Gary Lineker being taken off the air from his position as the host of the BBC’s Match of the Day is the story that’s dominating the headlines at the moment. The former England striker, who has been the host of the Premier League highlights programme since 1999, is being punished because he won’t apologise for a tweet in which he likened the language used by ministers of the Tory government in relation to its new policy on asylum seekers to “that used by Germany in the 30s”.
Since then, pretty much every presenter, pundit and commentator has said they won’t work for the BBC this weekend in a display of solidarity with Lineker. This includes his most likely replacement as host Mark Chapman, as well as Ian Wright, Alan Shearer and Alex Scott. This Saturday’s edition of Match of the Day will be broadcast with no presenter or pundits at all, without any of its usual commentators and with no interviews with players or managers. Other BBC shows, such as Football Focus and Final Score, have been pulled from the schedules because they can’t find anyone willing to work on them.
I will be completely honest with you. I would describe myself very much as left leaning, politically, and I despise the Tory government. I don’t feel that it represents me and I find myself not only unable to support them but frequently disgusted by its actions. I wish for a more compassionate government, one that cares more about its ordinary citizens than the rich and privileged and one that doesn’t actively stir hatred. My wish is that it gets removed from power at the next election.
I agree with Gary Lineker’s tweet. When you start using terms like “illegal immigrant” you stop using terms like “human being”. You start to think of asylum seekers like farmyard animals, or worse, vermin that need to be exterminated. These are living, breathing human beings with thoughts, feelings and families. They are not making extremely dangerous crossings of the English Channel in small and inadequate boats to get a free house and benefits over here. Most of them are fleeing a war or horrific regime the like of which that we can’t really comprehend in this country. I find it astounding that the government is looking to simply move the problem elsewhere rather than attempt to find out why these people are risking their lives to get here and making an effort to address those problems. This doesn’t mean put them up in luxury homes.
The uninitiated might be forgiven for thinking that this story is all about a mere football highlights programme on TV and that it doesn’t really matter in the grand scheme of things. But it does matter. In removing Lineker from his position, the BBC are effectively saying that you can’t broadcast on their platform if you say something the government doesn’t agree with. And that’s worrying – you might expect this of Russia or China, but not in Britain.
Remember, Lineker has never used his position as the host of Match of the Day to express his political opinions on the programme itself. Such opinions have always been confined to Twitter. The same Twitter that Alan Sugar has used to share several of his political opinions, a lot of them against the former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, plenty of them against the rail strikes and the relevant union leaders involved with them, and the not exactly impartial “DONT (sic) VOTE LABOUR”. Yet, the old boy is still allowed to wave his finger around as the face of The Apprentice on primetime BBC One. Could it be that he gets a free ride because his opinions are in support of the Tory government? I wonder.
I don’t know where this story will end up, but I do know the BBC have created an entirely avoidable situation. The furore over Lineker’s tweet was just about quietening down when they announced on Friday night that he’d been taken off the air. In doing so, they’ve made quite the rod for their own back. If it makes some people stop and think about what a sorry state this government has brought to country down to, then it might not have been a waste of time.
I’ve got some much needed time off work this week and, not wanting to waste it sitting around at home (though the snow has rather forced my hand on that one for the last couple of days), on Wednesday mum and I decided to go and see the sea.
We ended up in Mundesley, a village I hadn’t been to that often and didn’t know that much about. I knew that a teacher I didn’t like at primary school lived in Mudesley, and I knew that Mundesley was the first place mum and dad took me for an outing after I was born. I don’t remember that, obviously, but I’ve been told about it. I’ve also been to Mundesley with my friend and her dog for a walk.
When we arrived, the village was very quiet indeed, as you might expect in winter with the wind blowing and the temperature hovering just above freezing. Mum and I went to the cafe nearest the car park, where we sat in the window watching a procession of dog walkers heading down and then re-emerging from the ramp that leads to the beach. I had a coffee and a bacon and sausage roll. I’ve become something of a connoiseur of various pig products presented between two slices of bread, as my expanding waistline will attest to – Mundesley’s, for the record, was acceptable. Not the best I’ve ever had, but not too bad.
