Connect with us

Sports

How cricket became the next big thing for sport's wealthiest investors

Published

on

How cricket became the next big thing for sport's wealthiest investors

Chuck Ramkissoon, the most interesting character in Joseph O’Neill’s award-winning novel Netherland, is a Trinidadian wheeler-dealer who has come to New York to make his fortune.

So far, so normal, but it is how he intends to make his mark that sets him apart from the thousands of other characters in stories about the American Dream because Ramkissoon’s route to riches is cricket.

In a memorable section of a remarkable book, Ramkissoon tells his friend, the story’s narrator, that he wants to build a cricket “arena” in Brooklyn.

Sensing his friend’s incredulity, our hero launches into a sales pitch that starts with the huge South Asian population in New York, moves into a business plan that involves 8,000 fans paying $50 (£39) each to watch 12 exhibition matches every summer, and ends with the kicker, “global TV rights… a game between India and Pakistan… a TV and internet viewership of 70 million in India alone… we’d breakeven in three, at most four years”.

This vision is meant to sound unrealistic, bordering on absurd. Cricket in New York? Attracting paying customers? With tens of millions watching on the other side of the world?

Advertisement

The book was written in 2008 but is set a few years earlier, more than two decades before 34,000 people watched India play Pakistan in the T20 World Cup in New York last month, a game that proved the old adage about truth being stranger than fiction.

The top hospitality tickets at the Nassau County Stadium had a face value of $10,000 (£7,800) and ordinary tickets were changing hands for more than $1,000 on the secondary market. The game garnered 256 million hours of viewing in India, an incredible figure for a contest that finished in the small hours of the morning there.


India fans in New York watch their team’s victory in the T20 World Cup final in June (Derek French/SOPA Images/LightRocket via Getty Images)

I was reminded of Ramkissoon last week when the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) revealed it has sent presentations to several owners of National Football League (NFL) teams to alert them to the opportunity of buying stakes in the eight teams that play in The Hundred, one of 17 different “franchise leagues” that have popped up in recent years.

Those pitch decks, which include a video explaining The Hundred’s rules, have also been sent to the owners of teams in the Indian Premier League (IPL), the daddy of those franchise leagues, and pretty much every serious multi-sport investor on the planet.

All have been invited to games in the month-long competition, which started on Tuesday, and various media outlets have reported that high-profile owners of British football teams, such as Wrexham’s Hollywood duo Rob McElhenney and Ryan Reynolds, are interested.

Advertisement

“Many of them know cricket very well, know The Hundred very well and may not feel the need to come,” explained the ECB’s director of business operations Vikram Banerjee during a conference call with reporters.

“Others, some of our American friends, for example, may like the idea of what we’ve got but don’t really know cricket at all, so they’ll come along and see what English cricket’s about.”

It is a lovely idea, expressed in quintessentially English fashion, but what the ECB is really selling is something far bigger than English cricket’s latest wheeze for remaining relevant — and solvent — in a fast-changing landscape. It is selling what Ramkissoon was selling: potential.

“Cricket is perhaps the only sport that has a combination of being the most popular game in a market as big as India but is also growing fast in so many new markets, such as the United States,” says Mike Fordham, a former ECB strategist who went on to become chief executive of the IPL’s Rajasthan Royals and now advises governing bodies from the Gulf to the Caribbean on running cricket leagues.

“And if you add the fact it has been added to the Olympic programme for 2028 in Los Angeles, and there is a good chance the 2036 Games will be in India, and look at how fast the women’s game is growing, the sport’s potential is obvious.”

Advertisement

So, after that long preamble, let us explore how cricket became just the ticket for every serious multi-sport investor, how American cricket fits in, and where the sport is heading.


But first, how big is the Indian cricket market?

According to the United Nations, India’s population, now north of 1.4 billion, overtook China’s about a year ago. This means one in six people alive are in India.

There are also millions of Indians living in other countries, including more than four-and-a-half million in the U.S. and more than a million in the UK.

India’s gross domestic product has been rising fast for the past 20 years and its economy is now either the third, fourth or fifth largest on the planet, depending on which metric you prefer. India still has hundreds of millions of very poor people, but the proportion in poverty is falling as its well-educated, urban middle class grows.

Cricket is India’s most popular sport and it is not even close.

Advertisement

It is the same story elsewhere in South Asia. Add the populations of Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan and Sri Lanka to India’s and you clear the two-billion mark, which means one in four people live in countries where cricket is the number one sport, which does not include the sport’s fans in Australia, England, Jamaica, South Africa and everywhere else the game is loved.


Indian Premier League games are regularly played in front of packed stadiums (R Satish Babu/AFP via Getty Images)

“Obviously any conversation about cricket’s appeal has to start with India, and as India has got bigger and richer, so has cricket,” explains Gareth Balch, chief executive of global sports agency Two Circles.

“There are so many different numbers you can pluck out, from the rising value of IPL franchises to how many people consumed the broadcast of the India-Pakistan game in New York this summer.

