Kent Live Stream

Looking on the Kent website yesterday it seems that they are charging non members £5.99 to watch the live stream, this I assume covers youtube as well. I suppose the stream costs a bit to put on, but I fear all counties will start charging if this succeeds.

I don’t think Surrey will,don’t need the money that badly!

They don't, but the evidence of the last year is this regime will milk us regardless.

I believe Kent charge the most of all counties for entrance fee and although you can buy online the day before, their day before ends at about 6.00 pm. Must be a different time zone.

They really are money grabbers.

I wonder if the stream will be available via the Surrey website even though they will be using Kent's facilities.

kjb wrote:I believe Kent charge the most of all counties for entrance fee and although you can buy online the day before, their day before ends at about 6.00 pm.  Must be a different time zone.

They really are money grabbers.

I wonder if the stream will be available via the Surrey website even though they will be using Kent's facilities.

No they are not the most expensive, Hampshire and Somerset on the day for the CC last year was £21 and £19 respectively. I've just bought Day 1 ticket for Kent and it's £15 in advance. As a Surrey Member you can also use it for the Frank Woolly Stand as well, generally the best view. You can purchase the next day on the ground or online up to 11.59pm the day before at the £15 price. Also Day 4, if it goes that far, is just a tenner.
Don't know about the live stream but if they are charging You Tube probably won't, if they show it. And they have been showing Sky T20s no fee. I'm not sure you pay for You Tube stuff anyway?

Shame on Kent for not streaming live on YouTube

I think I read that it was an experiment by Kent, possibly on behalf of all counties and possibly just for T20. Logically it should not be available on Youtube for free or that would defeat the point of the experiment. It is supposed to be free to (just Kent?) members.

I hope none of you have paid up, as that would only encourage them. I wouldn't pay to watch Middlesex on the Kent stream, though to be fair that is because I'm not a masochist!

And yet Kent members could watch the Surrey CC and T20 matches courtesy of SCCC.

dougieginn wrote:And yet Kent members could watch the Surrey CC and T20 matches courtesy of SCCC.

As could anyone, member or not.

If Kent is playing the role of guinea pig for all counties in T20, rather than doing it off their own bat, perhaps we shouldn't cry "unfair" when we can't watch for free. The aim is presumably to see whether any additional revenue is sufficient to justify hacking off supporters who are not members of the county but may (at least when they are unhacked off) bring them revenue by actually attending on other occasions. My guess is that the extra revenue will be minimal, precisely because cricket supporters expect free live feeds and will generally object to paying.

Sounds from the Cricinfo report,we wouldn’t have liked what we would have seen.It seems that we dropped 3/4 catches and didn’t field very well,

I don't find a small charge unreasonable for non members as there must be production costs.
The live stream was OK except the scorecard was usually about three balls behind the action, very irritating in a close match. The charge can only be justified where there is a quality stream, the unwatchable stuff we got from Hants recently would not be acceptable.

offdrive4 wrote:I don't find a small charge unreasonable for non members as there must be production costs.
The live stream was OK except the scorecard was usually about three balls behind the action, very irritating in a close match.   The charge can only be justified where there is a quality stream, the unwatchable stuff we got from Hants recently would not be acceptable.

Presenters with a joint IQ in double figures would be nice too. In some cases Chatbot would do a better job, though (as in the US Army simulation) one of them might be tempted to throttle a fallible human presenter, or garotte Gus Fraser for being so gloomy. Chatbot could probably do the umpiring and scoring at the same time bur probably not serve SWC his overpriced lager.

While I see what you mean, it is often argued that the near absence of free-to-air cricket on TV since Sky upped the ante has contributed to the decline of the sport. In the short term the free live streams provide a disincentive to attend, particularly if the weather looks dodgy but in the longer term might people who dip in and out of the streams (but don't attend) be persuaded to give a live match a go? I don't know the answer but trying to recoup costs is not always the solution.

It surprises me that most matches are available free to view on YouTube. The quality of the coverage at most grounds seems to have improved a lot in the last couple of years. I'd be prepared to pay something to watch.