recently. http://www.theplaywhatiwrote.com/
Channel 4 have covering test, one day infact anything to do with cricket for a long time now but it has only just come to my attention what a great job they have done of it. I can rember me moaning to my dad about how bad the coverage would be with channel four as they had adverts and had never done any sport coverage before, but I would rather stay with channel 4 than to go back to the good old BBC. I realized how used I had become of channel 4s coverage while watching a recent England match, there was a close dissection did he edge it or not, my intional instinct was to shout at the television ‘show us on the sincomerter’. Now lets go back to the days when the BBC were converging the cricket, the same decision but instead of watching the jagged lines of the sincometer showing me a definite edge I would have been squinting at the screen trying to see if the ball moved when it went past the batsman. Now I know what you are thinking the BCC would have the same technology as channel 4 by now, but as rember it was pity much as soon as channel 4 got the rights when we were introduced to the sincometer, the red line for lbw decisions and other such quirks. Adverts, yes well they are always going to be a pain the backside and you will just have to live with it. But I must say that channel 4 have done a very good job with them they are not that frequent just at the end of the odd over at which point not much action happens anyway and whenever a wicket falls, these are the most annoying of the 2 as you want to see a replay of the wicket but it is only one advert that does not always finish. So I feel that channel 4 have got round the problem very well indeed. Simon Huges and his analyzing, I rember back in the early days of channel 4s coverage criticizing it, however now I find that I rather look forward to hearing it. He does a very good job explaining the Aussy tactics against Mike Atherton and Alex Stewart using wagon whiles showi ng where the batsmen are finding it hard to score runs. Using the outline of a batsman and stumps and then placing different colored dots on the screen to show where the ball has been bowled in comparison to the batsman and how well they have scored off it. And drawing all over a shot played by the batsman with a white pen explaining as they draw in great detail. I feel that channel 4 have done the impossible made what I must admit to an unpopular sport into one that is watched in most homes during the summer from their highlights of the test match to the Saturday road show channel 4 have excelled and I think that the deserve a pad on the back, well done channel 4 and keep up the good work.
C4 cricket has moved the game out of the Jurassic era on TV to a polished product of innovation and exceptability to cricket fans and sports fans just looking to keep up with England in the big matches. Floppy fringed public school boy Mark Nicholas fronts the show in the summer and winter and looks at home in the sweat and dust of India and the old Empire echo’s. This time around though to save money they are taking Sky and Indian TV pictures along with the subsequent commentators. Dermot Reeve who usually does the summer schedule is left at home in front of a mirror somewhere, Nicholas simply does an intro and a rap up with the mic on the field whilst his main job is writing for The Telegraph where he does an excellent piece. The main problem for cricket fans without satellite is the ridiculous scheduling of the highlights show on Channel Four.It just gets later and later as we near Christmas with the current slot being 12-45 am!. Now the majority of lovers of leather on willow (cricketwise!) are aged 55 and over so the teeth are long since plonk plonk fizzing in the Steridnet. Its England’s thirteenth Test Match this year and its wasn’t unlucky for some as captain Nasser Hussein won his second successive toss. And like the first win on the spin, he chose to bat as England opened the show for the third time in a row. And like those innings, we got off to a very nice start before getting the wobbles around 200.Even the mighty Trescothick failed with the blade as Michael Vaughn was this time the driving force. But he was bizarrely out handling the ball playing wicket keeper in front of the stumps. Its only the seventh time in Test history with Gouch in 93 being the only other for England to be out this way. Six of those seven have been in the last twenty years with four in the last 8 years, which suggests that the sportsmanship that this great game was built on is all but gone. Hilditch of Austral ia was actually at the wrong end when he was handled out.Vaughn could have appealed to Ganguly their captain if he thought he had handled the ball deliberately or not. The slow