“But a really good one is if you look at the total value of cricket’s media rights — it has risen fivefold over the past five years. That is remarkable growth and most of that is being driven by India and the rest of South Asia.”

As Balch notes, there are dozens of metrics you can choose to demonstrate the might of the Indian market, but let us pick out a few more to hammer this point home.

Advertisement

According to Oakwell Sports Advisory, a London-based firm, “India constitutes 90 per cent of the one billion cricket fans aged 16 to 69 globally” and “the Indian market is more than twice as large as the other 11 ICC (International Cricket Council) full member countries (the game’s most established nations) combined”.

When India played Pakistan at the 2019 Cricket World Cup in England, 800,000 fans applied for tickets and the game was watched by 229 million viewers on Star Sports, Disney’s Indian pay-TV network. India’s semi-final against New Zealand in that tournament drew an online audience of more than 25 million, a world record for concurrent live streams. That record has since been stretched to 35 million for another World Cup game between India and Pakistan last year.

When the IPL’s first eight franchises were sold in 2008, they went for more than $700m, almost double the reserve price. But when two expansion franchises were sold in 2021, they went for more than $1.2billion. Oakwell estimates the IPL’s total enterprise value to be over $15bn. Not bad for 10 teams that only play for two months a year.

These franchises are owned by the richest families and biggest conglomerates in India — the Ambani family, who recently threw a $600m wedding, co-own five-time IPL champions the Mumbai Indians — and the league officially became a “decacorn”, a start-up business that grows to a valuation beyond $10bn, in 2022.

Last year, the IPL sold its domestic media rights to Star Sports and Viacom18 in a five-year deal worth $6.2bn, three times the amount achieved in 2017. The deal means IPL games are second only to the NFL in terms of revenue per match, knocking Premier League fixtures into third place.

Advertisement

You get the picture.


OK, tell me more about The Hundred

Launched in 2021, it is a competition — with men’s and women’s versions — played between eight city-based franchises in England and Wales.

Its unique selling point is that it is even quicker than the Twenty20 (T20) format that has become the most popular version of the sport almost everywhere. The most notable exception to this is England, where Test cricket, which is played between international teams over five days, subsidises everything else, including the grassroots game.

Unfortunately, only cricket fans in Australia and India appear to like Test cricket as much — or in sufficient numbers — as English fans, which is why cricket chiefs have been looking for shorter versions of the game for more than 70 years.

The first was a format that could be played in a day. It is still catchily known as one-day cricket and involves each team getting 50 six-ball “overs” to score as many runs as possible. Every subsequent new format has just reduced the number of overs available, cutting the amount of time each game takes and encouraging players to score quickly.

Advertisement

Ironically, it was the ECB, in 2003, that came up with T20, which, you guessed it, is a 20-over-per-team game. For a time, its mix of big hits, quick wickets (or outs, in baseball parlance) and the excuse it provided for outdoor drinking on summer evenings reversed the gradual decline of the domestic game. But, like so many other English inventions, it was perfected elsewhere, particularly in India.

So, the ECB, knowing it has to diversify from Test cricket and ever conscious of the shadow thrown by football, had another go and came up with The Hundred, a format that is literally 100 balls per team, which knocks 40 balls and about half an hour off the duration of a typical T20 match.


The Hundred has proved popular with fans in the UK (Stu Forster/Getty Images)

This, it believed, would attract more families to the games and persuade free-to-air broadcasters, like the BBC, to find some space in their prime-time schedules. It also decided to give the women’s competition equal billing and prize money from the off, with most games staged as double-headers.

Guess what? It worked. Now in its fourth season, The Hundred has been a domestic hit. Thanks to relatively low ticket prices and a big marketing push, attendances have been younger and more diverse than typical cricket crowds. The audiences on the BBC and Sky, the competition’s main broadcast partner and biggest benefactor, have been solid and the highlight reel-friendly action has done well on social media.

Contrary to some of the gloomier predictions that surrounded its birth, The Hundred has not killed off the older T20 league still played by the 18 counties that constitute English cricket’s traditional professional pyramid or ruined the competitive balance of the wider domestic game, in all its formats, by giving the counties that host Hundred franchises a massive leg-up. Not yet, anyway.

Advertisement

You can probably sense there is a “but” coming, can’t you?

Yes, what is it? 

In short, The Hundred has not resonated beyond England’s shores.

This would not be such an existential threat if it were not for the fact that T20, powered by Indian money, has continued to spread its tentacles, grabbing chunks of the calendar — by far the most valuable real estate in any global sport — and increasing the cost of talent.

For the demographic reasons discussed above, the ECB never wanted to compete pound for rupee with the IPL when it came to attracting the best players, but it did think it could still beat nascent competitions in new territories such as Canada, the United Arab Emirates and U.S. for talent.

