Richard Brinkman, Author at iSportConnect

On The Brink: The Highs And Lows Of 2021 In Sport

Richard Brinkman casts his eye over some of the best and worst moments from the last year.

Inevitably at this time of year thoughts start to reflect on the year just gone, and project towards the one to come.

When I consider 2021 in sport my overwhelming feeling is one of uncertainty – it’s been a tempestuous time wherever you look. Delayed events, changed events, financial concerns, societal pressures, technical opportunity and a rapid scrambling for transformation (often without a clear idea of the end goal) have all contributed to an unfamiliar, unpredictable and therefore uncomfortable picture.

Much of this discomfort has been felt by sport’s administrators. It is undoubtedly a tough time to run a sport. Change is uncomfortable. We have seen the Rugby League World Cup delayed by 12 months; relatively new external leadership voices at UK Athletics and Premiership Rugby replaced by “safer hands” from within those sports; the leaders of the FA and EPL under serious pressure over EURO2020 and the European Super League respectively; and an under-pressure leader at the ECB who prioritised the wrong people and issue and who would like to leave but is stuck with the unenviable task of eradicating a societal issue from his sport.

“Yet in amongst all the upheaval there are frequent reminders of why you fell in love with sport in the first place.”

And yet in amongst all the upheaval there are frequent reminders of why you fell in love with sport in the first place. In the spirit of the great British Christmas top ten tradition I am going to pick out my own personal half-dozen highlights from 2021. And, for balance, five lowlights as well – after all, fortunately, the good outweighs the bad.

One of the many terrible things about COVID is that an inevitable focus on those closest and dearest to us, allied to lack of travel, has perhaps narrowed perspectives and horizons. Apologies in advance to all non-UK readers if the selections are a little British-centric. However, I am confident that some of the general themes will ring bells wherever you are in the world.

Talking of ringing bells – I wish all readers a very happy festive period and best wishes for a prosperous 2022.

2021 HIGHLIGHTS

Emma Raducanu’s US Open Win

The sheer freedom and uninhibited way tennis’ newest starlet hit the ball, attacked every match and approached every interview was a breath of fresh air. Of course, her international background and qualifier to riches story also helped the fairytale narrative. Fingers crossed the subsequent signs of over-exposure and being overly “managed” do not kill the goose and that those feet remain very grounded. The history of young talent backed by pushy parents who immediately try to “build” on success is not encouraging!

2021 F1 Season

An absolute ding-dong battle for the ages going down to the final lap of the final race. Probably the best driver ever (certainly statistically) versus the young pretender. The mixed-race kid from nowhere versus motor-racing royalty. Dominant teutonic engineering excellence and ruthlessness versus slightly maverick racing upstarts. Wherever you looked the narratives were a script-writer’s dream – fuelled by an ever-increasing antipathy between the drivers and teams themselves.

Of course, as only F1 can, they managed to turn the final act into something of a farce but that should not detract from a season that breathed life back into an increasingly predictable sport. To add to the excitement the middle of the pack also became ever more closely bunched. It is going to be all change to radically different regulations next season which will more than likely mean (at least initially) one team being far ahead of the others so we should cherish this season whilst we can.

Team GB in Tokyo

Despite the slightly weird scenes on the ground in Japan and the BBC’s increasingly bizarre coverage of the Games (did they just put names in a hat and match the first 40 names out with the 40 presenting tasks?) both the OG and Paralympics delivered the surprising and heart-warming images and stories that even non-sports fans love and have become accustomed to. It was another predictably bumper medal-haul for GB from some incredibly inspiring athletes at the Paralympics.

“I hope this shake-up is reflected in the funding model.”

However, it was the volume of medals that Team GB managed to accrue at the OG that was the most pleasant surprise. Particularly, the medals from less expected sources such as Gymnastics, Weightlifting, BMX, Triathlon and Modern Pentathlon alongside the perennials like Swimming, Cycling and Equestrianism that most pleased. I hope this shake-up is reflected in the funding model and some of the relatively big sports like athletics and rowing which have previously been cosseted by generous annual central hand-outs are made to be far more accountable for their own funding going forward.

Europe’s Solheim Cup win

An against the odds comeback win away from home which comes down to the final match on the final green – need I say more? Great standard of play, interesting course, inspiring personal stories and played in a great spirit. Everything you could hope for from a two-horse race and what every sports fan hopes to see when they tune in.

Harlequins Premiership Rugby win

The way Harlequins did it, with an end of season charge and two very tight late wins in the knock-out games, and the manner in which they played was not only heart-warming to every sporting romantic but was also authentic to their spirit as a club and pointed towards a new, more exciting, blueprint for English rugby going forward.

The free-flowing attacking approach orchestrated by a young, audacious and gifted fly-half (who looks like a boy amongst giants) that produced remarkable high-scoring comeback wins at Bristol in the semi and in the Final against a powerhouse Exeter team were real Roy of the Rovers comic-book stuff. It has inspired a changing of the guard in the England team and with it a more mercurial and skills-based approach which is good for the game as a whole as well as dedicated fans.

England Women’s Rugby Team

Very rarely do you see a sport take a quantum leap in front of your eyes. However, I think that was what I witnessed across four weekends this autumn. The way the English team ruthlessly dispatched what are supposedly three of the top five other women’s teams in the world by 40 points+ on consecutive weekends set new standards for the sport. Particularly as it was done without the World Rugby Player of the Year, without their record-breaking winger, bedding in a new fly-half and handing out half a dozen debuts.

The strength in depth is frightening and the younger the player the more talented they seem. Frankly, it became boring at times and like watching boys against men (to coin a misplaced phrase). I truly fear for the Six Nations next spring and an uncompetitive tournament where most team’s (bar France, who remain competitive) goal will be to keep England to under 40-points. The continuing progress fuelled by increasing professionalism in Women’s sport remains a double-edged sword – whilst increasing quality and exposure at the top end it also increases the gap between the best and the rest – meaning more very uncompetitive matches.

