BBC should have separate Sports Person and Sports Personality prizes

HUW TURBERVILL: Stuart Broad couldn't make it back-to-back cricket winners of the prestigious prize but the way the award is structured needs a rethink

1broads231201

Take out a digital subscription with The Cricketer for just £1 for the first month

"There is no debate more tiresome," said one of my friends about the BBC’s Sports Personality of the Year.

But for something so tiresome, we don’t half expend enough hours debating it.

Cricket fans’ hopes were dashed last Sunday when Stuart Broad finished outside the top three of the main award. I’d like to think that he finished fourth.

Of the other two that missed out, Ronnie O’Sullivan is a real genius, and I love watching him play snooker. But he’s a bad sport at times. His shoulder barge with Ali Carter in 2018 was unsavoury. He also had a row with Mark Allen a month back. Everyone loves a bad boy, but him winning SPOTY is not for me, I’m afraid. Please don’t give me a rocket, Ronnie fans.

And then there was Tyson Fury. He told everyone not to vote for him! Frankly, I was not about to argue with him.

Broad showed real character and personality after he was left out of the first Test against West Indies at the Ageas Bowl.

He made his point brilliantly. After letting off some steam, or having a “hissy fit” according to The Guardian’s Jonathan Liew, he was recalled and took 29 wickets in the next five Tests. There was even a very welcome return to form with the bat, with 62 against West Indies at Old Trafford.

His backstory, told by his mum, was moving – his premature birth, his growing pains. He spoke well on Sunday, looked dashing, and hopefully won cricket a few more fans. It was always a tall order on this occasion to hope that he would follow in the footsteps of winners Ben Stokes (2019), Andrew Flintoff (2005), Sir Ian Botham (1981), David Steele (1975) and Jim Laker (1956); or Botham and Geoff Boycott (second); and Botham, Flintoff and Graham Gooch (third). 

bwtropphy231201

Domestic cricket didn't get a single mention during the BBC's review of 2020

I’m not sure cricket is truly implanted back in BBC TV’s consciences yet anyhow, after just three live T20Is last summer – two men’s and one women’s. They haven’t shown a live men’s Test match since 1998.

Even when I was a youngster I used to be quite infuriated by the skimpy time devoted to cricket in the BBC’s annual review, but then I’ve always been biased. In recent years since the Beeb lost the cricket to Channel 4 in 1999, cricket might as well not have existed in the round-up, although James Anderson (2018) and Anya Shrubsole (2017) have recently made the shortlist.

County fans were also infuriated that the Bob Willis Trophy or Blast wasn’t mentioned (weird when you consider the brilliant coverage it got on BBC Radio and iPlayer).

As it was, jockey Hollie Doyle was voted third by the public; Liverpool’s long-awaited-title-winning captain Jordan Henderson was second, and seven-time world champion Lewis Hamilton was first.

Anyhow, back to that tiresome debate.

The BBC should redefine their sports awards to two main categories: Sports Person of the Year and Sports Personality of the Year.

Because the title really is hugely ambiguous, and yes, leads to long and essentially tiresome debates.

rashfordm231201-min_(1)

Marcus Rashford's off-the-field impact wasn't enough to earn him a nomination for the main award

For me, the sports personality of the year was clearly Manchester United and England footballer Marcus Rashford. Whatever your politics, you must agree that he showed enormous personality by making his stand on child poverty – head and shoulders above the other candidates (and yes he scored some goals, especially in the Champions League).

Those who argue that the award should go to just the highest achiever – and there’s no doubt Hamilton deserved it in those circumstances: he is surely the greatest F1 driver ever – seem to be ignoring guidelines issued on the BBC website in 2008.

In a point also made by the excellent Jonathan Northcroft in The Sunday Times, winners should be “the sportsman or woman whose actions have most captured the public’s imagination”. Come on, that is clearly Rashford. Here is the full criteria anyhow.

Funnily enough, if you go the Wikipedia page for SPOTY, it also suggests you don’t have to be British.

“The recipient must be either British or reside and play a significant amount of their sport in the UK.”

Mo Salah, anyone?

Gift a subscription to The Cricketer this Christmas and choose your free gift (a £20 John Lewis gift card or copy of Bob Willis: A Cricketer & A Gentleman). Subscribe here

 

Subscribe to The Cricketer for exclusive content every day: The inside track on England's Test tour with George Dobell in Pakistan, award-winning analysis, breaking news and interviews and the only place for in-depth county coverage all year round. Plus: An ad-free app experience at your fingertips. Subscribe to thecricketer.com today for just £1.

Comments

Posted by David Rimmer on 28/12/2020 at 17:04

A thought provoking piece. Marcus Rashford would clearly deserve a SPOTY award or should I say the main one. What he has done in terms of alleviating child hunger cannot be praised highly enough. Children should not be penalised for feckless behaviour by adults but the former are not solely suffering because of Covid-19. The media have been craven in not analysing why poverty occurs and too easily (and lazily) blame the government (by the way, I have not voted for the Tories since 1983). It chimes with their views and in some cases with the readers' prejudices. It is NOT solely due to governments but partially because a significant (yet minority) sector of the population expect the taxpayer to pick up the tab for their behaviour. I could go on but will leave that point there. I have probably infuriated enough people. As for Tyson Fury, yes, he is a formidable boxer but I have no time for him and his inchoate utterings. His fan base would probably be not too far short of the National Front in their views. If Fury fought Anthony Joshua and the latter won, I would not like to be a policeman on duty that night. All the latent racism would come out and there would be more injuries out of the ring than in it. It would could easily be a repeat of the disgraceful scenes after Alan Minter lost his World Middleweight title to Marvin Hagler in September 1980. I have got that off my chest and yes Lewis Hamilton was a deserving winner with the petrol heads always likely to have the final say. Whether F1 is good for the environment is another matter. As for Stuart Broad, he was never going to win the SPOY award. The last three cricket winners have been swashbuckling all-rounders who have achieved heroic status in an Ashes series and likely to appeal to the public bar element and the man in the street. The two previous winners, Jim Laker and David Steele would not win the award now. They did so (particularly Laker), again for top performances against Australia but in times where cricket was more in the national conscience. Yes, TV was limited in 1956 but to win the Ashes was just as big a thing then (though without all the media excess), although Laker was not recognised when he stopped off in a pub in Lichfield on the way home after he took 19 wickets at Old Trafford. People knew more about cricket in 1956 and 1975 (Steele's year) and could appreciate the artistry of spin or the skill of defensive batting. And yes not having cricket on the BBC does not help but I also feel we live in an age where people have to be entertained instantly. Broad can sometimes entertain with the bat but he is not in the same class as Ian Botham, Andrew Flintoff or Ben Stokes with the willow. Broad's skill with the ball is lost on most people including casual viewers of the game. In that respect he is at a disadvantage with Hamilton and Fury whose skills are considerable but easier to understand. Once again thanks for the piece.

Posted by Ben on 24/12/2020 at 23:28

There's two definitions for "personality" in the dictionary, you've written an entire article on the wrong one.

LATEST NEWS

STAY UP TO DATE Sign up to our newsletter...
SIGN UP

Thank You! Thank you for subscribing!

Units 7-8, 35-37 High St, Barrow upon Soar, Loughborough, LE128PY

website@thecricketer.com

Welcome to www.thecricketer.com - the online home of the world’s oldest cricket magazine. Breaking news, interviews, opinion and cricket goodness from every corner of our beautiful sport, from village green to national arena.