-Steven Barnett is professor of communications at the University of Westminster and has written extensively about the Sky deal and cricket for the Wisden Cricketers’ Almanack. The opinions expressed are his own.-

David Davies’ review panel on UK sport’s “crown jewels” – the list of sporting events which have to be reserved for free-to-air television – has proposed adding significantly to the existing list of 10 events.

Most controversially it wants to see cricket’s Ashes Test matches, part of the package sold to Sky five years ago, back on mainstream television. Given its terms of enquiry, the Davies panel’s report was bound to be either lame or contentious. Thankfully, they have chosen contentious.

We’ll be hearing some cries of anguish from Sky over the next few weeks, but that’s to be expected. BSkyB’s hugely successful business model depends on exclusive access to sport, and you can’t blame Rupert Murdoch for understanding long ago the commodity value of exclusive live sport on television. He famously told an annual meeting of News Corp in 1996 that sport was to be the "battering ram" for expansion of his global pay television network.

And Sky does it brilliantly: three sports channels, pioneering innovations in coverage and much more domestic and international sport on offer than than ever before. But this array of sporting choice comes at a price – in excess of 600 pounds per year if you want it all. Most people don’t: pay TV in Britain is still a minority activity.

That shifts the focus of responsibility to the sports bodies – and this is where the real challenge lies. Can they be trusted to represent the wider public interest of universal audience access for their blue riband events?

Increasingly the answer is no, as cricket eloquently demonstrated. The county game was struggling and Sky made an offer in 2004 that no terrestrial broadcaster could reasonably match. Result: Test cricket vanished from most viewers’ screens, and a peak viewing figure of 7.4 million on Channel 4 when England won the Ashes in 2005 plunged to just 1.9 million this year on Sky – beaten even by the 2.3 million who were watching Songs of Praise on BBC1 at the same time.

Exactly the same happened in Ireland when rugby’s Heineken Cup switched from Irish national broadcaster RTE to Sky Sports 3 years ago and an audience of 255,000 fell to 47,000. When a sport migrates from free-to-air to subscription television, there is a simple algorithm: it will lose around three quarters of its audience.

Does it matter? In a debate dominated by sports governing bodies and the big beasts of pay TV, the arguments of ordinary sports fans tend to be drowned out. So here are three examples of the cultural damage of allowing major events to migrate to pay TV.

First, it removes major sport from exposure to the maximum number of people. Television fuels participation and aspiration, particularly of children. Public tennis courts are full during Wimbledon fortnight, and I have lost count of the number of eventual sporting champions who describe the moment they saw an inspirational performance on television which galvanised them into excelling at that particular sport. Even a few minutes of peak-time mass audience exposure can have an astonishing impact on generating popular interest.

Second, there is the shared national experience, where great sporting events create and cement a sense of national identity. Even non sports fans recognise a tangible feel- good factor that follows national sporting success. And many commented on how this year’s Ashes success was a damp squib compared to four years ago.

Third, those most likely to be deprived of access to these major sporting events are the most disadvantaged sections of society – pensioners, the low paid, the unemployed, the disabled. Do we believe as a nation that this is fair?

We will hear plenty of claims from sports bodies about the huge investment in grass roots initiatives being funded by television’s money, some of which will be true. But they all managed before Sky arrived, and there is a compelling response to this much-repeated argument from the other side of the world.

Australia has listed every rugby league and union test match, every Ashes test match and one-day international in Australia; every round of the Australian and British golf opens; Wimbledon and the Australian Open tennis championships; and even international netball matches. Not to mention soccer, motor racing, the Melbourne Cup and the Commonwealth Games.

That’s a population one third the size of ours which is hardly noted for its lack of sporting success or grass-roots participation. It’s a nation that understands the cultural significance of sport and the role of universal free to air television in driving that culture. It’s time we did the same in Britain.

England have regained the Ashes after beating Australia by 197 runs at the Oval to seal a 2-1 series victory.

How important was Andrew Flintoff's run out of Ricky Ponting when the Australia captain looked well set? Flintoff did little with bat or ball in his last test before retiring but still made sure he grabbed the headlines.