2021 LOWLIGHTS

Euro 2021 Final

Forget the result. Forget the disappointment of such a tepid display from the team in the Final after such an encouraging start to the tournament. The disorder and unruliness around the Final was embarrassing. According to the independent report lives could have been at risk at some points, yet no material consequences or actions seem to have occurred. It is well known that running UEFA events is not straightforward given the amount of central control they prefer to exert but, even so, the lack of planning and foresight from the FA was astonishing given events earlier in the tournament and English football’s history. The attempt immediately after the event to paint the trouble as “civil disorder” and a police matter at an event at the FA’s stadium featuring the England team and attended by their “fans” was also pretty shocking. It is good to see senior FA figures taking some personal responsibility now.

European Super League

A shambles! The UEFA proposals that gave rise to the ESL concept were ill-conceived and bad for most, but this was worse. At least the presentation of the idea was. The whole debacle was just a depressing reminder of how money trumps everything (see also Newcastle United owned by Saudi Arabia plc), how entrenched individual club interests are now in football and what an antiquated concept “the good of the game” is – even within the 20 clubs of the Premier League.

“Hopefully an Independent Regulator will halt the rampant player wage inflation at the top end of the game that sees even average EPL players paid multi-millions every season.”

The ghost of the ESL concept continues to cast a long shadow over English football. Only last month we had Leeds CEO Angus Kinnear’s colourful Maoist analogies in relation to a new Independent Football Regulator who may make EPL clubs share more of their wealth with clubs lower down the football pyramid. Is this the same gentleman who in April was vociferous in his opinion that ESL must be stopped at all costs in recognition that football clubs play a larger part in the fabric of English communities than just being financial businesses and that therefore the largest entities should not be allowed to abandon the others? You cannot have it both ways Angus!

Hopefully an Independent Regulator will halt the rampant player wage inflation at the top end of the game that sees even average EPL players paid multi-millions every season. I hope the Regulator wil prefer to see some of this wealth redistributed to smaller clubs so that football is a game all can enjoy across the country regardless of where they live or who they follow.

Azeem Rafiq / Yorkshire racism scandal

Just depressing to see the sport you love, and participate in, labelled “institutionally racist” – particularly so by those with the privilege of being tasked with running and championing the sport. Whatever the wrongs and rights of dressing room cultures, what may or may not allegedly have been said or done in the past, who now works where and what initiatives are launched where, the bottom-line is that there were no winners here.

There may be some winners in the long-run but I am yet to see how that will be measured or when. If positive changes to this wonderful sport can be made I am all for them. However, the allegations and subsequent responses at the top end of the game all seemed a million miles away from the cricket I and my many recreational cricket badger mates experience. Given that this is a highly charged, very emotive and subjective issue it remains a difficult area to have an informed and mature conversation about so I will leave it there.

2021 Lions Tour / Ryder Cup

Both events are highly anticipated box-office draws on account of their rarity value and the unusual nature of bringing together under one roof players who are usually competing with each other. Both events turned out to be damp squibs in terms of entertainment. Both went largely as scripted with the favoured team exerting early dominance in the manner anticipated and then holding on to it whilst largely unchallenged by a competitor that could not find any inspiration, creativity or luck. Neither event was exciting and both were effected negatively by the lack of visiting fans. The atmosphere (or lack of) at both events was perverse and unsettling – and certainly did not encourage talented players to produce their best. A similar situation appears to be playing out in the current Ashes in Australia where the missing Barmy Army seem sorely missed. As is often stated the support, as well as the sport, is a key part of the entertainment proposition.

IOC & China

The IOC are usually very slick with communications – their messaging is generally considered and well delivered. However, their involvement with the missing tennis player Peng Shuai appears ill-conceived and clumsy. It is a matter of record that the 2022 Winter Games are being held in Beijing because there were no other realistic bidders. Therefore, it is always going to reflect as self-serving at best (and subservient to the Chinese authorities at worst) to get involved in this issue and try to deliver evidence in direct contradiction to the Peng Shuai’s own playing union.

The WTA is taking a commendably tough approach until convinced that their member is safe and well. It would be a lot easier to make the right noises and carry on as normal (like the “fellow professionals” of the ATP) with the money involved but they have selected (unusually) to take highly ethical approach. To have this potentially undermined by the IOC with all it is supposed to stand for does not sit well.

Women’s Sport Must Ensure It Does Not Make The Same Mistakes As The Male Equivalent

After a recent Women’s Sport Trust report looked at the status of media coverage received by women’s sport, Richard Brinkman looks at the viewers it should be targeting and says that it must avoid following some of the past mistakes made by men’s sport.

In my last blog I was reflecting on some observations arising about the important issue of driving a stronger and more prosperous women’s sport ecosystem. These were driven by the commendable and thought-provoking “Visibility Uncovered” report recently released by the Women’s Sport Trust (WST) that reflects on the media coverage of women’s sport in the UK across 2021.

One element that really got me thinking was the report’s observation that women’s sport “needs to address building greater habit and repeat viewership”.

I think that it is pretty clear and widely accepted that in the extremely competitive fight for leisure time, eyeballs and spend that all of sport finds itself in an understanding of what makes a broadcast or fixture compelling and special to a specific audience.

This obviously means identifying and understanding that potential audience is vital if you are to have any chance of being commercially successful, or even viable.

“My personal view is that too much of the coverage of women’s sport is not clear about focus or objective – it can often feel a bit forced.”

In short, building repeat and habitual viewing is increasingly difficult but increasingly important! It is especially difficult if you are not lasered in on a particular audience or objective.

