Friday, 24 February 2012

Sofa, so bad - Or...

...why the merger between The Cricketer and Test Match Sofa is wonderful news for them and terrible news for many more



We are barely two months into the new year and already cricket has thrown up enough talking points to last us the whole year. There's been the resurgence of Pakistan, the ongoing decline of India, the increasing likelihood of Sachin Tendulkar ending his career on 99 international hundreds and so many more, yet the most controversial story of all seems to have taken place off of the pitch and indeed nowhere near a stadium or administrators office at all.

I speak, of course, of the purchase of alternative commentary broadcaster Test Match Sofa by fusty old Cricketer magazine. A surprising move, yes, but one which has stirred up a furore that none of those involved could have envisaged.

I should probably declare several interests at this point. Back in September 2008 a well known cricket writer and I conceived the idea for something very similar to Test Match Sofa. Unfortunately this coincided with me starting a new job and him landing a book deal, and nothing came of it. I therefore have nothing but admiration for the people who had the inspiration, time, energy and resources to set up Test Match Sofa and make it work so well.

In addition, I know a number of those involved in the deal. I have played cricket alongside some of the Sofa lot. Andrew Miller, editor of the Cricketer, is someone I have met on several occasions, 100% of which have involved alcohol. The magazine's publication director Andy Afford gave me my first writing job for a cricket magazine (even if he did keep forgetting to credit me). I have no axe to grind with any of them and I am certainly not going to join the chorus of people crying 'kissy kissy sell out' at the parties.

All of which is why I feel so bad that I can only see this merger as a bad thing. I know that it was necessary if the Sofa was to continue and I applaud the Cricketer for reaching out to a younger audience. I know that the Sofa is breaking no laws by what it does (I've done the research, remember) and that the ECB and BBC are making themselves look even more foolish than usual with their bleating about it. And yet to me this deal echoes of nothing but the sound of doors closing.

One of the great pleasures of the past few years has been watching bloggers slowly insinuate themselves into the mainstream media, and this is perhaps more prevalent in sport than in any other sphere of journalism. It has been my delight to see Jarrod Kimber progress from his scabrous, scatological Cricket With Balls site to the pages of Cricinfo and on to the point where the man is now making a film about the decline of Test cricket.

The internet has also presented a wonderful opportunity for women to show that they, too, have a deep knowledge and understanding of sports. In South Africa Ant Sims became one of the nation's leading sports bloggers before most people even realised that she had two x chromosomes and can now be found gracing the pages of no less an institution than Sports Illustrated. Meanwhile, in the UK, Lizzy Ammon – herself a Sofa alumnus - has gone from being a reluctant blogger unsure if she had anything new to say to providing online commentary for The Mirror newspaper. There really is a whole new world of opportunities out there.

Or is there? The problem is that for every blogger who makes these steps, dozens don't. Even after you weed out the ones who lack dedication and/or talent, there are still a substantial number for whom the door is never opened. And with each successful blogger, there is a door shutting behind them to so many others.

Which is why the Cricketer-Sofa deal is a bad thing. Suddenly, a part of the cricket establishment has control over the one opening there is for wannabe cricket broadcasters. At the same time, the magazine has a ready supply of new, enthusiastic freelance writers at its beck and call. Quite where this leaves those who currently commentate but who are already tied to other publications is anyone's guess, but the future for them doesn't look rosy at all.

There will be those who blanche at that last statement, but you don't even have to be as cynical as I am to realise that however much Miller et al might deny it, there is going to come a point where it happens. Some suit with a calculator and a balance sheet is going to become involved. They are going to wonder why the broadcast medium that they paid a six figure sum for isn't sourcing its talent from the people they are already paying. Instead of two breeding grounds for new talent, you get the same old faces revolving in and out, much like the England team of the 1990s.

As a result, the door into cricket broadcasting is shut because it has a new, establishment, doorman and a number of doors into cricket writing are blocked off because someone has put a Sofa across them. However much you love what each organisation does, you can't pretend that this is a good thing.

For possibly the first time ever, I've written something in the hope that I will be proved wrong.

