No, neither did I.

Can you imagine the FA Cup final, World Cup, Wimbledon, Open golf, Olympics or Six Nations being taken off terrestrial television?

While the magical summer of 2005 will live long in the memory, the England Ashes victory against Australia has been the preserve of Sky Sports subscribers and pub owners across the country.

Now, given the fact that cricket matches can last five days and therefore inevitably cross over to the working week, I’m not suggesting for one minute that when such events occur, we should all take days off to watch them.

But it would be nice to have the choice.

In these dark days of recession, spending £40+ to subscribe to Sky Sports is beyond a lot of people and as one of the ‘Crown Jewels’ of our sporting calendar, it should be on terrestrial television.

Surely, especially given the jubilation a cricket series win provokes in sports fans and the general public, not to mention one against Australia, removing it from the public consumption is, well, just not cricket.

The fact remains that Sky’s coverage is impressive – former captains such as Ian Botham, Mike Atherton and Nasser Hussain plus Ashes legends such as Bob Willis and Shane Warne provide a range of opinions and analysis which are unrivalled, as is their High Definition camerawork.

And there’s no doubt that the money Sky provides has a positive impact on all sports – and cricket needs it at elite level as much as anything else.

But while they continue to offer such as high standard of production, sharing the live coverage with a terrestrial channel, as they do for the FA Cup final, is not such a crazy idea.

Of course, those of us without Sky have now been able to savour the delights of Test Match Special which, although not quite as good as having images, it so quintessentially English and irreverent that it never fails to entertain.

But with sport in the UK continuing to falter as sports grounds are closed and investment fails to materialise, how are the next generations going to be inspired if they cannot see the moments that make sport such great unscripted theatre?
 
 
It’s a big day for the International Softball Federation and their BackSoftball campaign to promote the sport’s reinstatement to the Olympic Games Programme in 2016.

Softball has come a long way since it was voted off the Programme in 2005 – and sellout crowds and a carnival atmosphere at the Beijing Games last summer only skims the surface of the contribution the sport makes to the Olympic movement.

Softball is a predominantly female sport – at a time when the International Olympic Committee (IOC) is keen to promote female sports – and it’s clean anti-doping record; inclusivity and accessibility make a compelling case to the IOC.

The ISF realised in 2005 that they could do more to contribute to the Olympic values and set about a phenomenal initiative, modernising their organisation and providing programmes and support for national softball federations across the planet.

I’ve always been aware of softball as a sport played to a highly-professional level by advertising and marketing friends and it’s true that it is easy to learn and cheap to play.

But the level of camaraderie the sport provokes; the popularity of the sport in the Middle East or other conservative areas where female team sports are otherwise not permitted; and the sport’s fundamental ability to change lives through its global community programmes make it a great choice for the IOC Executive Board when they meet in Berlin today.

Even yesterday when the ISF visited a Berlin softball league, we discovered that the game in Germany is played by people aged three to over 60 from all walks of life and from all over the world.

It has been a privilege for Calacus to be a part of such a tremendous campaign with a team who deserves success when the announcement is made for the right to participate in the Olympic Games in 2016.

 

 
 
 
The PR battle of 2009

Everyone loves a romance between celebrities and the very public flirtation between glamour model Jordan and one-time pop star Peter Andre provided reams of copy for gossip-hungry tabloid media and readers in the UK.

Since then, Jordan and Andre have followed the well-trodden path of celebrity couples across the planet.

Just as with Disney girl Jessica Simpson and Nick Lachey in the United States, they invite the media into every aspect of their lives.

From romance to wedding to everyday living, there seems to be a hunger from the public and therefore from the media to see how these rich and ‘famous’ really live – and perhaps to draw some comfort in the fact that they have the same highs and lows that we all encounter.

There’s a reason why Jordan has been one of the most enduring and successful topless/glamour models in the last decade. She’s not the prettiest model but she seems to combine flirtation, hedonism and cheekiness with a single-minded obsession to be a success in everything she does.

But she also wanted to be seen as a responsible mother with a brain to match her looks, confirming through her books, her life with Andre and name change to Katie Price, that she had left her bad behaviour days behind her.

At the same time, I get the feeling that Andre, while accepting of his role as part of a celebrity couple, wanted above all to be a father and a partner with all the responsibilities and respect that that entails.

Famed for his six pack in the days of his hit single ‘Mysterious Girl’, stories of him bedding hordes of women just never made the media and given some of the obscure celebrities whose kiss and tell stories reach print, his low profile is not the reason.

Andre has been unfairly described as a wimp in some sections of the media, but throughout his acrimonious split from Jordan, he retained his dignity and the values that come with being from a Greek Cypriot family who take such matters very seriously.

While Jordan has reverted to type, partying, prancing around topless and in skimpy outfits and openly seeing other men, her estranged husband has maintained the air of someone who puts his children before anything – and that is to be applauded.

The last few weeks have shown that Jordan’s conversion into Price was nothing more than an act – as many of us perceived it to be – and the split from Andre has clearly hurt her deeply, regardless of what she says to the contrary.

I can’t help that thinking that when her children are old enough to read back on the spat between their parents, Jordan’s antics are going to remind them that the way their mother has behaved is no example of how to live responsibly.

Perhaps a regrettable aspect of the celebrity world we live in is that, while curiosity into Jordan’s life continues, she and others like her will continue to provide a focus for the media that their lack of talent or contribution to the world really deserves.
 
 
As a child, Ferrari were a brand that held a huge amount of mystique for me.

The magical designs of their cars, the power of their engines…they were synonymous with the Italian romance with cars.

When Michael Schumacher started winning Formula One championships at Ferrari, I could only drool at the mastery of his talent, the single-mindedness and drama of his success.

Of course, there were times when it would be easy to question whether he took gamesmanship and ruthlessness to a new level, but no one can doubt the talent of the man.

But, despite their superiority in recent years, it seems a shame that Ferrari have resorted to a schoolyard communications policy which will win them few friends.

Following the injuries suffered by Ferrari driver Felipe Massa recently, Schumacher was drafted in to replace him and applied to undertake some testing to get used to the car before the next race.

This contravenes F1 rules and, to me, seems crazy, since practice appears to be imperative to maintain efficiency –don’t footballers, tennis players and every other sportsman and sportswoman practise daily?

It seems that Ferrari’s application for an exemption to this testing rule was blocked by the Williams F1 team, along with Red Bull and Toro Rosso.

I cannot speculate about their reasons for objecting –and it can be argued that the rules should be maintained for everyone, regardless of team or status – but the same fate befell Jaime Alguersuari, when he replaced Sebastien Bourdais at Toro Rosso last month.

I can understand Ferrari’s frustration with the rules, their frustration with the objections from other teams, but, given their status as one of the legendary teams of F1, this was not a time to start whining about not getting their own way.

For those of you who didn’t see Ferrari’s statement, it read: "Guess who opposed the test? A team that hasn't won anything for years and yet didn't pass over the opportunity to demonstrate once more a lack of spirit of fair play.

"Just for the record, the Scuderia Ferrari had given its approval to let Alguersuari test, but it seems even in this instance someone decided to stick to the precise wording of the regulations."

Ferrari condemn themselves with their reference to the “precise wording of the regulations”, which, while common sense would say there should be some flexibility for exceptional circumstances, are put in place for a reason.

Ferrari would have been so much wiser to make a statement saying that they were disappointed with the ruling but respect it.

They could then add that they would invite the FIA and F1 chiefs to look into proving for some flexibility in the rules for forthcoming season.

This would allow them to maintain the moral high ground and not drag themselves into petty squabbles which tarnish the sport and has ultimately tarnished their reputation.