My personal view is that too much of the coverage of women’s sport is not clear about focus or objective – it can often feel a bit forced, like it is trying a bit too hard to be special or different. It is either too introductory or basic (i.e. designed to cater for an entirely new audience) or exclusively ‘for-women’ oriented (i.e. deliberately doing anything and everything but what you would normally expect to see in established broadcasting of sport). This is a pretty binary approach that, in my opinion, does the sport covered a disservice and will ultimately be self-defeating.

Habitual and repeat viewing depends largely on appealing to habitual and repeat sports viewers. Yes, new viewers can be won but this is only ever likely to be in relatively small numbers.

For better or worse the majority of these habitually frequent viewers (certainly in the UK) are men and, as touched on before they are likely conservative (as implied by the term habitual) in their preferences. Therefore, being too basic or overly appealing to one gender or the other is unlikely to deliver if your ultimate end goal is commercial success.

Women’s sport has an amazing opportunity to learn from some of the mistakes that men’s sport has made in trying to attract female following over the years in terms of broadcasting for mass appeal.

One of the things the Hundred got very right was their use, across both the BBC and Sky, of established and well-known and respected faces and voices of both genders commenting on all of the matches to ease the existing audience into the new format whilst also welcoming the desired new younger audience.

Ironically, one of the sports that I find to be very well presented is netball on Sky. They are very good in explaining the how and why, rather than just the what, of the action on the court. However, netball is hardly an exemplar of gender parity and it is just a shame (given the dynamic, skilful and quick approach play) that the game stops as it gets to the crucial moment of putting the ball in the net in order to seemingly make it as easy as possible! I’ll be honest, as a general sports fan I find this aspect of it off-putting.

Sky have, though, created a very discernible look and feel around the sport and boosted a very dedicated community around the sport. Unfortunately, “community” in sport is usually a euphemism for a very dedicated and knowledgeable following that is relatively small.

The ultimate point to me is that, yes, I may be male but, ultimately, I am a sports addict – I will consume and interact with good sport regardless of who is taking part. I am interested in any sport provided it is fair, entertaining, and meaningfully competitive. I may be wrong but I doubt that I am alone in this.

If the rise of women’s sport in the UK is to continue to be unstoppable it will increasingly depend on growing attention from the likes of me (who already spends more time than is probably healthy consuming and thinking about sport!). There is a natural limit to how much of a new audience any sport can attract. Given the volume of sport available on all platforms there is generally a good reason why most who do not already follow sport take that option, they can be extremely difficult to reach and convince.

From my point-of-view it is not an increase of easily available media coverage for women’s sport that is going to win this attention. For most sports access is, for me, generally pretty good and most coverage serviceable. Personally, I find it is the positive differences in women’s sport that create its appeal and interest is not becoming more like the male sports I am already overly familiar with.

“Long may female sports stars celebrate their differences and feel comfortable to be themselves – please, please, please don’t become overly media trained or managed!”

Rather, what wins me over is the talent, skill and (crucially) openness, honesty and humility of stars like Sarah Hunter and Tammy Beaumont. They genuinely look to enjoy what they are doing, care deeply about making themselves and those around them better, and are highly competitive but balanced in their approach. It is refreshing and highly appealing. It stands in stark contrast to the often anodyne, trite and homogenous approach of the majority of male sportsmen. Long may female sports stars celebrate their differences and feel comfortable to be themselves – please, please, please don’t become overly media trained or managed!

Of course, there is also an appreciation of watching players who are just very, very good at what they do. Whether that is Amy Jones wicket-keeping, Marlie Packer over a ruck, Sarah Bern ball-carrying, Sophie Ecclestone bowling or Abby Dow’s all-round game as a sports enthusiast there is a thrill in watching individuals who are pound-for-pound best in the world quality.

What is less appealing is a world where the differences between men’s and women’s sport are eliminated. A world where the less desirable elements of men’s sport are allowed to develop in women’s sport. I am not sure many sports viewers want or need another version of what they are already familiar with.

Some of this is already creeping in – the top divisions of rugby and football are becoming all the same clubs and therefore geographic pull as the men’s leagues. The WSL is seeing the development of unsustainable business models with spiralling player wage inflation and a concentration of all the best talent in a very few clubs. The academies of those bigger clubs are sucking up all available talent from a wider and wider range at a younger and younger age.

There are too many uncompetitive games in a number of the sports where the top three clubs easily defeat all the rest and only really compete with each other. I could go on – women’s sport becoming more like men’s is not what I want to see because I am too well aware of the shortcomings of the existing product. To be clear – I want women’s sport to prosper, but I am keen that it does not repeat the same mistakes.

There is a lot that could, should and is being said around these issues. I commend the WST for generating some concrete evidence to inform the debate and guide development. I also applaud their ambition and goals to keep shifting the dial for women’s sport. As a father and a husband I see at first-hand every week the benefits mentally and physically of regular sporting and physical activity.

“Women’s sport has a superb opportunity to address this at an earlier stage of its nascent development and steal a march.”

However, for me it is vital that there is balance and care taken in reading the research undertaken – don’t just look for what you want to see. All is not continually rosy and relentlessly positive – lets learn and address issues as progress is made.

It is also important that the correct questions are asked. It is not just a question of always wanting more – be that money, attention, or media coverage – that will all come in spades if the individual women’s sports better understand their appeal to different types of sports fans (newbies, by gender, established addicts, traditionalists etc) and what really makes it a different and, on occasion, a more appealing proposition than most of the existing sports offerings.

After all, are we not constantly hearing that the major issue in sport is an inability to properly monetise itself through a lack of understanding of its following. Women’s sport has a superb opportunity to address this at an earlier stage of its nascent development and steal a march. However, this will require a potentially challenging transition away from the easier, quicker, cheaper but blunter approach of exposure counting.

“It Is Crucial For Future Growth That Debate And Review About Progress Is Thorough”

Richard Brinkman shares his thoughts on one of the most recent reports looking at the media coverage of women’s sport.

