If the relationship between sport and politics is a strained but unavoidable one, it can seem like familial bliss when sports and ‘business’ lock horns. It’s not always the case, and politicians notoriously have their own agendas when they embroil themselves in sporting issues, but generally they want the best for the sport. Or think they do.
When businessmen (and it is usually men) put on their hard hats they are interested only in the bucks and the bottom line. Sport becomes a commodity to be traded in the most profitable deal, almost exclusively with a short-term outlook. Throw in a dash of big ego, a lack of common sense and you end with a proper mess.
It may be the reason the majority of South Africans won’t be able to watch or listen to one of the most important tours the Proteas host, the one which keeps Cricket South Africa financially afloat every four years. And unless there is a last-minute rescue act, it also means that the vast majority of cricket loving South Africans won’t have seen the Proteas on TV in a bilateral series since the end of March.
“In view of the significant audience the SABC enjoys, which meets CSA’s aim of growing cricket across all sectors of South African society, CSA was eager to ensure that the India tour was available on free-to-air TV,” said a CSA statement. It contains all the right words except that “aim” should have read “need”.
The CSA statement explains that the organisation has been in “protracted negotiations” for several months with the SABC but was unable to “strike a deal.” The statement further explains that CSA retains “exclusive ownership” of its own broadcast rights “…for the purpose of ensuring that cricket is accessible to the larger South African population.”
By way of explanation for the failure to “strike a deal” the statement says that CSA “finally received” the SABC’s offer for the broadcast rights on November 29. In other words, time was tight with the first T20 International due to be played on December 10. So why did it take CSA another six days to accept the offer? And why does their statement make it sound like that was a good thing?
“CSA responded to the SABC six working days later on 7 December, accepting their offer in totality. Regrettably, hours after CSA’s full acceptance of their offer, the SABC informed CSA that they are unable to broadcast the India tour due to a withdrawal of potential sponsors,” the statement said.
It was remarkable that sponsors were prepared to commit at ten days’ notice. Large corporations plan advertising and sponsorship budgets 12 months ahead. But at two days’ notice the lack of clarity and commitment proved fatal; they had had enough of the uncertainty.
The hardest hit of CSA’s backers is KFC who ‘own’ the T20 International series. They rely more than any other on ‘mass’ exposure to leverage their very considerable contribution to CSA’s income. Asked repeatedly to comment on the saga, their refusal to do so was a result of diplomacy, discretion or rage. The third option is favourite.
If CSA intended to portray the national broadcaster as incompetent, cheapskate and at fault for the failure to get the tour on free-to-air screens, they may be right or wrong. But that isn’t the point, is it? Who needs the relationship more? The SABC has been battling insolvency for years. Most of SA’s population don’t pay their license fees and the corporation is struggling to reinvent itself as a mainstream commercial operation. But it is still CSA’s only avenue to share their pinnacle product with everyone.
“The public broadcaster is aware that Cricket is a loved sport in our country, but with the withdrawal of the sponsors due to the broadcasting rights not being timeously finalised, the SABC was faced with withdrawal or suffering financial losses,” said SABC COO, Ian Plaatjes.
Having spent many years in the doldrums battling for the public’s respect themselves, one might have thought an element of empathy from CSA and a desire to work together in pursuit of a common goal would have been mutually beneficial. But especially so for those supporters who cannot afford, or do not have access to, the excellent production offered by Supersport.
Both CSA and the SABC have left the door open and there is a glimmer of hope that the two Test matches, at Centurion and Newlands starting on December 26 and January 3, might be available for everyone to watch. But it will require generous and patient sponsors and a change of attitude from making the ‘best financial deal’ to making a ‘deal in which nobody loses and everybody gains something.’
One thing I notice from the Indian line-ups for the ODI series is how much of a second or even third or fourth XI it is. This really is the death of international cricket by stealth. For today's (3rd) game there literally isn't a single player who would get into India's first-choice XI in the format, and probably only four or five others who would be anywhere near it.
Meanwhile England and West Indies are playing a T20 series where England have rested a couple of their first-choice players six months before a World Cup in the same country, and Bangladesh (who've done without four or five or their big names for most or all of the last month) are playing a New Zealand 2nd XI...