After the cafe we went for a walk, taking in the Norfolk coast path and the various sights along the way. Mundesley is actually a very interesting village in an architechtual sense – there are a number of old buildings, quite grand in appearance, that I wish I could find out more about.
Look at this building, for instance. I’ve had to get this image from Google Maps as I didn’t take many when I was there (my hands were too cold to hold my phone) but I can tell you that it looks exactly like this now. Empty.
The architecture looks kind of art deco, I would say. It’s attractive, with its curves and big window. Yet it is underused, not being utilised to the extent that I’m sure the people who put it there invisaged.
The research I’ve done suggests that this building, somewhat surprisingly, isn’t listed and that it was once called Bar Victoriana. Judging by its Instagram account, Bar Victoriana marketed itself as a trendy cocktail bar and occasionally had live music. The bar’s website is now dead, but on Facebook it appears to have closed in July 2019, with the promise of a ‘new seafood & grill restauarant’ on the way, which would explain the signs still on the outside. I can’t find anything about what happened afterwards, but I would suspect that the business may have been a victim of the pandemic.
The building as it was in September 2008
Mundesley has plenty of Victorian buildings, probably due to the arrival of the railway (long gone) in that period that turned the village into a holiday resort. Some of them are made out of local stone, given them an unusual appearance, while others are built from the red bricks you would expect of the Victorians.
There are two imposing former hotels in Mundesley that demonstrate its past glory as a Victorian seaside resort. The photo below shows The Grand Hotel, as it was originally known, in around 1960:
From what I’ve been able to find out, the hotel was renamed the Hotel Continental at some point after the Second World War. G. Laird, who took the more recent photo below, remembers three summer holidays in Norfolk during the 1960s and said the Hotel Continental ‘was then a very elegant building and was clearly a popular hotel’.
It would seem the hotel later became apartments.
Old hotels fascinate me – especially abandoned ones. You see, history isn’t about being nerdy and reeling off dates all the time. My interest in history comes from mentally taking a trip into the past and thinking about what the buildings and the places I can see used to do, and of the scores of people that would have used them in a former life. Think about all of the Victorians who would have come to that hotel for their bucket-and-spade holiday. How excited they must have been to be out of the city for a few days. Imagine them, dining in the hotel with a view over the sea. What would they think of it now? A bit run down, a shadow of its former self. That’s what intrigues me about this kind of thing.
The other old hotel in Mundesley is the Manor Hotel. It was built in 1900, so slightly newer than the Hotel Continental, and was – as the name suggests – originally a manor house, converted into a hotel as the tourism industry took off. According to this newspaper article, the hotel ceased trading in December 2019 and a month later was up for sale (for what seemed like quite a reasonable £450,000). Of course, the pandemic was on its way shortly after, bringing with it a complete halt to tourism and leisure activities, so I don’t know what happened after that. The building stands empty, still showing evidence of the business that continued there until 3 years or so ago. Below is a photo I found online of the hotel in the month it closed:
Our walk also took in the impressive All Saints church, which stands alone and imposing on the cliff top. The church has Norman origins, but I learned that it stood virtually in ruins for about a hundred years until being sensitively restored (unusual for the time, I think) between 1899 and 1914 – this coincides with the railway and subsequent tourist trade coming to Mundesley, so they probably felt like they wanted to smarten the place up for all of its new visitors. The church is described in much finer detail than I can manage here.
The church of All Saints, Mundesley
On the wall of the church, we noticed a plaque dedicated to the residents of the London borough of Haringey who had died at Clarence House in Mundesley. We found The Clarence House later on in our walk, and it is a care home in what looks like it might have been another former hotel, but even looking online I can’t find anything about this perculiar dedication to people who came there from the capital. My theory is that some elderly residents of Haringey may have been moved out of bombed-out London to calmer, safer surroundings on the Norfolk coast, but I have no idea if I’m thinking along the right lines. If anyone reading this happens to know more, please do let me know.