Australia put up the fight that everyone expected but England were always likely to grind out the win.

So probably not as exciting or as skilful as the 2005 series, but much more competitive than Australia's whitewash win last time. The series probably pivoted on Monty Panesar's defiant batting in the first test in Cardiff.

Where will this series rank and did the result reflect the strength of the two sides?

PHOTO 1: Andrew Strauss of England celebrates winning the Ashes against Australia with the traditional urn trophy after their fifth Ashes test cricket match at the Oval in London August 23, 2009. REUTERS/Toby Melville

PHOTO 2: Ricky Ponting of Australia is run out by a direct throw from Andrew Flintoff. REUTERS/Toby Melville

Heard the one about the English batsmen who just couldn't resist nibbling at balls way outside off stump? It is an all too common occurrence and is the main reason why England fell short of a good first innings total in the deciding Ashes test.

Of course, flashing away outside the off-stump isn't just a disease to afflict English batsmen, although the problem does appear to be more acute on these shores than any where else.

It's an epidemic that has spread with the invention and subsequent proliferation of one-day cricket, which encourages the batsman's need to dominate and unsettle the opposition's bowlers.

The difference in test cricket is that the bowler is not required by the laws to bowl such a tight line around the stumps and therefore has more weapons in his armoury.

Five of the eight dismals to fall on day one were through players playing loosely outside the off stump. Of the five two can be offered impunity.

Captain Andrew Strauss was undone by a ball which inexplicably held its line instead of swinging in to the left-hander.

And Alastair Cook was delivered a ball that was so close to off stump that had he left it he may well have been listening to the lugubrious sound of the death rattle milliseconds later.

In saying that, Cook's technique will always leave him more susceptible to nicking one from the right-hander bowling across his bows. Whereas Andrew Straus plays with a straight bat down the line of off stump, Cook plays with an open face and pushes out rather than down the pitch and therefore is guiding the ball directly to the gluttonous slip cordon.

He can learn a lot from his captain.

England's plight is exacerbated by the profligacy when it comes to going on and scoring big hundreds, just one in the series so far, which brings us to Ian Bell.

He was England's top scorer yesterday, yes, but he's now had 32 innings batting at number three for England and has yet to register a century and that includes playing against teams of far less calibre than Australia. It is not good enough and exposes what many see as a mental weakness.

Say what you like about Ravi Bopara, but he scored two centuries in his first two innings in that position.

England's bowlers will need to be on top of their game if they are to wrestle the initiative back their team's way.

PHOTO: Andrew Flintoff of England misses the ball during the fifth Ashes test cricket match against Australia at The Oval in London August 20, 2009. REUTERS/Toby Melville

England will be under huge pressure to make changes for the deciding Ashes test at the Oval and the middle order is the obvious place to start, with Ravi Bopara, Ian Bell and Paul Collingwood contributing just 16 runs in six innings at Headingley.

So what should England do about it?

Possible replacements include Jonathan Trott, who was called into the squad at Headingley, Robert Key of Kent and even 39-year-old Mark Ramprakash as a one-off experiment.

Captain Andrew Strauss said he would be reluctant to make wholesale changes but Bopara, in particular, looks short of confidence in the crucial number three spot and it might be worth a gamble on Trott or Key in such a crucial game.

And Ramprakash? Is that just an idea for the romantics?

As for Australia, their selectors should be patting themselves on the back.

They recalled seamer Stuart Clark in place of spinner Nathan Hauritz in a horses-for-courses selection which was a stunning success.

The experienced Clark galvanized the rest of the attack with his opening spell on the first day, his accurate probing outswingers claiming three England wickets and tying down one end.

That inspired Peter Siddle and Mitchell Johnson, who had struggled previously in the series, and each claimed a five-wicket haul in the match. They will head into the deciding test high on confidence and with Brett Lee also likely to be available for selection Australia's seam bowling resources look healthy indeed.