I hope, like me, you found the recent publication (and subsequent articles, podcasts, tweets etc) of the “Visibility Uncovered” research commissioned by the Women’s Sport Trust (WST) extremely thought-provoking. The study looks at media coverage of women’s sport across UK media so far across 2021 and raises many valuable and interesting points.

It is not easy as a male to feel comfortable commenting on women’s sport. It is with some trepidation that I write this as it often appears that a male view about female sport is not that welcome or deemed valid unless it is overwhelmingly and relentlessly positive. Ignoring the obvious irony of this, I feel strongly about the positive growth of women’s sport having seen at first-hand its positive effects within my own family and friends so have opted to be brave!

“All sports enthusiasts should have an equal stake and motivation to ensure that female interest, opportunity and participation in sports of all types is as high and positive as it can be.”

All sports enthusiasts should have an equal stake and motivation to ensure that female interest, opportunity and participation in sports of all types is as high and positive as it can be. I am certainly enthused about the opportunities for women’s sport to add to the sporting landscape and economy.

However, it is highly unlikely that a women’s sport ecosystem run by women exclusively for women is going to deliver the results or economic goals that appear to be the ultimate target (although some clearer SMART goals around what desired ultimate outcomes might look like would certainly help clarify this – but one step at a time).

It is an important topic and the WST are to be commended not just for their continued championing of the cause, but also for putting some concrete numbers on the subject in order to inform debate and for monitoring progress on an ongoing basis.

However, it is crucial for future growth that debate and review about progress is thorough. The correct (and sometimes awkward) questions need to be asked and the responses need to be interrogated realistically in order to make real, lasting progress. It is always tempting to look for the answers that one wishes to see but, to my mind, it is vital that any approach is balanced and prepared to learn from failure. This, incidentally, includes acknowledging that existing weaknesses in men’s sport can often be instructive.

To that end over my next two blogs I thought I might point out some of the most pressing points that occurred to me when looking at the research.

One of the first things to strike me is how dangerous it is to try and pull definitive causes and effects out of viewership/listenership/readership data without fully understanding context. I worry that a seeming desperation to see the most positive angle out of any situation in relation to women’s sport will mislead and cloud an ability to take the most appropriate action going forward.

Take, for instance, this claim from the WST website:

“4.3m people who watched the Women’s Hundred had not watched any live coverage of England v India earlier this year and of these viewers, 666,000 went on to watch three minutes or more of England Women v New Zealand in September, accounting for 16% of the unique reach for the series”.

The strong (and deliberate) inference here is that the Hundred is growing cricket audiences per se and introducing new viewers to the international game.

However, an alternative (and, dare I suggest, more accurate) reading of the situation could be that as the entire T20 and ODI series vs India took place during Wimbledon fortnight this naturally suppressed the viewing of that series by the “normal” cricket audience. After all, everyone knows that Wimbledon is more than just a tennis tournament in the British calendar and that the wall-to-wall BBC coverage over the fortnight distorts viewing figures across all genres on all channels every year. Even my own cricket watching decreases as my tennis viewing rises to an abnormal annual high every late June/early July.

*Women’s cricket is one of the sports that has received a lot of positivity in recent years, following the Women’s T20 World Cup in Australia in 2020.*

Could it be that the audience for the NZ series was just a return to a more “natural” cricket audience level given the less competitive TV and sporting alternatives at that point?

Of course, no one will be able to say for sure until data over a few years has been collected. The truth, as ever, most likely lies somewhere in the middle. It remains true, though, that it is dangerous to jump to binary conclusions however much one might wish them to be true.

The second point that leapt out is the difficult situation WST finds itself in having to deal with Women’s sport en masse. Of course, the female version of every sport has its own unique situations, challenges and opportunities. No two are quite the same.

As an aside, I cannot imagine how such an organisation trying to promote men’s sport across the board might operate or what it might look like – it seems hard enough for men to get any sort of collective view within leagues within individual sports!

This very broad view inevitably leads to some confusing messaging. The goals for the organisation are impressive, important, and laudably directed towards a more prosperous future for women’s sport.

However, the focus remains either very much in the past (“things are so much better than they used to be” as per the Visibility Uncovered report) or comparative (vs men’s sport, creating a potentially zero-sum “us v them” narrative) rather than refocussing and moving towards what is actually wanted and/or needed.

“It is tough to push for collective changes that will deliver for all beyond basic volume of participation and media coverage stats.”

And therein lies the issue – what is wanted or needed is much and various depending on the sport. Therefore, it is tough to push for collective changes that will deliver for all beyond basic volume of participation and media coverage stats. Once some sort of acceptable parity or level is reached on these measures (and the figures suggest rapid progress has been made) – where next?

My own most recent live sporting occasion happened to be a Women’s Premier League hockey match. It was a great experience. An extremely high standard of hockey, an entertaining game, a friendly atmosphere amongst the 50 spectators (and eight dogs!) in bucolic surroundings. But I was rather left wondering a) where else in the sporting world could you wander over and watch six or seven Olympians and a Kate Richardson-Walsh coached team completely free, b) how else I could follow one of the teams on an ongoing basis now I am hooked and c) what is the WST research actually doing for this particular women’s sport and its top-level athletes.

To be fair, I guess this is where the WST Unlocked programme for leading female athletes might kick-in – although how many more athlete voices can actually cut-through in this age of athlete activism is a moot point. But that is another story for another day!

In keeping with that theme – more thoughts, observations and ideas arising from the important WST “Visibility Uncovered” report will follow in my next blog. For now, though, I hope the points arising provide some interesting food for thought.

On The Brink: Sport Must Concern Itself Less With Reinvention And More With Adaptation

In this edition of ‘On The Brink’, Richard Brinkman looks at how sport must become less invested in trying to force a reinvention of itself, instead of focussing on the more clear issues at hand and enhancing the current product.