Speaking of the war, there is a large amount of evidence of Second World War defences in Mundesley. As well as a few pillboxes, there is a gun emplacement, built in 1940 or 1941. There is a newspaper article here about the community’s efforts to have the gun emplacement protected by Historic England. The gun emplacements are a stark reminder of how worried Britain was during the war about the enemy invading by sea and its extensive efforts to protect the coastline. The guns themselves were removed by 1946, but under the structure remains what would have been an accomodation area complete with bed frames. The future of the gun emplacement is a concern, with the underground section apparently now full of water and coastal erosion bringing the whole thing ever close to the edge of the cliff. I’m not that into war history, but I’d recommend visiting the gun emplacement at Mundesley while you can.
The gun emplacement at Mundesley, pictured in 2016
Part of our walk also took in Sea View Road, an untarmacked street separate from the main road. We found the number of seemingly empty but reasonably well-kept properties along this road odd, eventually concluding that this is probably an area of second homes – rich people, coming from outside Norfolk, who own properties on the coast that they only live in for some parts of the year. It’s a growing point of contention around here, and is already a massive problem in places like Cornwall.
Our walk also took in this old brick kiln, right in the middle of what is now a caravan park and one of Mundesley’s listed buildings, and some evidence of coastal erosion:
With a little help from a bus, we were back where we started and some (very good) chips for lunch brought a lovely little trip to the seaside to an end. I left knowing more about this small village of the North Norfolk coast, and reminded that everywhere has a story to tell if you look hard enough. I urge you to go out there and explore!
Ahh… it’s Valentine’s Day. Love is in the air. As I write this it’s bang on the time that the lovers amongst us are tucking into a love sausage or making the most of a 2 for 1 offer at Pizza Express, but alas not me. I’ve been repellent to women for a whole 30 years now – an impressive record I’m sure you’ll agree.
I don’t think it’s related to being alone on 14th February – God knows I’m used to that – but for some reason a lot of things today are getting right on my nerves. Here’s a few of them.
Hair
If I had a superpower, I wouldn’t want to be able to fly or shoot webs out of my wrists or anything like that. I’d just like to be press ‘pause’ on the growth of my hair. As someone who has what you might call social anxiety, I find the whole process of going to the barber’s and getting my hair cut difficult. Having gone through it and left with my hair looking nice and tidy, I’d love to be able to halt its progress instead of the bloody stuff being all over the place again four weeks later. The same goes for facial hair – I can’t stand the feeling of a hairy chin so I stand in front of the mirror holding a razor way more often than I’d like.
Earphones
How do people get them to stay in their ears? I wear mine while hoovering or on long car journeys (as a passenger, of course) – I don’t know if my ears are just a weird shape or something but they just won’t bloody stay in! The sound they produce is disappointingly tinny as well.
The lack of an affordable ad-free YouTube
You’re welcome to say this is a First World Problem, but I watch a fair amount of YouTube (I’m too old for TikTok) and it is infested with ads. Want to watch an Alan Partridge clip from the 90s? Well you’re going to have to sit through two noisy 30 second adverts first! You can actually pay a monthly fee to get an ad-free YouTube, but because it comes with bells and whistles like being able to continue playing in the background and download videos to watch offline, they charge £11.99 a month for it! If they just offered an ad-free option for, say £5.99 a month, I’d be right there.
Waking up early on a day off
My work pattern these days means that I have one day in, one day off, two days in, one day off, one day in and then one day off. Why is it, then, that on the days I’ve got to go to work I feel like I could turn the alarm off and sleep for several more hours but when it’s my day off and I have no alarms set I am wide awake before 7am? It’s infuriating. Going back to sleep isn’t an option, either, as I’m very much a ‘you wake up, you get up’ sort of person.
Anyway, that’s enough of the moaning. I’m going to leave you with a love song for Valentine’s Day.
If you know me just a little bit, you’ll be aware that I am a huge fan of Arctic Monkeys. While I wait for their new album (due this year), today I was listening to their early work. The Bakery was a B side to Fluorescent Adolescent, a song from the album Favourite Worst Nightmare that reached no. 2 in the UK singles chart in 2007.
Alex Turner is a brilliant lyricist and in the early Monkeys stuff he was particularly good at taking very relatable scenarios and putting them to music. In this one there’s a girl he fancies and he like seeing her about the place, and gets a bit annoyed when she’s not around. 2 minutes and 57 seconds of adolescent innocence. Enjoy.