FILE PHOTO: England's Mark Ramprakash watches his ball to safety on his way to a century during a game against a Board President's X1 in Hyderabad, November 22, 2001. At the close of play England were 297 for 9 and Ramprakash was out for 105. REUTERS/Darren Staples

Australia have far more limited options than England when they consider changes to their
battle-weary side for the fourth Ashes test starting on Friday at Headingley, with their main hope of fresh impetus resting on the fitness of Brett Lee.

England had the luxury of bringing in fresh blood on Tuesday, calling up fast bowler Ryan Sidebottom and uncapped batsman Jonathan Trott for the first time this series, while again putting Steve Harmison on standby in a 14-man squad.

Australia captain Ricky Ponting expects to be able to call on Lee for the first time this series, after the quick bowler missed the first three tests with a rib injury.

Seamer Stuart Clark could be another option, possibly at the expense of Peter Siddle but otherwise the skipper has little to juggle with ahead of a match they cannot afford to lose, with England already 1-0 up with two to play.

"We will keep a close eye on Brett and I would expect him to be able to bowl," Ponting said after the third test draw in Edgbaston. "We know what Stuart is capable of and we will have plenty to talk about."

Australia are again likely to be without first-choice wicket-keeper Brad Haddin again after he pulled out of the Edgbaston test with a finger injury but Ponting remained bullish.

"If we play our best cricket we will take some beating," he said.

PHOTO: Brett Lee reacts to the crowd as he delivers drinks during the fourth day of the third Ashes test against England at Edgbaston in Birmingham, August 2, 2009. REUTERS/Darren Staples

In the end it wasn't about the two S's, Swann and swing, it came down to the two P's, patience and perseverance, as Australia's batsmen swept away England hopes of a 2-0 Ashes series lead by holding on for a draw at Edgbaston. The challenge for Australia and their batting line-up now is to perform like that in the first innings of a test to put pressure on England, and not just in the second when they need to save a game.

This match didn't get the denouement it deserved after the thrilling cricket played on Friday and Sunday, but mother nature can hold up her hand and take the blame for that. Just one more day's play could have provided an intriguing finish, but it wasn't to be.

In truth England's bowlers didn't bowl well enough, with Graeme Swann never quite touching the dizzy heights of Sunday night when he bowled a spellbinding over to Ricky Ponting, which eventually accounted for the great man's wicket.

Flintoff bowled with aggression but now looks so seriously hampered by his knee injury you begin to wonder whether the Headingley test, which begins on Friday, might be beyond him.

As in the first innings, Anderson's probing line and ability to swing the ball offered the home side the likeliest route to victory, but bewilderingly he was left under bowled by captain Andrew Strauss.

Most cause for concern will be the bowling form of Stuart Broad who, like Mitchell Johnson, appears to be shorn of confidence. Unlike Johnson, he is struggling to take wickets when he's out of form.

I'd stick with Broad. He's a good bowler learning his trade and too much time has been invested in him to dispense with him mid-series, in his first slump of form. It may place pressure on the rest of the bowling attack but his batting adds weight to a line-up that appears brittle without Pietersen.

So, the choice for Strauss and the selectors, if Andrew Flintoff is passed fit, will be whether to stick with Graham Onions, who bowled beautifully on Friday morning, bring in the horses-for-courses swing bowler Ryan Sidebottom, or recall the "daisy" (some days he does, some days he don't) Steve Harmison to add hare'em and scare'em fire power.

I'd stick with the same line-up. By all accounts Headingley pitches these days are flatter than in the past and they'll need the durability and youth of Anderson, Broad and Onions to take 20 wickets.

If Flintoff isn't fit, playing Harmisson to add variety would be the best bet.

Of concern to England coach Andy Flower will be that Australia have scored six centuries to England's one. Five of the top six heaviest scorers with the bat in the series so far are Australian. And four of the top five wicket takers are from the touring party.

What he can take heart from is that his side are still 1-0 up, meaning they have taken the wickets and scored runs when it mattered, and his team were the only side with a chance of winning this truncated match.

As for Australia. They'll look at those stats and wonder how on earth they trail in this series.

The 2009 vintage may not have the class of 2005, but roll on Friday is what I say and bring me more Ashes cricket.