Seeing the top Australian players go from their Big Bash League, during the Northern Hemisphere’s winter, to million-dollar spells in the IPL and then lucrative stints in America’s Major Cricket League — which has attracted significant Indian investment — was one thing, but when players start pulling out of agreements to play in The Hundred because they can earn the same money in less time in Canada, the need for action is clear.

Advertisement

There is also pressure building within the English game, too, as those 18 counties, most of whom are member-owned, are groaning under almost £200m of debt. The Hundred was initially sold to them as a means to reset the clock.

The ECB rejected an offer of £300m for 75 per cent of the entire competition from British private equity firm Bridgepoint Group two years ago. Given the rising prices of IPL franchises and the sums being spent on teams elsewhere, that was probably a good call.

But there is a right time to cash in on every asset and now looks like that time for The Hundred.

The ECB, however, is not seeing it quite that simply. For the governing body, this sales process, which is for 49 per cent stakes in each franchise, is as much about making sure The Hundred is one of the franchise leagues still standing when the inevitable consolidation comes, as it is about finding a quick fix for the counties’ overdrafts.

So, unlike the auctions that have driven franchise values up in India, the ECB has asked both financial services giant Deloitte and Raine, the American boutique bank which has become sport’s go-to auctioneer, to run what Banerjee described as a “very strange speed-dating” process that will hopefully see The Hundred’s host venues partner up, “in a weird kind of school disco moment”, with an international investor.

Advertisement

On the same conference call, the ECB’s CEO Richard Gould stressed that this is as much about “skill sets” in areas such as digital engagement, event management and women’s sport as it is about massive cheques, although massive cheques would be nice, too.

If this sounds to you a bit like former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s policy on cake — “pro having it and pro eating it” — you are not the only one.

Banerjee and Gould were speaking only a few days after British newspaper The Telegraph reported unnamed IPL sources saying the ECB had no chance of raising the £200m or so it is aiming for from these sales of large minority stakes. They were actually a bit ruder than that, suggesting the process was a “car crash” and the suggested valuations “delusional”.

When asked about this, Gould drily noted the ECB has spoken to every single owner of an IPL and WPL (Women’s Premier League) team and they all seemed pretty interested in The Hundred then, which might be why they are now trying “to negotiate through the media”.

This is a fair comment, but The Athletic has spoken to several sources — who asked to remain anonymous to protect relationships — who believe the financial return from all of the ECB’s matchmaking will be “underwhelming” unless some of the host venues sell some or all of the 51 per cent stakes they have been gifted.

Advertisement

In other words, 49 per cent stakes will not bring in those massive cheques, particularly from IPL owners who have snapped up franchises in South Africa, the U.S. and elsewhere, but 70 per cent or even 100 per cent stakes might.

“No investor will want a minority stake and just see their funds go into infrastructure and other assets related to the county game that they have zero control over,” explains Oakwell’s Andrew Umbers.

“Therefore, the valuations are all over the place. Currently, nobody is selling a majority, but that might change.”

Fordham agrees.

“The real appeal for IPL investors would be in creating a bigger platform for sponsors, multi-league annual contracts for players and coaches, and more control of the calendar,” he says.

Advertisement

“I actually think most of The Hundred franchises will end up with IPL investors and at least a couple of them will be wholly owned by IPL groups.”

Laurie Pinto is a British financier who has been helping wealthy people buy and sell sports teams for years. He sees it like this.

“The ECB knows it has to do something and in cricket, that usually means cosying up to India and there will definitely be some of that,” he explains.

“But they are also worried about the ‘India-fication’ of cricket, for want of a better term. They are worried about India’s economic dominance of the game. That is why they brought in Raine. They want to globalise their ownership structure.

“The dream would be to link Wrexham with (Cardiff-based Hundred franchise) the Welsh Fire, or (NFL legend) Tom Brady’s crowd at Birmingham City with the Birmingham Phoenix. They’ll be talking to everyone: Fenway Sports Group, the Kroenkes, the Glazers, Jim Ratcliffe, all of them.”

Advertisement

It is not an unrealistic dream, either. Avram Glazer, admittedly not the most popular sports team owner in the UK throughout his time at Manchester United, was outbid for those two IPL expansion franchises three years ago but paid $30m for the Desert Vipers in the UAE-based International League T20 competition.

It has also been reported that Austrian drinks giant and multi-sports team owner Red Bull might want a slice of The Hundred. Red Bull already sponsors several Indian cricketers and has just hooked up with Leeds United. Yes, Leeds United, the Championship football team co-owned by Paraag Marathe, the former chairman of USA Cricket.

And just to really confuse you, RedBird Capital, the New York-based investment firm that owns AC Milan and Toulouse, as well as having a stake in the Fenway Sports Group empire, bought 15 per cent of the IPL’s Rajasthan Royals in 2021.

So America’s main contribution here is money?  

Yes and no. English cricket would love American money. Please send some as soon as possible.

But cricket more generally wants American attention, love, respect… and money. Some of that has already started to flow.