Thanks for reading this load of old moaning. I’ve not been doing much writing recently – not been in the best place, mind wise – but hopefully I’ll soon be back on track!
The last time I, and most of the others at the ground today, had been inside Carrow Road was on 27th February last year. Norwich beat Leicester 1-0 with a driven half-volley from left back Jamal Lewis. 534 days on, almost all coronavirus related restrictions have been lifted and Carrow Road was back to full capacity. Having swiftly got through a long queue outside the ground, I took the familiar route to my seat in the upper tier of the Barclay end, where I saw familiar faces all together once again. It was as if we’d never been away – the masks on those faces the only sign that the pandemic had ever happened.
Carrow Road, ten minutes before kick off against Liverpool
It was quite emotional when a video was played on the big screen with the message ‘Welcome home, Canaries fans’ and the welcome the players received as they came out onto the pitch was something to behold. It’s good to be back and hopefully we’ll never be forced away again.
We’re not as good as Liverpool
Really, the main thing we learned from this game is that Norwich are not as good as Liverpool. We knew that already, so there’s no reason to be too downbeat about the result. Champions League winners in 2019, Premier League champions in 2020, Liverpool can put their slump in form last season down to the injury crisis they suffered in defence. Jurgen Klopp has a settled side that he has spent several years building and with Virgil van Dijk back from ten months out they look good for another push for the title. They also have a spell over Norwich, having beaten us in 13 of our last 15 encounters, so anything other than a Liverpool win would have been a major shock.
Positives to take
If you’re a pessimist, you might point out that Norwich starting brightly, fading away and then conceding goals is very much what they did on a regular basis when they were last playing at this level two years ago. It was the first game of the season, though, so let’s be lenient. All of Daniel Farke’s new signings did well and look like they will fit in just fine – when Milot Rashica and Teemu Pukki have played a few games together and developed an understanding their link up play could prove very fruitful. Billy Gilmour can pick one hell of a pass and Josh Sargent looked threatening in his brief substitute appearance. After a disrupted pre-season due to Covid-19 (which forced two friendlies to be cancelled) and players away at Euro 2020, things will get a lot better in the weeks ahead for City.
The T20 Blast has the excitement and the crowds, so there’s no need for The Hundred
In a concerning development this week, The Guardian reported that the England and Wales Cricket Board could be asked to move or even cancel the scheduled fifth Test match against India this summer. Due to take place between the 10th and 14th September at Old Trafford, it is believed that the Indian board may want the game shifted to make space in the calendar to complete this year’s Indian Premier League. The T20 tournament was suspended earlier this month due to an outbreak of Covid-19 amongst players and staff.
Given that The Guardian claims the remaining 31 IPL matches are worth £200m in broadcast revenue for the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), it’s not hard to see why they would be keen to squeeze in the remainder of the tournament in a packed calendar. To me, however, it feels like a pivotal moment in the sport’s history – if an international fixture was moved or cancelled to accommodate a domestic franchise tournament, it would send out a message of cricket’s priorities and there may be no going back. It cannot be allowed to happen.
This comes as cricket in England is also at a crucial stage. The Hundred, a whole new format cooked up by marketing men and despised by almost everyone with a passing interest in the game, is set to start in July. I’ve been thinking about ways to improve cricket and here are some of my suggestions.
England should play 7 Tests every summer
Test matches. The purest form of the game. The best form of the game, in my opinion. A prolonged examination of a player’s skills, a test of their concentration. There is nothing like the ebb and flow of a Test, the way the story unfolds over the course of five days. You can dip in and out of it, coming back to a match that has changed dramatically in the few hours you’ve been at work.
England is one of the few countries that can still fill a ground for Test match cricket, a sad indictment of the world’s shortening attention spans. But, with this privileged position, we should make the most of it by playing seven Tests every summer. One series of three, one series of four. The only exception to this would be an Ashes year, in which the battle against the old enemy Australia would have to be over five and the other opponent would have to come over for two matches.