PHOTO: Australia's Michael Clarke is congratulated by England's Andrew Flintoff after Clarke reached his century during the fifth day of the third Ashes Test against England at Edgbaston, Birmingham, England, August 3, 2009. REUTERS/Philip Brown

Lord's rose to its feet to acclaim Andrew Flintoff after his five wickets helped England beat Australia by 115 runs to go 1-0 up in the Ashes series.

The home crowd was especially delighted given England had not beaten the old enemy at the home of cricket since 1934.

It was also a bitter sweet moment as Flintoff is due to retire from tests at the end of the series.

It doesn't look like he is up for being persuaded otherwise but if the burly all-rounder can again lead England to a home Ashes victory like in 2005, he will be in English cricket hearts forever.

What next for Ricky Ponting's Australian side? After failing to close out a win in the first test in Cardiff, they face a 1-0 deficit with three to play. These Aussies are made of sterner stuff so expect some more twists in the coming weeks.

PHOTO: England's Andrew Flintoff (C) celebrates after bowling Australia's Nathan Hauritz during the second Ashes test cricket match at Lord's Cricket Ground in London July 20, 2009. REUTERS/Philip Brown

It takes guts, skill, determination and more than anything patience to win a test match and that is why the longest form of cricket is still one of the greatest challenges that a sportsman can face.

And England will need all the patience that human nature can muster if they are to wear down and eventually beat this resolute Australian side, which managed to recover from 128 for five to close on 313 with the loss of no further wickets, chasing another 209 runs for victory.

Bad light again saw a truncated day’s play as the magnificent Michael Clarke and the unyielding Brad Haddin put on a superb partnership for the sixth wicket, sending strains of anxiety coursing through the England camp.

The premature finish to the day will have benefited England more than Australia, who were looking more than comfortable and almost rapacious with their scoring, despite England taking the second new ball, in bowler friendly conditions, just before the close.

There will be much soul searching for Andrew Strauss and his men, who are still in the box seat for this test match, but the team will be concerned that they have allowed a resilient if unspectacular Australian side to get so close to the 522 target they set.

Once again the pitch showed its compassion to the batsmen even if England’s bowling became lackadaisical as the day wore on and the bowling intensity waned.

England will regroup and come again in the morning in what will be an ultra tense and ultra tight final day’s play (Edgbaston 2005, anyone?), but if they want to emerge as the best test playing nation in the world, these will be the types of challenges they will need to overcome.

Australia will be on cloud nine following a controversial two sessions before tea where three of the five wickets they lost could have been given not out on another day.

Katich was caught off what should have been called a no ball. Strauss caught Phil Hughes at slip when the ball looked to have brushed the ground and had the umpires called for a referral he would surely have been reprieved.

Mike Hussey was given out caught at slip, despite appearing not to hit the ball.

Despite all that, England’s bowlers were disciplined and incisive in the sessions before tea, with Andrew Flintoff showing fans what they’ll be missing when he departs the test arena following multiple hostile spells.

England will need to be relentless and intense and show the calmness their tail-enders displayed in Cardiff if they are to achieve their first victory over Australia at Lord’s since 1934, but can they take a further five wickets or have Australia wrestled back the initiative to complete an unlikely and unprecedented victory?

PHOTO: Australia's Michael Clarke celebrates scoring a century against England during the second Ashes test at Lord's, July 19, 2009. REUTERS/Kieran Doherty

For a third day in row England's demoralised bowlers wheeled away with all the luck of someone who's just walked across the path a black cat and smashed a mirror while walking under a ladder.

In all honesty they didn't deserve any fortune after another day's abject bowling display and signs from Strauss early on that it was a damage limitation exercise by time wasting with field placings and underbowling key bowlers.

Australia eventually put England out of their own misery, a cricketing version of shooting a lame horse if you like, by declaring on 674 for 6, once wicket keeper Brad Haddin completed his balmy century and holed out on the attack to Ravi Bopara in the deep.

Marcus North by that point had already joined Ponting, Katich and Haddin on the Cardiff honours board, further undermining pre-series reports that he was no more than a solid county professional, much like the much maligned spinner Nathan Hauritz who took more wickets in England's first innings than Swann and Panesar combined in Australia's.

