Having a Clear Policy
While never a big fan of Johnny Howard, his one redeeming feature in my eyes was always that he was a cricket tragic, just like me.
When Channel Nine began to stuff around the everyday battler who wanted to watch the 2005 Ashes series but not have to pay for it, JH stepped in and promised us all that we would get it free to air. For all his faults, and they were considerable, he kept his word. When Steve Waugh retired, JH made him Aussie of the year, respecting the achievements of a man who encapsulated the Aussie battler (I'll forgive you for where you put Tugger on your cricketer's list this time Warnie but don't do it again). And maybe some of you will remember the charming conversation between Dizzy and little Johnny in the Nine commentary box a few years back; I forget but I'm thinking it was the Boxing Day Test 2005?).
Now that we have a new leader in OZ I want you to join with me in asking him what his policy is regarding the most important issue on earth. Iraq, Work Choices, and FTAs are all important Mr. Rudd, but please tell us, what are your thoughts on cricket?
PS: Any information on Rudd's disposition to the game of all games would be greatly appreciated.| Posted by TA on Mon 26 Nov |  13 comments |
Yes indeed, Krudd's Kricket Kredentials aren't look 'too smort' as Tony Greig would say...
However, hopefully he'll keep his eye on the ball of OUR economy rather than George Bush's baseball bat, if you get me drift...
p.s. I've just got the security code of LUDWIG - any consequence???
Posted by virtualgaz on 2007-11-26 19:24:32
However, hopefully he'll keep his eye on the ball of OUR economy rather than George Bush's baseball bat, if you get me drift...
p.s. I've just got the security code of LUDWIG - any consequence???
Posted by virtualgaz on 2007-11-26 19:24:32
Apparently Rudd can talk a chinaman OK.
Kim Beazley was Mr. Cricket though, wasn't he?
Posted by sportsfreak on 2007-11-26 19:30:32
Kim Beazley was Mr. Cricket though, wasn't he?
Posted by sportsfreak on 2007-11-26 19:30:32
Actually, Howard had nothing to do with the 2005 Ashes telecast. He did say he'd try and get it on the ABC if needed but in the end, SBS stepped in and ponied up the cash so he didn't have to lift a finger.
Personally, I'm over Howard and was delighted Rudd got in. Mainly cause of two issues important to me - the Iraq war and climate change. I was even going to put in my two cents before the election criticising Howard's dithering on global warming on Skeptical Science but being a typical Australian, I just didn't get around to it (too busy playing and blogging about cricket). And I actually find Howard's schtick on mateship and blokey sportiness representing true Australian behaviour a bit on the nose.
But if you pitted Rudd against Howard in the nets, my money would be on Rudd based on Howard's offspin form.
Posted by JC on 2007-11-26 19:47:25
Personally, I'm over Howard and was delighted Rudd got in. Mainly cause of two issues important to me - the Iraq war and climate change. I was even going to put in my two cents before the election criticising Howard's dithering on global warming on Skeptical Science but being a typical Australian, I just didn't get around to it (too busy playing and blogging about cricket). And I actually find Howard's schtick on mateship and blokey sportiness representing true Australian behaviour a bit on the nose.
But if you pitted Rudd against Howard in the nets, my money would be on Rudd based on Howard's offspin form.
Posted by JC on 2007-11-26 19:47:25
No, "Howard had nothing to do it" is wrong. He did what politicians do: made a noise about it, brought the issue into the public eye, got a lot of people grumpy about it, and eventually got people with no intention of ever getting involved to do everything for him. Amazing stuff. The point is: will Rudd do this for us when push comes to shove?
As for whether you think it is "on the nose" or not, I think history will portrait JH in precisely the same light as the values he espoused while in office. You don't do what Howard did and survive the way he has without being a battler yourself.
Posted by TA on 2007-11-26 20:13:51
As for whether you think it is "on the nose" or not, I think history will portrait JH in precisely the same light as the values he espoused while in office. You don't do what Howard did and survive the way he has without being a battler yourself.
Posted by TA on 2007-11-26 20:13:51
I would think that Kevin would be a big cricket fan. He is after all a Queensland country boy, so I'm sure he played the game in his youth.
There is no Australian who doesn't follow the game as far as I am concerned.
Posted by Russ on 2007-11-26 20:24:20
There is no Australian who doesn't follow the game as far as I am concerned.