Tuesday, 22 September 2009

Sainsbury's Beer Competition - 1st Quarter Final

Whistle v Bretwalda

One lucky ale had to make it through to the quarter finals on a bye, and Whistle is it. Unfortunately, this is ill-deserved luck, because Whistle is duller than the new Snow Patrol single (which is possibly the dullest piece of music ever committed to memory by anyone). It is so average, so uninspiring and so lacking in flavour, that it is little more than flavoured water, with a touch of alcohol thrown in.

Bretwalda actually improves slightly on the second tasting, but it is still pretty insipid. On this occasion, though, it wins through simply by not being Whistle.

Sunday, 20 September 2009

Sainsbury's Beer Competition - 7th Opening Contest

Shropshire Lass v 80/-

Shropshire Lass is a revelation. Blonde beers usually lack something, a certain depth of flavour or character. But the Lass starts off with a honey, almost toffee-like, flavour that is then undercut by a generous burst of citrussy sharpness.

I had, in truth, expected the 80/- to walk this contest, but in fact the best thing I can say about it is that I didn't get bored of drinking it until the glass was 3/4 empty. It was a perfectly decent shilling ale, but just didn't stand out from the crowd in anyway. As a new beer, it was certainly inferior to Shropshire Lass, which wins by a country mile

Friday, 18 September 2009

Sainsbury's Beer Competition - 6th Opening Contest

Porteresque v Birds & Bees

Porteresque is everything you might want from a porter. Rich, fruity, malty and without the annoying tendency to demand a tip before doing anything meaningful.

Birds & Bees starts out promisingly, with a crisp, fragrant nose and a very clean taste. The problem is that it is simply too light and clean, it has no depth at all and ends up very much like drinking fizzy water.

In the end , Porteresque wins by some distance. And no, it didn't cost me $5 just to say that.

Wednesday, 16 September 2009

Sainsbury's Beer Competition - 5th Opening Contest

Chaos Theory v Woild Moild

OK, now this definitely sounds like a contest from Robot Wars. All we need are Craig Charles, Jonathan Pearce shouting like a deranged toddler and a large number of geeks. Oh, and Julia Reed and Phillipa Forrester in excessively tight leather trousers.

Unfortunately, there's not enough room in here for all of that, so we'll willingly settle for two beers and Mrs Bear in nothing but lingerie.

Beer first, obviously. Woild Moild is just as an old fashioned mild should be - hearty, almost treacly, with a lasting aftertaste.

Chaos Theory is a brute, as you would expect an IPA at 7.1%ABV to be. The problem is that it is almost completely unmemorable, too easy to drink and too lacking in distinguishing flavour.

Victory, therefore, to Woild Moild. I'll leave you to imagine Charles et all. I'm off to attend to Mrs Bear.

Tuesday, 15 September 2009

Sainsbury's Beer Competition - 4th Opening Contest

Taylor's Tipple v Wilson's IPA

Oh dear. After six pretty decent pints, this really was - with apologies to Ben Folds - the battle of who cares less.

Taylor's Tipple was disappointingly average. Nothing but a bog standard bitter, ok to drink but nothing to stand out from the crowd.

The IPA was even blander, with no discernible flavour of either hops, yeast or anything else. It was also a bit sharper than an IPA should be.

Which means that the Tipple wins, but that's really not an achievement at all.

Monday, 14 September 2009

Sainsbury's Beer Competition - 3rd Opening Contest

For the second year, Sainsbury's are having a beer contest. The most popular of 15 selected bottled beers will make it onto their product list.

Now, the Bear loves a contest, so I'm randomly selecting two beers a night and playing them off against one another, until we either have a winner of I die of alcohol poisoning


Bays Breaker v Williams' Ceilidh

This was a genuine Blue Peter moment. I don't normally like lagers, but this was something of a revelation. Rich, complex and with an almost citrussy finish.

Bays Breaker is a perfectly decent bitter. Solid, warming, but with a slightly metallic aftertaste that takes a bit of getting used to. On any other day, this may well have been a winner, but the Ceilidh was too good today.