Advertisement

As already mentioned, the 2024 T20 World Cup was co-hosted by Cricket West Indies, the governing body for the game in the Caribbean, and USA Cricket, with 16 of the 55 games taking place in the U.S.

Those games were shared between venues in Florida, New York and Texas, and, while there was some grumbling about the quality of the playing surfaces (another link with O’Neill’s Netherland), the tournament could not have gone much better for American cricket, with the U.S. claiming the upset of the tournament, a win over Pakistan, and reaching the second round.

That victory over Pakistan, and the earlier one against Canada, happened at Grand Prairie Stadium, near Dallas, which is the closest thing the U.S. has to Ramkissoon’s “Bald Eagle Field” and one of the two venues used by Major League Cricket (MLC), the six-team franchise league that is just about to complete its second season.

Launched in 2023, it is owned by American Cricket Enterprises, a consortium of private investors, including some of the franchise owners, which is comprised of IPL team owners and successful Indian-Americans, such as Microsoft chief executive Satya Nadella.

Their combined financial firepower has enabled the MLC teams to attract the current and former Australia captains, Pat Cummins and Steve Smith, as well as their Australian team-mates Travis Head and Glenn Maxwell, former South Africa skippers Quinton de Kock and Faf du Plessis, and ex-West Indies captain Kieron Pollard, as well as several other leading internationals. In terms of global stars, the MLC has trumped The Hundred by paying them more than the £125,000 maximum on offer in England this month.

Advertisement

English cricket bosses will be relatively relaxed about missing out on a few big names, particularly if it serves the greater purpose of growing cricket, especially in a new market that might, one day, provide some balance to India’s outsized influence over the game.

The T20 World Cup was one step on that journey, the MLC is another, and the first Olympic T20 competition at the Los Angeles Olympics in four years will be another.

“Cricket is full of opportunity — it’ll be one of the fastest-growing sports economically in the next decades,” says Balch.

“With this opportunity come choices: one choice would be for the cricket economy to resemble basketball’s, with the IPL potentially being the NBA. Basketball is a truly global sport with a dominant league. The U.S. ‘Dream Team’ might not win every game it plays, but every other basketball league on the planet is a few steps below the NBA.

“Cricket has to choose whether that’s the best economy for the game, especially considering the multiple formats of the game.”

Advertisement

Deciding whether your sport should have a league as dominant and successful as the NBA or not is a nice choice to have, though.

Ramkissoon would have loved such options. When he emailed potential backers with his great pitch for bringing back America’s “oldest team sport”, he received responses such as “Whoever, could you please stop sending me crazy junk mail?!”.

I should probably mention that the novel starts with the narrator being told that Ramkissoon’s “remains” have been found in a canal, in handcuffs, “evidently the victim of murder”.

He was a complicated man, though. Far more complicated than cricket, which is actually quite a simple bat-and-ball game. Far better than baseball. As hundreds of millions of Indians, Bangladeshis, Pakistanis, Afghans, Australians, New Zealanders, English, South Africans, Bajans, Jamaicans, Dutch, Irish… the list goes on, will tell you.

(Top photo: iStock; design: Eamonn Dalton)

Advertisement

Sports

The State of Punditry – part 2: How the world analyses football – and the U.S. lead the way

Published

on

The State of Punditry – part 2: How the world analyses football – and the U.S. lead the way

Football coverage is a divisive subject.

Some think the standard of punditry is great, others will tell you it needs some work and some will deride it as awful. The analysis of the analysis never ends.

This week, The Athletic is looking more closely at the state of the industry, starting with yesterday’s piece assessing what is demanded of pundits in the United Kingdom in 2024 and how people consume their work.

Today, we broaden the discussion to see how UK coverage stacks up against the rest of the world, including the proudest of all football nations Germany, Brazil and Spain, together with those pesky upstarts in the U.S..


In Europe, the landscape of punditry can be wildly different. Travel to Italy, Spain or Turkey, switch on a television and scan through the channels and you’ll almost certainly be able to find some football coverage, be it via a football talk show, replays of matches, or on the news.

Advertisement

This is the case in the UK, too, via Sky Sports’ network of channels, but we’re talking free-to-air here in countries where people are arguably far more obsessed with football than your average UK football diehard.

It borders on fanaticism in a place like Turkey and the at-times frantic coverage reflects that. One grim incident recently showcased how seriously football is taken, when pundit Serhat Akin was shot in the foot when leaving a TV studio.

The former Fenerbahce player had been covering the club’s match against Belgian side Union Saint-Gilloise from an Istanbul studio, after which he was approached and shot by a masked man.

Akin posted a picture of his bloodied foot on Instagram with the caption: “They shot my foot, our last word is Fenerbahce.”

Over in Germany things are a bit calmer.

In many ways the coverage is very similar to in the UK, only probably a bit better. Standard Bundesliga behaviour.

Advertisement

Why? Well, depending on your disposition, they don’t quite have as much forced melodrama that you tend to find with the Premier League.