Bring back the ODI tri-series
The last ODI tri-series in England in 2005 featured a memorable Bangladesh victory over world champions Australia in Cardiff
Up until 2005 the English summer would include an ODI tri-series, where three teams – usually England and that year’s two touring sides – would compete for a place in a final at Lord’s. The demise of the tri-series was down to money, of course. The matches that didn’t involve England would understandably generate less interest, making it harder to sell tickets for them and broadcasters to question why they were paying so much for the rights. But as such a multi-cultural place, I think there is still the opportunity for a highly successful tri-series to return. Imagine England playing a two Test series with Pakistan and a four Test series with India, with the meat in the middle of that sandwich being a tri-series including three India v Pakistan clashes at grounds such as Edgbaston, Headingley and Trent Bridge – cities with large British Asian populations.
The T20 Blast is everything the ECB want The Hundred to be
As a cricket tragic I find The Hundred a bit of an insult. This sport that I love so much is apparently too complex and too boring to attract new fans without it being pulled into a shape I don’t recognise first. And that’s according to the governing body! I refuse to believe that the concept of 20 overs of six balls would be too much for the general population to understand. And the idea of changing the term ‘wickets’ to ‘outs’? Do me a favour.
What about the county cricketers of this country, professionals who ply their trade for clubs that have existed for over a century? For them to be told that they are no longer relevant and that the focal point of the summer will now be crass, made-up teams with names as risible as ‘Oval Invincibles’ is just offensive. The fact is, the ECB already have the answer to attracting new fans to cricket right in front of them – it’s called the T20 Blast.
According to a brilliant Elizabeth Ammon column in Wisden Cricket Monthly magazine, in 2019 all eighteen county teams reported that ‘between 20% and 50% of their ticket sales [for the T20 Blast] were families, and a quarter were people who had not previously bought tickets’. I went to a Blast match that year which had a crowd bigger than most international fixtures around the world. Give it a window so the best players in the world have the chance to come and play in it, get some of it on primetime terrestrial television, and the game of cricket will get the popularity boost the ECB craves. And they won’t have alienated most of the existing fans in the process.
Tomorrow is Valentine’s Day, when supermarkets shift a lot of flowers and chocolates love is in the air. Musicians have long been inspired by matters of the heart, so it takes a different approach to the subject to stand out. Here, I’d like to introduce you to the funniest love song I’ve ever heard.
The Turtles might not be familiar to you, but you will probably have heard at least one of their songs. In 1967 they had a big hit with Happy Together, knocking The Beatles off the top of the US charts.
Happy Together, the biggest hit The Turtles had
They were talented musicians, so naturally they wanted to go down new routes and change their sound. Their record company, however, motivated by the cash Happy Together brought in urged them to write a very similar song.
Fine, they thought – if that’s what you want, that’s what you’ll get. The Turtles recorded a parody of their biggest hit, dripping in sarcasm – it was called Elenore.
I feel as if I can go no further without showing you the song’s lyrics in full:
You’ve got a thing about you I just can’t live without you I really want you, Elenore, near me Your looks intoxicate me Even though your folks hate me There’s no one like you, Elenore, really
Elenore, gee, I think you’re swell And you really do me well You’re my pride and joy, et cetera Elenore, can I take the time To ask you to speak your mind? Tell me that you love me better
I really think you’re groovy Let’s go out to a movie Whadda you say now, Elenore, can we? They’ll turn the lights way down low Maybe we won’t watch the show I think I love you, Elenore, love me
Elenore, gee, I think you’re swell And you really do me well You’re my pride and joy, et cetera Elenore, can I take the time To ask you to speak your mind? Tell me that you love me better
(One more time) Elenore, gee, I think you’re swell, ha-ha Elenore, gee, I think you’re swell, ha-ha, ha-ah-ah
I long to use the line ‘I really think you’re groovy, let’s go out to a movie’ on a woman.
The trouble is, The Turtles did such a beautiful job of their act of self-sabotage that it backfired. The lyrics were a joke, but they were delivered so well and backed by such terrific production that the song became another top ten hit in the US and went to number seven in the UK – five places higher than Happy Together had managed.
It never fails to make me smile.
