Your Papers.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Where do we get our written cricket information? Which newspapers and websites? Which are the good and bad ones?

Which writer's opinions do you trust, and who do you take with a degree of scepticism?

Who are the great stylists, and who write like an internet translation app?

Obviously, the best minds in the game post on CMS, so accept that as a given. I'm talking about those who draw a wage for doing what we do for nothing. Apart from when we're doing it at work.

[Arthur Crabtree]

Cricinfo is a great source, particularly its coverage of live cricket. But the quality of the journalism is variable. Especially the ex players. I find Boycott just plain annoying. Ian Chappell is ok. But generally the ex players are not writers of note. Just writing up stuff they might say in an interview.

The 'funny' stuff is lamentable. On page 2.

Among the journos, I find Harsha Bhogle reasonable. As is Duleep Premachandran. David Hopps is a worthy replacement for Andrew Miller. But, for me, the greatest writer, especially stylistically, is Gideon Haigh. He also has great knowledge of cricket history. Though his technical insights will never carry the weight of a former player.

stasguru is a thing of wonder.

[Arthur Crabtree]

I feel a sad about what happened to the cricket coverage on the bbc. As I do about the website as a whole. What was once the envy of all news outlets in the country, and beyond, is now an incoherent mess. Which was intentional.

The BBC over by over feature was the paragon that all others aspired to. Particularly when helmed by Ben Dirs. All else has gone. There are bits about TMS that have all the insightful profundity of an episode of Last of the Summer Wine. There are articles by writers of the stature of Alec Stewart. Aggers, a legend behind the mic, is a little embarrassing on the page, and not a reliable guide to the international game.

Such a shame.

[Arthur Crabtree]

When England are playing Australia, and doing well. As we tend to, now. The Sydney Morning Herald is a must for a morning boost of schadenfreude. And it's a decent read, though often a little cheerful. Which I find to be true of Aussie media generally, which has a feel of can do optimism compared to the UK equivalent.

Big nod to Greg Baum, who must be among the world's greatest sports journalists.

[shankycricket]

I chat with George every now and then and he comes across a balanced writer to me and not exactly the knee jerker which AC might like to portray him to be.

[Arthur Crabtree]

The Guardian's sport coverage isn't that good. The actual newspaper barely carries cricket at all. More so for the Ashes. Most of the county game is online. But while the football coverage is dreadful, even idiotic, the cricket writing, what there is, holds up well. Vic Marks and Mike Selvey are probably the two most respected cricket writers in the country. Both write well, and their opinion is well worth seeking out.

The Guardian has thrown a lot of effort at its website and their writers spend some time talking to the readers on the blogs. Which only really works well if you agree with what they are saying, as dissent is met with a rather grumpy dismissiveness.

Barney Ronay writes a good article, especially if he has a subject to keep the word souffle buoyant. It can be all style, and no story. But it can also be excellent and often worth making an effort for.

Their over by over feature has a good reputation, and it is good. A real fan will want ball by ball on cricinfo. And its no better than the one on BBC. But it's still pretty good. It is lively, often funny, with the quirkiness of a fanzine, but carries a very slight aftertaste of smugness. Try it and see.

Mike Brearley writes at the weekend. His articles tend to be extra-ordinarily dull. Which isn't what you'd expect at all.

I

[m@tt]

Online:

Cricinfo and the Telegraph are my main two sources. Cricinfo has by far the best live coverage (apart from watching on Sky, of course). The Telegraph has the probably the nicest-to-use comments section, although their journalists have been a bit knee-jerk of late.

I also frequent the Times (although accessing articles is a bit of a pain as you have to edit the URLs to avoid the paywall), Sky Sports, the Daily Mail and the Guardian. Less so, the Cricketer and the Independent.

[Arthur Crabtree]

The journalists who turn up on live tv never seem too impressive. That one from the Independent (Stephen Brenckley?) just looks at the averages before he goes on air. The one from the Sun who has been there ages... John Etheridge, never inspires confidence. Same with Paul Newman, who doesn't seem to believe what he's saying when you see/hear him, and changes his mind if someone disagrees with him.

Steve James used to write for the Guardian, he's good. As did Simon Hughes, who is fine on tv, but really dull as a writer. Atherton wrote for the Guardian for a short while as well, and he was ok. Cricket Writer of the year I think.

[Arthur Crabtree]

I chat with George every now and then and he comes across a balanced writer to me and not exactly the knee jerker which AC might like to portray him to be.

I didn't mention your man, Shanks! I'll consider myself warned off.

[dan08]

Cricinfo for me.

I occassionaly have a look around at other websites but nothing matches Cricinfo in terms of statistics (which i love ).

[Arthur Crabtree]

Cricinfo is pretty amazing for the breadth of its coverage. And usually lively and interesting. Below the line though, is insanity.

[Aidan11]

Rarely read papers.

Get most of my info through forums like this believe it or not.

[ddb]

Cricinfo is a great source, particularly its coverage of live cricket. But the quality of the journalism is variable. Especially the ex players. I find Boycott just plain annoying. Ian Chappell is ok. But generally the ex players are not writers of note. Just writing up stuff they might say in an interview.

The 'funny' stuff is lamentable. On page 2.

Among the journos, I find Harsha Bhogle reasonable. As is Duleep Premachandran. David Hopps is a worthy replacement for Andrew Miller. But, for me, the greatest writer, especially stylistically, is Gideon Haigh. He also has great knowledge of cricket history. Though his technical insights will never carry the weight of a former player.

stasguru is a thing of wonder.

Did you read Ed Cowan's piece on cricinfo?

I chat with George every now and then and he comes across a balanced writer to me and not exactly the knee jerker which AC might like to portray him to be.

I didn't mention your man, Shanks! I'll consider myself warned off.

On Gideon AC, he did a very good interview here that's worth a listen/read: http://thecricketcouch.com/blog/2012/02 ... eon-haigh/

[Arthur Crabtree]

Just read Cowan's piece ddb. Nicely written, if a bit raw in places, but then I think cricinfo articles aren't edited. Eloquent and passionate to the point where it is actually quite moving. And for the armchair fan, an interesting, vicarious insight into how it must feel to play at that level.

Bit surprised that he says he may never speak to ZK. I thought players mixed after play. It used to be like that.

Listening to Haigh now. And my girlfriend. Was the link because he's doubting technology?! Very interesting stuff, particularly on the state of the India team. Seem to think there's something sick in the heart of Indian cricket. A bit Shakespearian this stuff. Recommend this particularly to Indian fans.

[ddb]

Was the link because he's doubting technology?!

Ha no. It was because he talked about journalism and had some very interesting views on the BCCI/ICC.

There's also an IPL podcast on there which is the latest one. Brilliant insight with a KKR CEO or something of how KKR have planned their buys.