motion suggests that the Yorkshire batsmen patted the ball to the ground in anticipation of the ball spinning back to the stumps between his gate. But no blood was spared in the appeal that it was merely a batsman courteously passing the ball to the keeper as the umpire greeted the lazy appeal with the finger, which i assume Vaughn passed onto short leg. The bonehead Flintoff quickly blasted one straight to the fielder to secure the batting stutter with Ramps making it three out in twenty balls with a shocking decision for a workman like 50. Only messing around with floodlights and worsening gloom spoilt the day as the match referees again mucked around with match starts because of Indian dew. Why we need floodlights at Test Matches i will never know. And its also a mystery why Flintoff who has failed miserably with the bat and was again put in ahead of Craig White.The Yorkshire blade revels in the sub continent challenge where as the ruddy cheeked Lancashire slogger always pi***es on the fireworks. But if we can recover some more from our indifferent 267-6 then it could yet be a winning last test for the ever improving captain Hussein and England.I wasn’t his biggest fan we he took over and now im beginning to see why he’s highly rated. Not many leaders can take a sub standard team of youngsters and pros and do so well without something up top. 1am start for the second days coverage, why can’t they stick it on after Countdown or something. They are more likely to get viewers and ad revenue from silly loan companies and Stenna chairlifts than the 0898 in the early hours. Its not only the stairs they can’t get it up you know. England looked on for four hundred with Foster going well until the ever improving cocky keep er got out which curtailed the innings with the last two wickets quickly following. India trudged to 89-3 by the closes England persisted with the leg sideline against Tendulkar and co. At 22-2 it look like the thrustrating ploy was working. But it didn’t take long for the brilliant Sachin to smash the green spinners around a bit with Nasser and Tendulkar exchanging words,as well as batting tips. But if we can start on the ball first thing tomorrow with a tight line then this test ain’t over as i think the top is going to crumble for the team batting last. One match all in the series would be a fair reward for Hussein’s gutsy leadership. Day three and the slot is lost to C4 early hors schedule hidden between a tack Hollywood drama and those brilliant short films no one ever watches. Mark Nicholas fringe is slightly limp like his tender wrist though as its been raining, yes raining in India. Only forty odd overs were possible as the Asians crawled to 218-7, still a hundred odd behind. Even Tendukar failed to impress with only ninety off the bat. Senghori who was the one banned in South Africa that caused a lot of the trouble here made a glorious 60 odd to show exactly why the Indians were desperate to play him unofficially. If the boys can eek out the last three for twenty or so then England can still win this test match on what is beginning to look more like a seamers pitch. India are playing three spinners which means we could really clobber them to set up a three hundred plus survival job for them on the last day of the series. But rain could yet ease India to a draw and a series win that England have won the percentage of sessions inThe players don’t want to be talking about the weather to any suspicious Indian characters who want to know their thought s on it!. Even less time available today as this one ends up a damp squib of a draw. We had just enough time to knock them over a nd add some quick ones. With 38-0 on the board and a lead of 136 going into the final day our extremely hard work and lack of luck with the weather will cost us the series. If we do get a full day tomorrow and crash it around a bit then we may get two sessions at them around the bat. If this was a five test series it would be in the bag. Alex Stewart is talking about offering his services in the one dayers after the New Year.Im a big fan of Alec but im afraid you can do one as you have let your country down like others and you are running scared from bookies. If you’re innocent of match fixing charges then why are you afraid to go to the sub continent from day one. Iron Bottom (Ian Botham) got drunk again in an strictly no drinking province last week!,now that didn’t make the papers so he’s defiantly getting old and has been. No highlights on Channel Four as the final day was washed out. A soogy draw was a cop out, as England really deserved to tie this series with some gutsy cricket and captaincy. It turned out to be England versus Tendulkar and their wily spinners with England yet again battling hard in the heat of the sub continent.