Last week I was considering Charles Darwin’s statement: “It is not the most intellectual of the species that survives; it is not the strongest that survives; but the species that survives is the one that is able best to adapt and adjust to the changing environment in which it finds itself”.

This quote is more pertinent than ever in light of the many challenging external “macro” environmental issues that many sports are confronted with in the present climate of accelerated change. As a reminder some of these are

Ageing populations and a more sedentary younger generation
Ever more competition for leisure time, attention and share of wallet
The ability and apparent thirst for people to access and share opinion, content and information immediately and remotely: a demand for instant gratification and entertainment
A lack of capital allied to limited time and/or human resources

“The leaders tasked with navigating these waters have to be particularly skilled in an extremely broad range of diverse skills.”

These are taxing and complicated inter-connected issues to try and overcome. The leaders tasked with navigating these waters have to be particularly skilled in an extremely broad range of diverse skills. Last week I commented on how a lack of leadership had impacted on Premiership Rugby’s ability to adapt and adjust.

Another element that consistently hampers change in sport is governance. Nowhere is this more evident than in the UK’s strongest sport – football. As Darwin noted just because you are strong (or, in this case, relatively rich) does not mean you don’t have to adapt.

It is generally accepted that there are eight characteristics that are consistently found in good governance. Suffice to say a system where most of the money and fandom is generated in one organisation (Premier League), another runs the national team, national stadium, regulations, officials (sort of) and most grassroots participation (Football Association), and a third provides the essential “glue” through the middle of the pyramid that maintains football as an essential part of English communities (English Football League) is not ideal if you are considering key governance factors such as Accountability, Transparency, Effectiveness and Efficiency or Responsiveness.

And this is even before you begin to consider a further level of complexity in the competing interests of different kinds of clubs, or mixed quangos like the Professional Game boards.

With this in mind I noted with interest last week’s publication of The People’s Football Association submission to Tracy Crouch’s parliamentary investigation into potential football reform (www.faequalitynow.com). Whilst the submission’s suggested make-up of a new FA Board is, frankly, bizarre and likely to make decision-making worse (if not impossible) it is a sign that reform and change is wanted by a large number, needed based on the evidence of what has been recently occurring in football, and therefore more than likely to be coming.

It seems many within the football “bubble” are resistant to impending change and do not see any need for more centralised collective control over the game (often short-handed to “independent regulator”). This is surely a King Canute-like response given that whether they like it or not (and I genuinely think most politicians would prefer not to get involved in something as emotive as football) parliamentarians are being forced to actively participate in football matters. Looking at the past two years we have seen the following football issues occupy parliamentary time:

Lobbying to reinstate standing areas
A continuing fall-out from Hillsborough
The collapse or administration of local clubs – from Bury to Derby
Government loans and bail-outs to mitigate the effects of COVID
Resistance and assistance in blocking European Super League proposals
Furore over PL clubs trying to claim furlough tax-payer money whilst their players were mulling over whether to accept any kind of pay-cut (average PL weekly salary being ~£60k)
Major disorder at an international event at Wembley featuring the English team

“I would suggest that they start to actively participate in the debate of how football should adapt, rather than just trying to defend as much of the status quo as possible.”

Given the breadth of these issues and the increasing involvement (mostly at football’s request) of public resource and money it seems inevitable that some kind of more formal government involvement or oversight of football will happen.

Public confidence in the current system (the debate and issues raised by the proposed Saudi takeover of Newcastle being a topical demonstration) is low and it is not a tenable situation to ask government for money and action when you want it, but then to asked to be left well alone and have a blind-eye turned to unsustainable business practices the rest of the time.

“But what would an independent regulator actually do?” seems to be the refrain from those at the top of the game who are doing very nicely under the status quo. Most of us, of course, do not know the answer to that question. We all have a number of ideas and a personal perspective on how far-reaching the remit should be. However, those in the best position to answer and link the many perspectives in the most coherent way are the very ones who are asking!

I would suggest that they start to actively participate in the debate of how football should adapt, rather than just trying to defend as much of the status quo as possible which, if reports are to be believed, seems a general approach. Much better to guide the process of adapting and adjusting from a Victorian administrative structure to one fit for the modern world than have it forced upon you by well-meaning but inexperienced (in terms of administration) football enthusiasts.

*The European Super League was one of the latest “transformative” ideas for sport.*

In this way the apparent thirst for “transformation” might also be quelled. The win/lose nature of sport, the rapid shifting of seasons and fortunes, as well as an industry that depends on excitement for relevance all feed a strong desire for rapid and radical solutions. Often there is a collective push en masse for significant change without any real idea why the change is desired. There is certainly a strong element of this in the current debate around football governance.

This might explain the enthusiasm (to the point of cliché?) for transformation and solutions that are “game changing” within the sports industry.

When something is described as transformative in sport it is almost always with a positive implication. Something that was bad has been turned into something good. A loss has become a win, failure has become success. Of course, this is a very limiting way to look at issues that have a lot of nuance. Sport with its blend of economics, participation, media and social currency is an especially nuanced business.

This partly explains the angst and opposition to “game changing” and more “relevant” innovations in sport such as European Super League and The Hundred. It is hard to articulate nuanced issues around innovation clearly and simply. However, a failure to be transparent and completely honest seems to result in knee-jerk resistance.

“Successful species do not transform (i.e. make a marked change in form or nature) to survive, they adapt and adjust.”

The ECB, from inside the “bubble”, genuinely don’t seem to understand the antipathy towards The Hundred. However, all the talk of The Hundred being “transformational” and a “game changer” was always going to antagonise many (and, incidentally, likely appeals less to those who don’t know if they like cricket yet – the key target). A big part of the joy and appeal for many cricket fans and what makes it different from other sports is its heritage and sense of continuity. Obviously, things have to move on and, yes, adapt and adjust but they do not need total transformation – or completely “reimagining”.