The funniest love song I’ve ever heard
Another love song I like
This one’s not a parody, it’s just a really great song. It’s The Dave Clark Five with their 1963 song Glad All Over.
An absolute banger, it was a number one hit in the UK and broke the top ten in the US – highly unusual for a British group that wasn’t The Beatles back then.
You may have heard it at a football match, it’s an anthem for Crystal Palace. It’s well worth a listen.
England’s tour of New Zealand was a bit of a let down. It was a much anticipated first meeting of the two teams since the World Cup final, the sides evenly matched and now rivals full of mutual respect. The series of five T20s, however, was four too many. I understand that preparations for next autumn’s T20 World Cup are now the focus but five felt like too much.
The tourists rested most of their biggest names for those white ball matches and went with fresh faces. There was no Jos Buttler, Jason Roy or Jofra Archer to name just three, but there was Tom Banton, Pat Brown and Saqib Mahmood. While it was intriguing to see how these youngsters got on, it left the T20s without that star quality – especially as New Zealand were without their captain Kane Williamson, who was injured.
Somerset youngster Tom Banton got his first chance to impress in England colours in New Zealand
The cricket was good, to be fair. England won the first game, then their inexperienced bowlers suffered and they found themselves 2-1 down. Dawid Malan then scored the fastest T20I century by an Englishman, smashing an unbeaten 103 from 51 balls, and leg spinner Matt Parkinson took four wickets on his debut to level the series.
After the drama at Lord’s in July, incredibly, the last match ended in a tie. Reduced to 11 overs a side in Auckland due to rain, both teams scored 146. This time the Super Over was decisive, with England comfortable winners.
New Zealand’s Jimmy Neesham couldn’t believe it when another match against England went to a Super Over in Auckland
There were only two Tests, which is never enough but especially not when it’s England versus New Zealand. The Black Caps have become a very fine Test team in recent years and deserve at least three matches against the ‘marquee’ sides. Reportedly the New Zealand board lose money when they host Test matches, which rather forces their hand unfortunately. Neither of the Tests were part of the World Test Championship either, which gave the whole series the feel of a warm up for bigger things to come.
As beautiful as the cricket grounds of New Zealand are, the pitches prepared did not provide a great advertisement for Test cricket. The Bay Oval in Mount Maunganui hosted its first Test match but saw the hosts bat for 200 overs and then dismiss England for 197 to win by an innings. A week later in Hamilton the England captain Joe Root made a very welcome return to form with 226 but rain and a placid surface meant New Zealand easily played out a draw and took the series 1-0.
New Zealand wicketkeeper BJ Watling batted for 11 hours in scoring 205 in the first Test against England
Williamson’s men were using the series to prepare for crossing the Tasman, as they had been given the rare opportunity to have a proper go at Australia. For the first time in more than thirty years New Zealand will be part of the Boxing Day Test at the Melbourne Cricket Ground. The Aussies are resurgent at the moment and thrashed them by 296 runs in Perth – it remains to be seen if they can bounce back from that.
England will be playing on Boxing Day as well, in Centurion in the first Test against South Africa. It feels like a properly big series, this one. Four Tests, two well matched sides, playing at grounds that have produced exciting cricket over the last few years. For the TV spectator back home, the time difference between the UK and South Africa means the first ball of each day’s play will be bowled at either 8am or 8.30am. Wonderful. Especially when the New Zealand games were real through-the-night affairs.
Jimmy Anderson, England’s all time leading Test wicket taker, looks set to return to the team after a year blighted by injury. He has not bowled a ball for his country since limping off after sending down four overs on the first day of the Ashes at Edgbaston in August. It would be great to see him back. The tourists will also hope that Root’s double hundred in his last outing means the skipper has turned a corner, as well as that Jofra Archer can bowl at his quickest once again.
Jimmy Anderson is fit and ready to return for England in South Africa
South Africa have been in chaos off the field. Among other things their board’s chief executive was suspended following allegations of misconduct, their players were apparently considering going on strike over a breach of commercial rights and a number of sponsors announced they would be ending their association with Cricket South Africa, raising concerns about the board’s financial security.