Please could somebody tell me why Pakistans fans were allowed in to the last two games after the absolute fiasco against England its always the same one set of rules for english sports teams and another for the rest of the world you see just take a look at galatasary supporters murdering english fans and still in euro compation on more than one occasion but english make a noise outside a pub abroad and they are hit with batons and shot at and soaked we need to be tougher on our sporting neighbours fans and sports associations need to investigate this seemingly bias view towards the english fans of all sports. Cricket has and should remain a Gentlemans game and should not be getting a yob following we should not need high fences armed police and stewards by the thousands but if this is not dealt with harshly now it will turn out like being in prison to go support your teams whatever sport it may be and remember you still pay for the pleasure i hope it is sorted out soon and the above actions are not required
Channel four has taken cricket to a new dimension. On the BBC cricket 'was' boring. Only those who were really interested in the game would watch. Everything was straight forward. You watched the match through the camera, there were different angles, but it was pretty much straight forward. Sky television added a little life to criket, but not everyone has Sky sports, so not all of us can watch cricket on Sky. Chanel 4 recently took over the rights to show cricket matches. Channel 4 wanted to make cricket more interesting. Cricket is an interesting sport. I have been watching cricket from quite a young age, both one day internationals ad test matches. Test matches can be boring because they do drag on, but channel 4 has madecricket altogether a little more interesting. It has added more colour to the game in a way. The commentry, camera angles, and added accessorries have made it more interesting to watch. Channel 4's intention,I think was to get more young people in to the game. Cricket to many young people is an older persons game. BUT cricket is for everyone, and channel 4 should continue makin improvements so that more young people become interested in the game.
This is the time when Channel 4 really have to prove themselves to see if their coverage is up to scratch. In y opinion it is, but with the Ashes coming up in July, time will tell.... Channel 4 have used a lot of modern, technological equipment to supplement their coverage, which has made it very clever and gives you a chance to see for yourself, whether the decisions that the umpires are aming, are correct or not. Sky also have "clever cams" like the Snickometer and Hawkeye, the main camera angles and graphic pictures, showing you what is going on, and the movements of the batsmen, and whether lbw decisions are correct. However, with Sky, you have to oay for this, and as you get Channel 4 for free, it gives us, the viewers, the better deal, and would make it a prefernce over Sky's coverage. Channel 4 don't make their coverage too hi-tech and over the top, and they try to recuce the boredom of watching crcicket, by changing characters, seeing what people thinl, analysing what is going on, and showing facts and figures. These are nice touches, showing that their coverage is very in-depth, and they don't run out of things to show. However, with all these advantages, there are some disadvantages. One major one is the fact that every so often, they take sudden advertisement breaks, and we don;t knwo what has happened, which is just like Sky's coverage. Sometimes, they do keep it on for a long time, and if there is nothing happening, they go for some ads, but other times, they do it at the most inconvenient of times, and we don;t get to see what is going on. Also, there needs to be some fresh faces in the presneting team and the commentary team. Mark Nicholas holds things up well, and is a very knowledgable and interesting presenter, but the analysts alongside him, and the commenating tem, really need to be changed. Richie Benaud does his best, but they do need to give other commentators a go. Imr an Khan and Ian Bishop are there a lot of the time, but most of the time, they don't know what to say, and they repeat themselves. Perhaps, if they got some people from Sky, or pick up people from other cricket coverage providers, it would be better all round. Overall, the Chanel 4 coverage is very in-depth, and there are always lots of talking points, which are nicely backed up by the clever"hi-tech" advances that they have.
So, here we are coming up to the fifth and final test between England and the West Indies. And though England are teetering on their first series win against the West Indies since 1969, the most successful thing this Summer has been Channel 4's cricket coverage. Mark Nicholas is the consumate presenter and the commentry team are top notch, perhaps the most interesting being Michael Slater and Dermot Reeve, two relative newcomers to the microphone. My only criticism is that the director had the chance of not giving Richie Benault a contract when the BBC coverage ended, but instead they had to include him, which is a shame. Channel 4's technological improvements to the coverage have been very refreshing, particularly the exiting new camera angles and the snick-ometer, and they certainly enhance the viewing. Also Simon Hughes is extremely interesting and could be used more. Perhaps the worst thing about the Channel 4 coverage is that it has to include adverts, but I suppose they are a necessary evil, and you'd get them on Sky anyway. All in all Channel 4 cricket coverage is a comprehensive package and, with the inclusion of the excellent Cricket Roadshow on a Saturday morning and their superb website at www.cricket4.com, their coverage is top notch. Let's only hope ITV can do as well with Match of the Day when they get it next year.