The punditry industry is not quite as accessible for ex-players, so the notion of former pros that you’d get on, say, a certain national radio station in the UK where certain people will make certain comments to attract attention doesn’t really exist.

Presenters, again, unlike in the UK with Gary Lineker, Alex Scott, or, until recently, Jermaine Jenas, are media professionals rather than players. Pundits include Per Mertesacker and Christoph Kramer, the 2014 World Cup winner who has been an analyst for many years already despite being only 33 years old and still not officially retired (he left Borussia Mönchengladbach in the summer).


Germany coach Julian Nagelsmann speaks with Christoph Kramer (second right) and (right) Per Mertesacker (Tom Weller/picture alliance via Getty Images)

They have a tactics corner on Sky via Dutchman Erik Meijer, the one-time Liverpool striker who spent much of his career in Germany. In a recent interview with The Athletic, Meijer described his reaction to being asked to appear on German television: “The first question I had was, ‘There are 80 million Germans in this country so why do they need to employ a Dutchman? But they wanted a different voice — someone who would say that Bayern Munich were c**p when they were.”

Julia Simic, who used to play for the women’s national team, is also a regular, while pundits who cover the Premier League include former goalkeeper Rene Adler and ex-Croatia international and Fulham and West Ham striker Mladen Petric.

Advertisement

While Germans do like other sports, such as basketball, handball and tennis, football is the main draw and the coverage can be dense and fanatical, although it tends to be quite considered and mindful of weighty issues. The rise of vloggers and influencers we have seen in the UK hasn’t yet caught on.

Probably the most high profile figure is Wolff Fuss, inflection king extraordinaire. Search for him on TikTok and you’ll find 20 million matches. Fuss has the stage to himself because, in another difference to the UK, co-commentators are quite uncommon in Germany.

If Fuss is the main man, then Lothar Matthaus is the loudest. Not necessarily in volume, but in the decibel level of his opinions (and his outfits… Matthaus caught the eye at this summer’s European Championship with some striking gilets).


Lothar Matthaus (right), complete with gilet (Marcus Brandt/picture alliance via Getty Images)

Matthaus could probably be compared to Gary Neville or Jamie Carragher in that he gives forthright views on “his” club, which in this case would be Bayern Munich. Neville and Carragher constantly attract the attention of Manchester United and Liverpool managers with their views but Matthaus — and his partner-in-crime, Dietmar Hamann — tend to take it a bit further.

In the past year alone, Matthaus has called for Thomas Tuchel to be sacked, questioned the signing of Eric Dier, claimed Jadon Sancho’s influence at Borussia Dortmund had been exaggerated by the media and said he “felt sorry” for Cristiano Ronaldo whose “ego trips” had “damaged the team and himself”.

Advertisement

Last November, Tuchel referenced Matthaus and Hamann in a press conference after a 4-0 victory over Borussia Dortmund, saying: “Can I quote Lothar and Didi? For a team with no further development and a bad relationship between coach and players, that was alright today, I’d say. I’m sure the experts will tell you the rest themselves.” Nice.

Matthaus is probably still tame compared to Rafael van der Vaart, who, since retiring, has very much earned a reputation for making unfiltered and inflammatory comments in his role as a pundit in the Netherlands.

You may recall Van der Vaart had a pop at England’s Declan Rice after the Euro 2024 final on the coverage of Dutch broadcaster NOS, saying: “£100million for Declan Rice, what does he do? He comes to collect a ball only to pass it back to John Stones. He is useless. If you are truly worth £100m then you should be able to play a ball forward.”

This was very much in character for Van der Vaart, whose appreciation for the England team seems to be somewhat lacking given he also decried the whole side as “s***”, also on NOS, after they defeated the Netherlands 2-1 in the semi-finals.

Advertisement

Over in Spain, you may be most familiar with Spanish football TV punditry from clips of El Chiringuito de Jugones, a late-night debate show in which a cast of big personalities voice their opinions — usually quite loudly and with little sense of impartiality.

In recent years the programme has gained notoriety for interviewing Real Madrid president Florentino Perez after the attempted launch of the European Super League, using the phrase “tic tac” to announce incoming transfer news (imitating the ticking of a clock) and showing three minutes of former Madrid midfielder Guti looking sad after his old side’s 4-0 Champions League defeat by Manchester City last year.

Advertisement

You will find a more sophisticated level of discussion on TV channel Movistar Plus and streaming platform DAZN. The former features former Madrid and Argentina player turned pundit Jorge Valdano while presenter Miguel Quintana and former Equatorial Guinea international Alberto Edjogo-Owono, who spent his career in the Spanish lower leagues, are two respected voices on DAZN.

But the way fandom works in Spain — in particular with the big two clubs, Barcelona and Madrid — means those pundits are often labelled the enemy of one or other team, despite trying to be impartial.