Posted by Russ on 2007-11-26 20:24:20
Given KRudd is JH's mini me, you could assume that he is a big fan but I seriously doubt it.
He was captain of the debating team at school not the first XI.
And the reason that ball flew into the pitch a few metres in front of him was because half of it was sticky tape which stuck to his hand.
A better competition would be RJLHawke.
Posted by Hanuman on 2007-11-26 21:50:47
He was captain of the debating team at school not the first XI.
And the reason that ball flew into the pitch a few metres in front of him was because half of it was sticky tape which stuck to his hand.
A better competition would be RJLHawke.
Posted by Hanuman on 2007-11-26 21:50:47
I doubt Rudd will have our backs on Cricket. He doesn't really strike me as a "country boy" for all of his misty, I am a regular joe advertising.
I have just accepted that I am going to have to cough up the money for Foxtel for any overseas games.
Posted by Andrew on 2007-11-26 23:25:18
I have just accepted that I am going to have to cough up the money for Foxtel for any overseas games.
Posted by Andrew on 2007-11-26 23:25:18
I reckon stuff the debate and the worm, why not set up a net session? Johnny can bowl his trevor chappells and krudd will go me to.
On the point of our fantastic TV coverage, nothing irritates me more than when they stop the cricket for the news and that pathetic excuse for a current affairs show. Sure I'm happy for it to be on FTA but it shouldn't be exclusive rights.
Foxtel should be able to also broadcast the games (with less ads), and then when channel 9 go off to the cricket the average punter who wants to see the conclusion to the days play can do so in the pub. My mates and I tried this during Ashes 2006 only to find no coverage available.
---
Oxen Shizer - now with added Shizer
Posted by Moses on 2007-11-26 23:45:05
On the point of our fantastic TV coverage, nothing irritates me more than when they stop the cricket for the news and that pathetic excuse for a current affairs show. Sure I'm happy for it to be on FTA but it shouldn't be exclusive rights.
Foxtel should be able to also broadcast the games (with less ads), and then when channel 9 go off to the cricket the average punter who wants to see the conclusion to the days play can do so in the pub. My mates and I tried this during Ashes 2006 only to find no coverage available.
---
Oxen Shizer - now with added Shizer
Posted by Moses on 2007-11-26 23:45:05
Hmm, a net session during the election campaign - I reckon that could've turned the result either way. Kevin Rudd comes across as a bit of a nerd but that's counteracted by John Howard being 20 years his senior.
Posted by JC on 2007-11-27 09:16:27
Posted by JC on 2007-11-27 09:16:27
Fortunately for us over here in Perth, we rarely have that problem, due to the time difference we have coverage for the whole game, the only disadvantage is that we can't go home at 5 and watch and hour or so of cricket.
I am hoping that with digital TV channels they start using one channel for sports and the other for news and day to day programing that way everyone wins.
Posted by Andrew on 2007-11-27 12:17:13
I am hoping that with digital TV channels they start using one channel for sports and the other for news and day to day programing that way everyone wins.
Posted by Andrew on 2007-11-27 12:17:13
That would be nice if digital TV fixed it, still I can't see why they must have exclusive rights not to show it..
I've got Foxtel and would happily watch coverage without adverts given the option
Posted by Moses on 2007-11-27 17:44:29
I've got Foxtel and would happily watch coverage without adverts given the option
Posted by Moses on 2007-11-27 17:44:29
So would I Mosey, but its all to do with Ad revenue. Cricket would be less valueable if there was an Ad free version on Foxtel.
Posted by Andrew on 2007-11-28 12:00:41
Posted by Andrew on 2007-11-28 12:00:41
I'm not convinced, the PayTV penetration is around 10% I believe, so 90% of punters would still be watching on FTA TV. Foxtel would pay an additional fee for the rights to also show it that should cover the reduction in Channel 9's payment due to it no longer being exclusive.
Even if they made it pay per view I'd be up for that. In the UK I had to buy a series of India vs Australia and it was well worth it.
Posted by Moses on 2007-11-29 14:17:02
Even if they made it pay per view I'd be up for that. In the UK I had to buy a series of India vs Australia and it was well worth it.
Posted by Moses on 2007-11-29 14:17:02
Post New Comment
You need to be logged in to post a comment. If you're new, register here. Existing users, login via the right margin.