This is why so many cricket followers would rather have seen all the money, time and effort spent on breathing new life and excitement into an existing strong format domestically with the T20 Blast, rather than trying to reinvent the wheel. Many of the changes in the Hundred (the innings clock, archway entrance, fielder restriction for overtime, new batter always facing etc) could easily have been integrated into 20/20. All the progress in Women’s cricket from The Hundred could just as easily been made playing 20/20 rather than 100-ball cricket.

Successful species do not transform (i.e. make a marked change in form or nature) to survive, they adapt and adjust. That is to say they build on what they have in respect to changing elements and factors around them. They do not look to radically alter and reinvent themselves into something they are not. This is worth bearing in mind when thinking about developing sport for a consumer base that are largely passionate about existing products and, by nature, cautious.

On The Brink: “If Clubs Have So Little Faith in Their Match Day Experience They Should Look To Themselves”

In his latest ‘On The Brink’ for iSportConnect, Richard Brinkman questions whether one league is not quite getting it right when it comes to their current broadcasting model…

It’s over 150 years since Charles Darwin wrote “It is not the most intellectual of the species that survives; it is not the strongest that survives; but the species that survives is the one that is able best to adapt and adjust to the changing environment in which it finds itself”.

However, these words could have been written yesterday when one observes how some of the UK’s leading sports have responded to the dynamic environment they currently find themselves in.

“Another factor in sport that complicates the ability to respond to external environmental shifts is that most decisions are made from firmly within the “bubble” of any given sport.”

Most sports (certainly in the “developed” world) are dealing with a range of common issues in terms of the environments in which they operate:

Ageing populations and a more sedentary younger generation
Ever more competition for leisure time, attention and share of wallet
The ability and apparent thirst for people to access and share opinion, content and information immediately and remotely: a demand for instant gratification and entertainment
A lack of capital allied to limited time and/or human resources

These are taxing and complicated inter-connected issues to try and overcome. Particularly so if you are hamstrung in your efforts by other factors.

Factors such as governance (particularly topical in football right now) and a pressure to deliver “game changing” solutions are two such pressures. More about these next week.

Another factor in sport that complicates the ability to respond to external environmental shifts is that most decisions are made from firmly within the “bubble” of any given sport – but, as we can see, are massively impacted by “macro” factors beyond the “bubble”. This puts immense pressure on leaders of sports bodies. They need to be one part visionary to take into account such macro factors; and in other parts diplomat and juggler in dealing with often noisy and needy stakeholders who, in the main, have the luxury of considering just one part of the “bubble” (i.e. their club, participation, broadcast, finance etc).

As we have just seen with the Chairman of the ECB getting this balance wrong can have serious consequences. Equally, when such leadership fails, or is missing, poor outcomes are inevitable.

READ RICHARD’S LAST PIECE: The Three Themes Established By Sports Bodies Who Have Exited COVID Positively

This appears to be what has happened to one of my own favourite sports – Premiership Rugby, and, in particular, the broadcast coverage which is so critical to its continued well-being.

Premiership Rugby is a well-run and well-organised event, consistently delivering compelling sport that is both competitive and entertaining. With a very lean centralised team and good partners they have developed an excellent product which has been superbly marketed and presented – mostly by a bold broadcast partner in BT. In other words, it was one of the more intellectually advanced species in terms of its approach to growing and popularising its sport when it took a risk on a partner that was at the time small and new but willing to offer significant support.

They understood there was huge benefit in explaining and demonstrating not just the mechanics of what is a relatively complicated game but also its ethos and values. BT was a new and willing partner in this mission and they set the bar that most international rugby has been trying to reach ever since.

“It appears to be a very short-sighted decision unlikely to benefit anybody in the long-term.”

Programming was consistent and reliable – people knew what to expect, where to find it and when. This is a very compelling quality to sports fans – most of whom are deeply conservative about their sport. Anyone who has ever worked at a major venue or football club will tell you that trying to alter habits around attendance and consumption (be it beer, food or any kind of media) is extremely testing. You can literally pay them to change and they still won’t!

However, PR have been without an active CEO for a while now. They last week announced the appointment of Simon Massie-Taylor to the post, but his start date is yet to be confirmed. Meanwhile, I am left scratching my head at this season’s broadcast coverage. It feels like we have regressed back to 2010! It is very frustrating to see.

Terrestrial highlights regularly shown at 7pm on Channel 5 on a Monday are no longer. It is an extraordinary decision at a time when many sports would literally kill for terrestrial coverage. I understand that by having to “give up” around five live games per season Premiership Rugby are, in effect, subsidising this coverage. I also understand that any cost-saving is likely to be eagerly swallowed up by the clubs after the pandemic. Nonetheless it appears to be a very short-sighted decision unlikely to benefit anybody in the long-term. Would an effective CEO have been able to better present the bigger picture and resist the short-term pressures?

Over the pandemic all games were streamed live on BT’s Extra channels – with the traditional three main slots (Friday evening, Saturday pm and Sunday pm) given the full production treatment on the main channels. Now, the streaming has gone as well. One can only see the main three games per weekend. There will be many like me – if Saints are not one of the teams featured – my viewing is only very occasional.

Obviously, this unwillingness to stream every game now that fans can attend at grounds is down to the tired 1990s thinking about protecting live attendances. If clubs have so little faith in their live match day experience that they think fans will not attend if they are live on TV they should look to themselves – not deny the end consumer or, even worse, potential fan. There is plenty of other sport to follow – not to mention alternative entertainment sources.