In Spain, there is also a deeper layer of scrutiny towards refereeing and why decisions do or do not happen (possibly linked to the above). There is no equivalent of Match of the Day, perhaps because there is not much interest in analysing games like Osasuna versus Getafe from a tactical perspective. And the tactical insight mainly comes from social media rather than mass media.

As for other prominent pundits, Guti has made a name for himself on DAZN, while Gaizka Mendieta and Juanfran Torres are also regulars on television.

Often more in-depth analysis can be found on late-night radio shows such as El Larguero on Cadena SER or Cadena COPE’s El Partidazo — both of which go on until the early hours and continue to attract huge audiences, as The Athletic’s Laia Cervello Herrero explored earlier this year. Even then, debates can get heated given the nature of football in Spain.

Advertisement

You might think the tone would be fairly outrageous in a football-mad country like Brazil, but while passions undoubtedly run extremely high and some coverage can be melodramatic, there is also room for reasoned debate.

The biggest difference in Brazil is the volume of the commentators, who are the stars of the show.

“The commentator really goes for it,” Natalie Gedra, a football reporter for Sky Sports in the UK who previously worked for ESPN and Globo in Brazil, tells The Athletic. “Brazilians cannot understand countries who don’t scream ‘GOOOOOOAAAAAAL!’ There’s also a tune that comes with it, either the club’s anthem or a song that’s related to the national team.

“Visually it’s different too — for example, you will have a gigantic ball going back and forth on the screen between transitions of replays. I remember watching World Cups growing up and they had a little mascot who would show up on the screen and dance around.”

Having ex-referees as pundits, for example, has been a well-established practice in Brazil for at least a decade, formerly in the commentary box but now more as studio analysts. Oh, and the studios are always at TV HQ, not on site at stadiums.

Advertisement

Talking of the commentary box, it’s typically filled with three people – a commentator, i.e. the star, a journalist and a former player.

“They have more ex-players now, but a lot of journalists are co-commentators or pundits on both pre and post-match shows,” Gedra adds. “Everyone knows the commentator; they’re massive stars.”

Reflecting how their best players tend to head to Europe, Brazil’s most famous ex-players aren’t really part of the TV coverage over there, other than for World Cups. Ronaldo worked on the 2014 World Cup and, most famously, Pele was a commentator for the 1994 World Cup.

“There are some ex-players, like, for example (Walter) Casagrande, who played for Corinthians. He was the most prominent for many years,” Gedra says. “He was a bit of a pioneer, he had a big profile and didn’t back down from making big statements, but he was also very articulate.

“The main Brazilian football names don’t become pundits in Brazil, but Pele in 1994 is by far the most famous example. There is a picture of him celebrating in the commentary booth with commentator Galvao Bueno which is one of the most iconic images in the history of Brazilian television.

Advertisement

“Galvao Bueno is probably the biggest name in the history of Brazilian TV, he’s absolutely huge and the voice of many of the biggest sporting moments, like all the World Cups. Yes, people love or hate him but everybody knows who he is.”

Commentators in the UK don’t have anywhere near as big a profile. No wonder Guy Mowbray has started doing Gladiators.

Another difference is in the make-up of the post-match chat. Gedra has observed that Brazil’s coverage is less data-orientated than in the UK, although the tone depends on the channel. Globo, the free-to-air channel, have largely monopolised coverage but they are now under threat from newer players such as Sport TV, ESPN and TNT Sports. YouTube channels are also growing.

“I worked for ESPN and I think they got the tone just right, very analytical and not too spectacular or passionate,” Gedra says.

Advertisement

Unspectacular is definitely not a word you would use to describe the stylings of Alexi Lalas, one of the most prominent broadcasters in the U.S., whose brash persona brings a love-it-or-hate-it quality.

He works as an analyst for Fox Sports, has a podcast called Alexi Lalas’ State of the Union and doesn’t care if people like him or not. But his bold, direct and outspoken opinions have made him an influential figure in the U.S. and beyond.

Lalas is another who doesn’t seem to especially like English players, saying during the Euros that Gareth Southgate’s team were “insufferable as they are talented”.

“But I’m in the entertainment business,” Lalas told The Athletic earlier this year. “I am a performer. When you say that, sometimes people cringe. By no means am I saying that I can’t be authentic and genuine. But I recognise the way I say something is as important as what I say.

“When I go on TV, I put on a costume and when that red light goes on, I don’t want people changing the channel.”

Advertisement

Lalas’ audacious approach is a bit of a leap from the English-style NBC coverage that rose to prominence a few years ago. A number of ex-Premier League players headed Stateside and made names for themselves, such as Robbie Earle and Robbie Mustoe — while having decent careers in England, neither was a household name when playing for Wimbledon and Middlesbrough respectively.

go-deeper

GO DEEPER

Access all areas at NBC: Three Premier League games, a Winnebago and tactical sushi

The pair, who have their own podcast called The 2 Robbies, gave NBC’s coverage a familiar feel alongside commentator Arlo White and pundit Lee Dixon, while former Stoke City defender Danny Higginbotham is another face of the channel having moved Stateside. “What we’ve tried to do from the start is talk in a normal way about football,” Earle told The Guardian in 2017. An underrated concept.