The declaration, which gave Australia a 239 -run first innings lead, was inspired from Ponting, leaving England a tricky 30 minute period to negotiate before tea or as it happened before the rains came.

England's frail top order failed to repel the burning heat emanating from the Australian fast bowlers as both Alistair Cook and Ravi Bopara missed straight deliveries and succumbed lbw to Johnson and Hilfenhaus respectively, leaving England teetering on 20 for 2 before play was finally suspended for the day.

England will need to regroup overnight and come again in the morning, but we've been saying that for the last three days.

Psychologically and physically the joyless 180 overs England have spent in the field will have left them flushed and weak and a dominant Australia will be scenting victory before tea on the final day.

Andrew Strauss will need to show his hand with a captain's innings, supported by a show of concentration and obduracy from Pietersen, Collingwood and Prior, if England are to save this test match.

More concerns for England: the amount of turn the pitch showed at times during the fourth day, though England's bowlers failed take advantage of it, and that there are only three rest days between now and the second test, leaving drained bowlers little time to refuel.

It's the last chance saloon for England's batsmen but the can they hold during a final day showdown?

PHOTO: Australian captain Ricky Ponting gestures from the pavilion as he declares at 674 runs for 6 in their first innings during the first Ashes cricket test against England in Cardiff, Wales July 11, 2009. REUTERS/Andrew Winning

What an extraordinary first day of Test match cricket, even by Ashes standards. A day that ebbed and flowed, that tormented and teased both sets of supporters and ultimately left us with the question: where does the balance of this match lie?

As Kev notes, lunch for England would have been the equivalent of trying to digest tarmac, a disconcerting affair to say the least. Having won the toss and electing to bat England were reduced to 92-3 by a persevering if unspectacular Australian attack, which left the Barmy Army cowering behind their beer snakes fearing the worst.

Tea would have been sweeter -- "two more sugars please" -- after Pietersen and Collingwood put on a hundred runs for the loss of no wickets. If Pietersen batting is like watching an artist paint a masterpiece, then watching Collingwood is like sitting through a blacksmith beating a horseshoe into shape.

Then came an astonishing final session. Collingwood played at one outside off as unconvincingly as he'd hit a boundary a few balls earlier, and was snaffled by Haddin behind the timbers.

Shortly after, the least impressive bowler Nathan Hauritz took the wicket of England's best batsmen Kevin Pietersen, who played shot that would've had Geoffrey Boycott charging for him with his stick of rhubarb, and England were again teetering on the brink at 241-5.

Cue the Prior and Flintoff show. In a blink of an eye the pendulum had swung again as the bruise brothers rocketed England to 327 with a series of blazing cover drives and thumping pull shots through midwicket, and suddenly it looked as though England would finish close to 400 with 5 wickets in hand and the game, if not in the bag, then at the till ready for packing.

But back came Australia again with the redoubtable Peter Siddle removing Flintoff and Prior in a crazy last 15 minutes to leave England 336-7 at stumps.

So where does the balance of power lie? I think Australia will be the happier of the two sides. Their bowling on the whole was ordinary, yet they managed to winkle out seven England wickets and keep them to under 350.

However, England, despite cursing the fact that five out of seven batsmen conspired to give their wickets away, will be happy with what they have seen in the pitch, despite being 25 or 30 runs short and 2 wickets down from where they would like to be.

Much will depend on how long England can bat for tomorrow.

If England can get a score of 450 they'll be cock-a-hoop and Aussies will feel the game slipping away. However 3 quick wickets for Australia and they'll rightly feel in the ascendancy.

One final point. Check out the foot marks that are already appearing outside the left-hander's off stump (3 of Australia's top 4 batsmen are left handed).

It's hard to tell how and if a pitch is going to deteriorate, but having opted to play two spinners, England will be heartened by what they've seen, which could aid them in defending a below par score.

Where do you think the balance of power lies?

PHOTO: England's Andrew Flintoff looks over at Australian wicket keeper Brad Haddin during the first Ashes  test in Cardiff, Wales, July 8, 2009. REUTERS/Andrew Winning