Putting the analysis back into cricket

During the lunch break on day two of the Kolkata Test, Rahul Dravid and Simon Hughes, Middlesex cricketer and award-winning cricket analyst, conducted an educative and enthralling discussion on countering reverse swing. Using their access to the ground during the break, and Hawk-Eye to simulate Jimmy Anderson's bowling, Hughes explained the science of reverse swing, and Dravid demonstrated the art of playing it. Anderson had dismissed Sachin Tendulkar, Virat Kohli and R Ashwin the previous day, eventually picking up six wickets in the Test.

That ten-minute stint on live television took hours of planning, as Hughes and the producers reviewed the footage after stumps on day one, discussed what they would present during the lunch break the next day and used their dedicated Hawk-Eye set-up to analyse the trajectory of Anderson's deliveries. Hughes put his incredible memory to good use as he talked over the pictures of the bowlers' spell without a monitor, and Dravid, who has plenty of experience facing Anderson, followed it up using a bat to explain the best approach to playing the bowler, over Hawk-Eye generated pictures that were superimposed on the Eden Gardens wicket. "The more our talent engages with technology, the more effective and entertaining it is for the viewer," believes Huw Bevan, ESPN Star's senior vice president (production).

As far as cricket analysis goes, it was one of the high points of the series. It was the perfect example of the kind of material that is possible when a broadcaster makes the effort to go beyond the usual highlights packages, sponsored segments and studio discussions that had, in recent times, been reduced to fairly hackneyed programming because some broadcasters took the viewer for granted. As someone who has worked with live television, I can testify to the kind of effort that goes into presenting even simple sports bulletins with packages and graphics in the studio. Broadcasting out of the venue is an altogether different challenge, and pulling off what Dravid and Hughes did that day without any noticeable glitches was just remarkable.

The cricket on display from the Indians was utterly forgettable; as were ESPN Star's embarrassing 'Kya India baja payegi angrezon ki band?' promos, but the views and analysis - enhanced greatly by the touchscreen graphics - from the network's panel of experts were of high quality. The banter between Sourav Ganguly and Dravid on run-outs that culminated in a light-hearted apology from the former to the latter for running him out five times was another memorable moment. As two of the most recently retired members of the Indian team to take to commentary, their insights are fresh and their perspective current.

Test cricket lends itself to detailed analysis and reflecting at length on several nuances of the game, and the network made the most of the opportunity. This quality is possible only because Rupert Murdoch's Star Group, that bagged the media rights earlier this year for all of India's home matches and domestic competitions, excluding the IPL, for Rs 3,851 crore, or Rs 40 crore (400 million) per match, is not paying lip service to their claim of making the broadcast a class apart from the competition.

Compare this to the shows produced by Nimbus on Neo Cricket from 2006-2012, for India's home matches, and the contrast is telling. Not entirely focussed on presenting serious cricket analysis, Neo Cricket attempted a chutnification of sorts - some serious, some fun and some glamour.  This often resulted in studio discussions that were average, spot interviews from the ground that did little justice to the talent of the interviewee and more to reveal the ignorance of the interviewer. There was not much to distinguish one day from the next, when it came to the studio shows and ground reporting, because the network was low on innovative ideas and not particularly adventurous in its use of technology. Nimbus, which defaulted in its payments to the BCCI, was eventually shown the door.

Host broadcasters and even news channels believe that different formats of the game require different approaches. So one can have more fun with the analysis shows for Twenty20 cricket and the IPL, whereas Test and one-day cricket require more serious analysis. Fair enough, but since when did "making it fun" become about trivialising the cricket quotient? Right about the time that Sony Entertainment Television (India), now Multi Screen Media, bagged the rights to all ICC events from 2002 to 2007. And then won the IPL rights for ten years in 2008.

I was at the press conference in 2003 when SET Max unveiled the new and improved version of Extraaa Innings - contrary to popular perception, Extraaa Innings began during the 2002 Champions Trophy, with one-time VJ Ruby Bhatia as the glam factor - led by the team of presenters and experts at an opulent launch. The sizeable media contingent present on the day were among the first ones to get a sense of the possible impact Mandira Bedi's sari blouses would have on the nation in the days to follow. When I posed a question about how the cricket purist would receive this dilution of cricket analysis, the tetchy response made a mention of Galileo being scoffed at when he said the earth revolved around the sun. Apparently, this was an idea whose time had come.

And maybe it had. By all accounts, Extraaa Innings, since the 2003 World Cup, has successfully managed to draw in female viewership that is increasing year on year. But my strong objection to this type of cricket coverage is the sweeping generalisation that women are only interested in cricket when it is dumbed down and glamourised for them. Followed by another sweeping generalisation about what the man in Meerut wants to watch. It's all about the LCD (lowest common denominator), I'm told.

The ratings for IPL 5 were apparently three times that of any cricket wrap-up show (on rival networks) according to Neeraj Vyas, executive vice president of Max, but clearly people like me are not their target audience. I cannot bring myself to watch even ten minutes of Extraaa Innings with its garish set, imported cheerleaders, Bollywood-type dancers, stand-up acts and presenters who know more about Bollywood than they do about cricket, with the exception of Gaurav Kapur.  Plans are afoot to make Extraaa Innings for IPL 6 noisier, busier and consequently more overbearing. This unwelcome trend that began with Extraaa Innings led to the overall dumbing down of cricket analysis across all formats and tournaments in India over the past decade. That has only recently begun to change with ESPN Star.

As a purist, I don't fancy this glamourisation at all, especially when it involves the longer formats of the game. And I really do wonder if television ratings are accurately reflecting the cricket fan's preferences. Maybe, opinion is indeed sharply divided between cricket fans who prefer serious analysis and those who want their masala.

I grew up listening to Richie Benaud and Geoffrey Boycott, I'm not the biggest T20 or IPL fan around, and I'd much rather invest my time in a Test series where I spend hours watching replays and tuning in to all the analysis if I can't be at the ground. I'll take a lesson on reverse swing over hip-swinging cheerleaders any day.