Fox Sports also employ recognisable names from UK TV coverage including commentator (sorry, ‘play-by-play announcer’) Ian Darke, former Newcastle defender Warren Barton and ex-Sky Sports reporter Geoff Shreeves. Fox also use Mark Clattenburg as a refereeing analyst.

Undoubtedly the most renowned U.S. soccer coverage, though, is on CBS Sports via its hugely popular Golazo Champions League show, complete with the instantly recognisable line-up of Kate Abdo, Thierry Henry, Micah Richards and Jamie Carragher, whose on-screen chemistry make them a social media staple on every matchday.

Advertisement

Left to right: Kate Abdo, Thierry Henry, Jamie Carragher and Micah Richards have been a hit on CBS (Robbie Jay Barratt – AMA/Getty Images)

Pete Radovich, the coordinating producer of the UEFA Champions League coverage on CBS Sports, told The Athletic in September on how he came to realise that the network’s Champions League Today studio now owns the global conversation on major nights of European football.

“Thierry Henry, in no uncertain terms, says he gets asked more about CBS now than Arsenal,” he said. “That to me is wild.”

The show’s razor-sharp use of social media and its mix of humour, analysis and engaging post-match interviews with managers and players is a winning formula, while most importantly the quartet’s camaraderie feels natural, warm and unforced.

Americans showing the world how to make excellent football soccer coverage? It’s a brave new world.

(Top photos: Getty Images; design: Dan Goldfarb)

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Sports

Former NCAA swimmer Riley Gaines calls out ‘deranged’ co-hosts of ‘The View’ over Capitol Hill bathroom ban

Published

on

Former NCAA swimmer Riley Gaines calls out ‘deranged’ co-hosts of ‘The View’ over Capitol Hill bathroom ban

Former University of Kentucky swimmer Riley Gaines blasted the co-hosts of “The View” on Wednesday, calling them “deranged” and “out of touch” after they spoke out in defense of Delaware Rep.-elect Sarah McBride over a resolution that would ban transgender women from using women’s restrooms at the U.S. Capitol.

Gaines, a 12-time NCAA All-American swimmer who has publicly spoken out against trans inclusion in women’s and girls sports and advocated for protecting women’s spaces, posted a message on X calling out the group for speaking out on an issue that does not directly impact them.

Former competitve swimmer Riley Gaines speaks during a campaign rally for Republican presidential nominee, former U.S. President Donald Trump at Desert Diamond Arena on August 23, 2024, in Glendale, Arizona. The rally, held in partnership with Turning Point PAC and Turning Point Action, came two weeks after Democratic presidential nominee U.S. Vice President Harris held a rally at the same location.  (Rebecca Noble/Getty Images)

“I wonder if the deranged, out-of-touch women on The View would be comfortable letting Mr. McBride change in a locker room inches away from their own daughters,” she wrote in a post on X which accompanied a clip of the show. 

Advertisement

“It never matters until it affects you personally.” 

Gaines competed against former UPenn swimmer Lia Thomas, a transgender athlete, at the NCAA championships in 2022, where she said the NCAA had opted to give Thomas the fifth-place trophy for the “photo op” despite them tying in the women’s 200 freestyle.  

Thomas would go on to win a national title in the women’s 500 freestyle. 

Gaines was responding to a segment of Tuesday’s episode of “The View” where the co-hosts reacted to a resolution by Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., to ban transgender women from using women’s restrooms at the U.S. Capitol in response to McBride, the first openly transgender federal lawmaker set to join Congress in January.

RILEY GAINES REPEATEDLY TEARS INTO AOC FOR TAKING PRONOUNS OUT OF X BIO AFTER ADVOCATING FOR TRANS ATHLETES

Advertisement

“I don’t understand how this is [Mace’s] welcome to someone who is coming to make a difference in the country,” Whoopi Goldberg said.  

Rep.-elect Sarah McBride

Rep.-elect Sarah McBride, D-Del., poses for a photograph after joining other congressional freshmen of the 119th Congress for a group photograph on the steps of the House of Representatives at the U.S. Capitol Building on Nov. 15, 2024 in Washington, D.C. (Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

“It’s not a welcome, it’s flipping her the middle finger. Because she is the one person in the House that this will affect,” Sara Haines responded, adding, “And this woman that came and sat at our table is one of the most decent, amazing politicians I’ve ever seen. Her messaging resounded across the boards.”

Alyssa Farah Griffin chimed in, calling the attempt to ban McBride “gross.”

“It is a new member of Congress, who ran as a centrist democrat, talked about issues – pocketbook issues. She said at our table ‘I am not a spokesperson for my community. I’m running to deliver for Delaware.’ And Nancy Mace is trying to goad her into a fight she did not sign up to be part of. She’s trying to pigeonhole her into ‘You have to be this culture warrior, who makes this your whole identity’ purely because Nancy Mace doesn’t like how she chooses to exist.” 