The team itself were recently hammered in a Test series in India, and earlier this year were surprisingly beaten at home by Sri Lanka. Former captain Graeme Smith is now interim director of cricket and has appointed his former wicketkeeper Mark Boucher as coach so the Proteas will be hoping some form of stability at the top will enable the team to be somewhere near their best against England.
For a mad keen cricket fan like me, 2019 is like a birthday and Christmas present rolled into one. The World Cup is being held in England and Wales, with England the favourites to win it, and in August the Ashes start with England and Australia renewing their famous rivalry.
I have friends who may not quite understand much about cricket and why I’m so excited about this year – so I’ve written this for you.
Hosts England are favourites to win the cricket World Cup
When does the World Cup start?
The World Cup is just one week away. It starts on Thursday 30th May when England play South Africa at The Oval in London. The final is on Sunday 14th July at Lord’s.
How does the World Cup work?
There are ten countries playing in the World Cup. That’s not many compared to other sports. Compare it to the last football World Cup – where 32 teams were involved – or the rugby World Cup later this year, which will feature 20 teams.
Those 10 teams are:
Afghanistan Australia Bangladesh England India New Zealand Pakistan South Africa Sri Lanka West Indies
The teams all play each other once, with the top four going through to the semi-finals. There, 1st place will play 4th place and 2nd will play 3rd. Then, of course, the winners of those matches will play in the final.
There will be one match a day (two on Saturdays) between the start of the tournament on 30th May and the conclusion of the group stage on 6th July.
Where are the matches being played?
Ten grounds will host matches in the World Cup, stretching as far north as County Durham and as far south as Hampshire. They are:
The Riverside (Durham) Headingley (Leeds) Old Trafford (Manchester) Trent Bridge (Nottingham) Edgbaston (Birmingham) Lord’s (London) The Oval (London) County Ground (Bristol) Sophia Gardens (Cardiff) County Ground (Taunton) Rose Bowl (Southampton)
The iconic Lord’s will host the cricket World Cup final on 14th July
How can I follow it?
Every single match of the World Cup is live on Sky Sports, so you’ll need to pay to watch it on TV. Now TV is the best way in my opinion – you can buy one of their devices and buy a Sky Sports month pass for £25. Two of those will see you through the World Cup.
Highlights of every match will be on Channel 4.
If you prefer listening to the radio, commentary will be available on the BBC’s famous Test Match Special on Radio 5 Live Sports Extra.
Why are you so excited about it?
This is the first time England have hosted the cricket World Cup since 1999. Back then, I was a nearly-7-year-old who didn’t know what cricket was. England are also the favourites for it, going into the tournament as the number one ranked One Day International (ODI) team in the world.
Australia won the last cricket World Cup in 2015
It’s going to a close run thing, too – out of the ten teams playing, I reckon seven have a genuine chance of winning it. I think Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka will struggle but the other seven will be fighting for the four places in the semi-finals. Even those three I’ve mentioned are capable of causing a few upsets.
I hope you’ve found this guide useful and you might indulge in a bit of cricket over the next eight weeks or so. I’ll be writing about the games you should watch as we go along.
Remember my Durham holiday photo challenge? That stemmed from me trying to avoid getting bored during a week off work. Well – I’ve had another week off.
I always try to have a week off just before the Christmas rush starts, but I’m not very good at resting or doing nothing. So last week I decided to use one of my free days to go in search of something that had fascinated me for ages. I went looking for the Crystal Palace Dinosaurs.
I had not been to London for a proper day out since last December. I’d been there for the play-off final at Wembley, but this was my first visit to the city itself in almost a year. As such, after getting off the train at Liverpool Street I wandered around for a while, taking in my surroundings and the big buildings before making my way anywhere.
Eventually I went to Canada Water station and took the London Overground to Crystal Palace. When you come from Norwich you are used to everything being pretty close by – it took about half an hour to get from Canary Wharf to Crystal Palace! When the train finally arrived, I walked out of the station and was immediately filled with hope.
When you’ve come all this way looking for Dinosaurs, this was a pleasing sign to find.
I was definitely on the right track.