Certainly many of the more local “town” clubs that play in their own stadiums should be selling out every league home game (and mostly do). If the grounds are not full (and rocking) they should look at pricing and ticketing. This is why I was not at Franklins Gardens this last weekend and why, I assume, there were some 1500 empty seats. The team are flying, the opponents were an entertaining side, demand and popularity locally are huge – there is little excuse. The approach to ticketing and pricing appears to have grown organically over the years to the point where, in my view, it makes no sense and offers little value. I would be willing to bet that they are not alone in their approach.

*Premiership Rugby recently announced the appointment of Simon Massie-Taylor as incoming CEO*

However, its not just a reduction in rugby action that will have an impact. Rugby Tonight used to be an exemplar of how shoulder programming can actively help build a sport. Now it is such an anaemic version of its former self that even a broadcaster as talented as Craig Doyle can barely keep it afloat.

Gone are any highlights, demos, lifestyle pieces, club focus, any interaction with players from various levels and even enthusiasm from pundits such as Lawrence Dallaglio. In its place a 30-minute piece from World Rugby about player welfare and their guidelines to professional clubs as to how much contact training players should do a week. Charming a man as Alan Gilpin is (even over Zoom), and rugby badger as I am, after five minutes this was pretty esoteric and dull. (The answer is 15 minutes a week by the way – that took 25 minutes in the programme). This week’s offering about how much rest players who went on the Lions tour should have before reappearing for their clubs was similarly painful – “each case is judged on its individual merits” was strung out into 20 minutes, to be followed by a very ethereal 20 minutes about Club DNA (they change depending on the times, status, history/heritage and success of the club – just so you know).

However, one thing Craig did get right is to point out that you can still see the weekends highlights on BT. So what are people complaining about? They are complaining because nobody is going to stay up until 11pm or later on a Sunday to watch them Craig!

Apparently, and it took a fan like me two weeks into the season to find this out, I can also watch coverage and highlights on part of Premiership Rugby’s website. Just because you call part of your website ‘.tv’ it does not make it TV! For many like me it means a second-rate viewing experience on a tablet, laptop or desktop. Therefore, I have not even tried and I am a pretty enthusiastic rugby fan. This is a move of last resort that will not build following so, please, let’s not try and dress it up as a way to reach younger audiences, etc.

“To put it mildly, the removal of streamed access to all live games and regular terrestrial highlights is very parochial and narrow thinking.”

To put it mildly, the removal of streamed access to all live games and regular terrestrial highlights is very parochial and narrow thinking. The reduction in regularity, quality and volume of support programming is damaging. Guys – you have a fantastic product that is exciting, authentic and entertaining – get it in front of as many as possible as often as possible. Your thinking is akin to the makers of Doom Bar only selling it in pints in Cornwall and expecting it to grow. Get it in front of as many as possible in as many different forms as possible!

This is a classic case of a sport adjusting and adapting just as Darwin suggests. However, it is adapting to internal factors within the sport, not adjusting to the external factors in the shifting world that it is part of. It is only by adapting to external threats and pressures that a species survives, not by feathering its own nest better. In order to thrive and grow you must first survive.

One wonders if this is a situation borne out of a temporary lack of leadership at PR? Certainly the incoming CEO is one of the good guys and perhaps his experience within rugby will mean that the terrestrial highlights issue will quickly present a simple four on two that can be converted for an early win?

Look out for Richard’s next ‘On The Brink’ next Monday…

On The Brink: The Three Themes Established By Sports Bodies Who Have Exited COVID Positively

In the first of a new blog series, ‘On The Brink’ by Richard Brinkman takes a view from the edge of the sporting landscape at some of the latest and most relevant areas of the industry. Richard kicks off by sharing his opinion on three themes he has noticed by those within sport who have managed to find success during the coronavirus pandemic.

Sometimes it feels like nothing in the world of sport is as it was 18 months ago. There is no doubting that attitudes, assumptions and acceptances that have been the norm for a long time in the sporting eco-system have undergone a seismic shift.

Enforced absences, empty stadia and highly regulated behaviours have forced sport into many difficult conversations and uncomfortable decisions, as well as highlighting issues traditionally kicked into the “long grass”.

Simultaneously, of course, the lifestyles, priorities and expectations of many millions of sports fans and followers (so often the last stakeholders considered but ultimately the bill payers) have also changed. My own perspectives have definitely altered in line with my circumstances.

“All these factors are inter-connected and, in all likelihood, get one right and the others will likely fall into place. Conversely, getting one wrong is likely to unravel the other areas.”

Like many, I am working more remotely and with a broader range of businesses and stakeholders in sport than previously. Most of these organisations are focussed on enabling coherent and productive change that adds value and can accelerate results.

Through this lens I have been trying to note some of the common themes amongst the sports bodies that are deemed to have had a “good COVID” (i.e. are in good shape to drive or exploit growth) and regular errors among those that have found the pandemic extremely taxing (i.e. are in survival mode).

Some of the key themes I have noted are:

Shore up your heartland/core and build from there
Transparent, honest and consistent communication – Comms are still important
A demand to justify your decisions with data, research and/or insight

The key point is that the vast majority of UK sports enthusiasts follow more than four sports pretty keenly – they observe closely a range of activities and can discern good from bad. Those bodies that act well around the key themes will be at a competitive advantage over those that don’t. All these factors are inter-connected and, in all likelihood, get one right and the others will likely fall into place. Conversely, getting one wrong is likely to unravel the other areas.

Before looking at some examples, good and bad, I should acknowledge that running a governing body in the UK is a tough job at the best of times, let alone in unprecedented times. The balance of protecting legacy whilst driving progress, simultaneously supporting elite performance and grassroots growth, satisfying a myriad of funders, historic decision-making structures, dealing with well-meaning amateurs alongside ambitious professionals (to name but a few of the competing interests) is, always, very difficult. Yet, many of us would take it on in a heartbeat and most execs do it for well below what they would be paid in virtually any other industry. The public at large expect high standards, and rightly so. It has been very tricky, but not impossible.