I think that the coverage of cricket on channel 4 has got a lot better. I think this is because they have lots of new camara angles which does interest people a loy more. The other thing i have found interesting is that the show all the latest technology out like the Snickometer and the new Hawk-eye which shows if umpires are making the right decisions and with these people get more interested in the game which can't be that bad. The things i think are bad are the breaks they randomely take in the match which is annoying and sometimes they stop showing the cricket and go to horse racing which i find appalling if they sort this out the coverage would be outstanding. I think they also need to bring in new commentators because i am sick of the same boring old sounds of Benued and Kahn who just ramble on about nothing. So overall there coverage ha got a lot better but they still have a long way to go
What can I say about Channel four's coverage. I was disappointed when 4 got the coverage a while back but i have been made to eat my words... The hawk-eye is amazing. It shows the umpires, in the previous test...which England won...by an innings...and more runs....how gppd they are.The hawkeye (if you dont know) is a 3d image generator with 6 cameras positioned around the ground...show the path of the ball after it has collided with the batsmen....the batsman is vanished from the picture and the ball is digitally imposed. From there, it shows whether the ball would of hit the stumps or not. Aswell as the hawkeye...there is the snickometer... this was another first. A camera, with an oscilloscope reader, can read whether the ball has hit the bat, pads or any other necessary part of the batsman. Quite amazing. Not to mention the redzone.... WELL DONE CHANNEL FOUR> Id just like to point out that since channel four have been covering the cricket tests and one day internationals.....ENGLAND HAVE BEEN WINNING......... THEY ARE DOING WELL...AND I LIKE IT THAT WAY
The decision to award coverage to channel 4 a couple of years ago could have been disaster, however the channel 4 coverage of the cricket has been a revelation. We have been seen many technical advancements such as snick-o-meter and the detailed analysis provided Simon Hughes. But the most attractive thing about the channel 4s’ coverage has been the way that they have managed to refresh the way cricket is presented and broadcasted. The fact that channel 4 have presented an additional cricket roadshow programme, I feel has successfully exposed the great game to a wider audience. Over the last year Cricket coverage worldwide has changed to the same model as that of channel 4 proving that channel 4 cricket coverage have been successful.
Channel 4's coverage of England tests surely have to be the best sports shows on TV. I'm not even a big cricket fan but since channel 4 have been broadcasting I have regularly watching cricket and I have found it very interesting. Everything is done in such great detail that a new comer to the sport can learn lots just from watching for a little while. The jargon busting section is particularly useful I think. Mark Nicholas is a great presenter who rarely makes mistakes and is very professional throughout even though as far as I am aware he hasn't had a great deal of experience on TV. He really shines through when rain has forced play to stop, he always keeps things rolling and never loses my attention so I find myself still staying tuned even when there isn't any play. The analyst, Simon Hughes, comes up with small but relevant details about batting or bowling and how anybody can notice these things is just beyond me. Channel 4 have certainly recruited the right people for their coverage. I sincerly hope that Channel 4 continues to broadcast test matches, for me they have certainly brought new life to what I used to think of as a dull sport. I'm sure a lot of other viewers agree.
when channel 4 bought the rights to show england's home test matches, i thought that it would be the end of good cricket coverage on terrestrial tv. as it turns out, i was wrong. c4 have brilliant coverage. although i didn't think so the first time, the adverts create a break in the coverage, and make it easier to digest as it where. C4 are also the creators of the lbw camera, where it super-imposes the wickets behind the player. All of this makes for good viewing, and so my hat goes off to C4. long may this good coverage continue...
I have been impressed throughout the summer with Channel 4's competant and interesting coverage of cricket. At first I was very disappointed that Channel 4 had got Test Match TV rights from the BBC. I had always grown up with BBC coverage, and wasn't expecting too much from the new boys. I've been pleasantly surprised. First of all they have brought over the best thing about the BBC coverage - Richie Benaud. Professional as ever Benaud has helped establish the credibility of the broadcast team. Thankfully not everyone was brought over from the BBC. Instead of Jack Bannister's predictable calls of "That might be out... and is" you get more thoughtful comments from the likes of Dermot Reeve and Simon Hughes. Add-in the always intelligent presentation of Mark Nicholas and you get an excellent show. For me Nicholas is superb, combining his own comments with an ability to bring in other commentators and guests. Okay, I'm biased in liking Nicholas as he captained my old home county of Hampshire for a long period of time, but couldn't anyone be better than Tony Lewis and the old BBC cronies? On the down side there are advertisements, but thankfully they are never at the expense of the coverage, and so are only a minor irritant.