In case you don’t know, the Crystal Palace was a huge glass building that was built to house the Great Exhibition of 1851. When the exhibition closed, the Crystal Palace was moved from Hyde Park to Penge Common in South London. It had such an impact that the area it stood in itself became known as Crystal Palace.
The land surrounding the Crystal Palace was landscaped and became Crystal Palace Park. The Palace burned down in 1936, but you can still see where it would have been. And one of the elements of the original park that still remain are the dinosaurs.
I followed the path and got my first glimpse of the sculptures.
You don’t get those in Eaton Park.
These models have been in place since 1854. 161 years! They were the first attempt to make large scale models of dinosaurs in the world, and were designed using the Victorians’ best ideas of what they looked like -they were made a full six years before Charles Darwin published On the Origin of Species. Scientifically speaking, we now consider the sculptures to be rather inaccurate. But for me that just makes them all the more interesting.
The Iguanodon models, the Park’s most famous residents.
A close up of Iguanodon.
There are not just dinosaur sculptures there. The idea was to make models of extinct animals from different eras. The dinosaurs were one part of that.
This is a Megaloceros. You can probably guess it is related to the deer.
It was well worth the trip out to see them. It takes a bit of extra time to get there, and it’s a little bit off the tourist track, but there is plenty to see out there. I might even come back when it’s a bit warmer.
After ticking the Crystal Palace Dinosaurs off my ‘to do’ list, I headed back to central London and did the usual things tourists do when they are in central London.
The London Eye is ready for Christmas.
Parliament, taken from the other side of Westminster Bridge.
It was then time to head home. And I managed to make it back, despite Greater Anglia’s best efforts. My train back to Norwich was cancelled so I had to make a detour to Cambridge in order to get home! I didn’t mind that much though, it had still been a decent day.
I have another week off work in January – I wonder what I’ll get up to then?
I found this video on YouTube recently. Uploaded by madmusician91, who must take all the credit for it, the video shows the last few minutes of Channel 4’s excellent live coverage of cricket:
England had just won the Ashes for the first time in 18 years, in what is regarded as the greatest Test series ever played. Cricket was in the public consciousness like it had not been since Botham’s Ashes of 1981, enjoying popularity akin to football, being talked about across the country. Ironic, then, that that series was to be the end not only of Channel 4’s coverage, but of live international cricket coverage as a whole on terrestrial television in the UK.
Television was still in its infancy when the BBC decided to show the Lord’s and Oval Tests against Australia in 1938. Very few people owned a television then – and if they did they were rich. Even so, whatever viewers there were got the chance to see Len Hutton score 364; at the time it was a world record and it is to this day the highest Test score by an Englishman. The BBC continued to show live England cricket right up until 1999.
Test cricket at Old Trafford in 2014 – but you needed to pay to see it on television.
Pay television first made an impact on live England home matches at this point – Sky Sports shared coverage with Channel 4. Rupert Murdoch’s network had already been showing England tours since 1990, but this was their first foray into home internationals. The rights deal, however, remained in favour of the terrestrial broadcaster. Sky showed just the one Test match each summer, with the other five or six on Channel 4. Sky showed all of the one day matches live.
In 2004, to some surprise, the England and Wales Cricket Board announced that it had awarded exclusive rights to England home matches to Sky Sports. This meant that from 2006, fans would have to pay to watch England play live for the first time. The deal went ahead despite a campaign to ‘Keep Cricket 4 Us’ and with an extension until 2017 cricket will only be shown as highlights on Channel 5.
While Sky’s money has been invested in grassroots cricket, with the sport not easily accessible to the general public interest has inevitably waned. The conclusion of Sky’s first live Ashes series in 2009 was watched by just under 2 million viewers, with the average throughout the day at 856,000. Compare this to Channel 4’s live coverage of the 2005 Ashes finale – 7.4 million watched the end of play, with an average of 4.7 million between the lunch break and the close.
With such a gulf in viewing figures between the pay TV channel and the terrestrial, there remain calls for live England cricket to return to free-to-air television. With no prospect of this until at least 2018, however, it looks like an hour of highlights per day is all we will have to satisfy us for now.
LEE PAYNE 