*Richard believes the messaging behind the Hundred could have been handled better by the ECB.*

If you look at golf back in Spring 2020 the various bodies (R&A, European Tour, England Golf, PGA etc) were all quickly aligned around a simple coherent plan. They wanted to get golf clubs open as quickly as possible and their core constituents out playing again. Once this was achieved professional tournaments could recommence for TV to maintain presence/interest and support the top end. They were prepared to accept some compromises around how golf clubs functioned and tournaments were run to achieve this. Thus they were able to drive and project positivity from the inside of their sport out. More people were able to try the sport and, crucially, more people wanted to.

Contrast this to the ECB who created consternation amongst their core constituents (existing ticket buyers, Clubs, Counties) with the messaging fiasco around trying to sell and launch the Hundred. We don’t need to trawl through every example but suffice to say that telling people that already like cricket that your new tournament “is not for you” is hardly likely to build advocacy. Then branding the existing cricket family (who are the volunteers that largely run All-Stars, Dynamos programmes, etc and pay £100+ for a day at the Test match) as too male, pale and stale is more likely to build alienation than bridges. Finally, failing to make an effective case that meant that cricket had to restart after other outdoor activities left the grassroots wondering about HQ priorities and/or competence.

I guess that neatly segues into honest, authentic and consistent communication.

The racing industry were always very clear that they wanted to get racing restarted at the tracks, not so much so that people could go racing but in order to support the betting industry that is the single most vital factor in keeping the equine industry and its thousands of workers afloat. Satisfying broadcast obligations simultaneously was a helpful by-product too. Again, circumstances meant that unfortunately the messaging was not exactly what racing enthusiasts would ideally want to hear. However, it was clear, honest and, all things considered, a step forward. As such it was welcomed.

Meanwhile, from the ECB there was no lack of transparency – just far too much “messaging” which lacked authenticity due to a lack of coherence. In summer 2020 when Pakistan toured England we were celebrating the cricketing family and how everyone pulls together. By autumn 2021 those words look pretty hollow in light of pulling out of the return trip.

“Despite very testing circumstances and much uncertainty the use of data, research and insight by the Rugby League World Cup team to bring in a diverse and varied range of commercial partners has been inventive and impressive.”

Likewise, it makes no sense to continually claim that the mental wellbeing of your players is your primary concern whilst simultaneously loading more and more workload on them and giving them less and less opportunity to perform at their best. This is akin to suggesting that an employee will get the best technology and tools to do their job, loading their MacBook Pro with Windows 95, giving them no Internet access and then wondering why they aren’t competing with the industry’s best.

Finally, we had the unfortunate cancelled/postponed India test at Old Trafford. In the morning it was covered by insurance, by the afternoon it wasn’t . Why not just be honest and say that it depends on an interpretation of the small print? Claiming that the decision had nothing to do with the IPL when the BCCI had tried to move the match six weeks earlier for that very reason also stretched credibility. Finally, the refusal to be at all critical smacked of prioritising cricketing politics over the cricketing public. Trust is hard won and easily lost.

But there are successes that have battled through the tough times. Despite very testing circumstances and much uncertainty the use of data, research and insight by the Rugby League World Cup team to bring in a diverse and varied range of commercial partners has been inventive and impressive. Their creative approach is an exemplar of how to maximise and best show what you have to offer.

The ECB, to its credit, has also bought in to making fact-based decisions – their use of a wealth of research and insight to build and market The Hundred should be lauded, whatever the outcome of the competition. They have also issued a flood of figures subsequent to the first edition – many of which point to how important the tournament has been for women’s cricket in particular.

However, the issue with being data-driven is that when one presents decisions without compelling evidence it does not look good. Inconsistency and a lack of coherence damages stakeholder confidence.

“The ECB, to its credit, has also bought in to making fact-based decisions – their use of a wealth of research and insight to build and market The Hundred should be lauded, whatever the outcome of the competition.”

For instance, the decision in August to approve £2.1m of ‘Long-Term Incentive Plan’ payments to ECB senior execs (reportedly to be shared by six or seven individuals) needed some careful explanation in the current environment.

Particularly so when we look at some of the information that is in the public domain:

In 2020 62 ECB employees were made redundant, reportedly 20% of the workforce
In 20/21 the ECB reported a £16.5m loss, with reserves that were at £70m+ in 2017 down to £2m
The ECB reported that cricket as a whole lost £100m in revenue in 2020/21
Cricket was the major beneficiary of the government’s £300m summer sport bail-out
Reportedly CEO Tom Harrison reportedly earns £512,000 per annum – after the pay and incentive cuts senior execs agreed in April 2020

Whether these payments are deserved or not I cannot comment on. What I can say, however, is that I am sure they are based on a number of metrics and targets that have been hit. Please share them! If they are around broadcast contracts, The Hundred or are “soft” as agreed with a previous regime so be it. Just be clear and honest!

The current reasoning of “exceptional leadership” across the pandemic does not ring true or instil confidence. It is not exceptional leadership to ensure professional cricket continued to be played in order to continue to fund the entire cricket pyramid as I recently heard Tom Harrison suggest. This is, literally, the ECB doing its job – pretty much its sole purpose. Even those that love cricket as much as I do are not going to clap a fish for swimming Tom! We do not pay firefighters more when they put out fires, nor nurses more when wards are full or soldiers when they go into battle.

As someone with measurement, data and insight-based decision-making experience I can vouch for the fact that if you use data to reach decisions but are not then prepared to share that information you are on a hiding to nothing and must be prepared to be viewed with scepticism. Comms and the optics of these things matter – especially when we all crave certainty in uncertain times.

For all sports, they matter most of all to your core constituents who want to believe in you the most. Without those solid foundations you are on shaky ground to build any kind of permanent growth.