Advertisement
Mace speaks to reporters in Capitol hallway

U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) arrives for a House Republican caucus meeting at the U.S. Capitol on November 19, 2024, in Washington, DC. Mace introduced legislation that would require House members and staffers from “using single-sex facilities other than those corresponding to their biological sex.”  (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

Gaines said in a separate post on X Wednesday that she would be “happy” to join “The View” for a conversation after disagreeing with Goldberg’s numbers regarding trans athletes competing in public schools. 

Fox News’ Liz Elkind contributed to this report. 

Follow Fox News Digital’s sports coverage on X, and subscribe to the Fox News Sports Huddle newsletter.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Sports

Freddie Freeman grand slam ball to be auctioned. Could bring 'life-changing money' for Venice family

Published

on

Freddie Freeman grand slam ball to be auctioned. Could bring 'life-changing money' for Venice family

The past few weeks have been a whirlwind for Zachary Ruderman.

He’s the 10-year-old Dodgers fan who ended up with one of the most significant baseballs in team history — the one his favorite player, first baseman Freddie Freeman, hit for a walk-off grand slam during the 10th inning in Game 1 of the 2024 World Series against the New York Yankees.

Since then, Zachary has seemingly become one of the most famous people living in Venice.

“It’s a lot more attention than my son has ever had,” his father, Nico Ruderman, said. “He’s spoken to so many media outlets, so many interviews. People recognize him. I mean, literally everywhere we go people stop him and want to take pictures with him. He’s really actually been loving it. It’s been a fun experience for him.”

That experience is entering a new phase. On Wednesday, SCP Auctions announced the ball will be up for bid from Dec. 4-14. Coming just weeks after the Dodgers won their eighth World Series championship — with Freeman hitting four home runs and winning MVP honors, all on a badly sprained ankle — SCP founder and president David Kohler said his company thinks “the sky’s the limit” for what the auction could bring.

Advertisement

“We think this is gonna bring seven figures,” Kohler said. “We think it’s one of the most historic baseballs ever, with the moment of this World Series, the first walk-off grand slam, the whole story of Freddie Freeman, the Dodgers, Game 1, extra innings. Just everything about it. I mean, it’s one of the most historic moments in sports and we feel that people are going to appreciate that.”

Last month, Dodgers superstar Shohei Ohtani’s 50th home run ball was sold by Goldin Auctions for a record $4.4 million. Could the Freeman ball be worth even more than that?

Zachary Ruderman holds up Freddie Freeman’s grand slam ball with his parents, Nico and Anne, at his side.

(Courtesy of Nico Ruderman)

Advertisement

“It could be. You never know,” Kohler said. “We’re gonna find out. Certainly the Ohtani ball was very, very significant and Ohtani is beloved, but this is more of the history of the game of baseball and just the moment — seeing that happen was just incredible.”

Zachary, along with his father and mother Anne, were part of that moment. After Freeman blasted his game-winning shot into the right-field pavilion, the ball rolled next to Zachary’s feet. The fifth-grader batted it over to his father, who pounced on it, stood up and handed it back to his son.

“They’re just amazing memories,” Zachary said Thursday, looking back on that night. “Like after we got it, no one was mad. No one was trying to take it from us. Everyone was just super happy.”

His father added: “We just feel so lucky and honored to be a small part of such a huge moment in Dodger history.”

The experience was so special that at first the family had no intention of parting with the ball.

Advertisement

“That night when we caught it we were like, ‘We’re gonna keep this forever,’” Ruderman said. “The problem is, if we keep it, we’re not gonna keep it in our house. I don’t want to pay for the insurance for it, so it would just be locked up in some safety deposit box. Nobody would ever see it.

Zachary Ruderman holds his Freddie Freeman grand slam ball while posing with L.A. City Councilmember Traci Park at City Hall

Zachary Ruderman holds his Freddie Freeman grand slam ball while posing with L.A. City Councilmember Traci Park at City Hall.

(Nico Ruderman)

“Maybe [the auction] brings life-changing money and pays for education for our son, and also allows somebody with the resources to actually display it and show it to the world. We’re really hoping that whoever buys it agrees to display it at Dodger Stadium for some time so everybody can see it. That’s really our wish.”

Even with all the incredible experiences he’s had because of the ball — including his favorite, speaking in front of Los Angeles City Council at City Hall and receiving a certificate of congratulations from Councilmember Traci Park earlier this month — Zachary said he’s “really excited” about the auction.

Advertisement

“It’s probably going to be a pretty fun experience,” Zachary said.

“We’ve had our fun with the ball,” his father added. “At this point he cares more about the memories, the pictures. He loves reading all the articles and watching all the news stories about it. That’s what’s fun for him, not the item itself.”

Continue Reading

Trending