Read the full story here.

For the uninitiated, this was due to the screening of the BBC Sports Personality of the Year – a lengthy annual celebration of the country’s sporting prowess that dates back to 1954 and which is deeply embedded in the national consciousness.

Before the event Andrew Strauss, who was nominated for the most prestigious of the awards on offer, the individual trophy, said that he was not interested in personal glory but recognition for his team.

And he got both halves of his wish. The judging panel for the team event, which consists of more than 30 national and regional newspaper and magazine sports editors, decided that the Ashes-winning squad’s achievements topped those of both the Brawn GP F1 world championship-winning squad and – more controversially by far – England’s women cricketers.

For cricketers to win was excellent – as far as it went. But what a shame that the England men’s team victory, based on its seat-of-the-pants performance against Australia in this summer’s Ashes series, had to be at the expense of the all-conquering England women.

Charlotte Edwards’ team had swept all before it in 2009, taking not only the Ashes but also victories in ODI and Twenty20 tournaments, although arguably against less tough opposition than the men’s team faced throughout the year.

Taking the positives, at least the women’s team was represented, and at least they were up on the stage in Sheffield and therefore in the national consciousness, and at least cricket was well and truly present last night. But, to people with a more nuanced appreciation of the respective merits of the two teams this year, it felt incredibly uncomfortable.

Let’s return again to this issue of the national consciousness. However much we want to go on about team sports, the elite individual award is the point of this event. It is the only one open to a public vote and the winner is unveiled as the climax of the evening.

Rated as one of ten individual athletes taking part, Andrew Strauss came eighth and polled just 3.3 per cent of votes cast, compared to 29.4 per cent for the winner, footballer Ryan Giggs.

The only sportsmen polling fewer votes were boxer David Haye on 2.7 per cent and triple jumper Phillips Idowu who scored 0.9 per cent.

Many people are asking this morning not only what more Charlotte Edwards and team could have done, but what more Straussy himself could have done to make an impression on the public – winning the Ashes at home across a drama-filled two months this summer obviously not being anywhere close to enough.

Would Australia treat Ricky Ponting this way?

Clearly Strauss is a fairly modest and self-effacing individual. You have to wonder if the same would have happened to either Freddie Flintoff, who won in 2005 from a non-captaining position, or (just imagine this) Kevin Pietersen. Cricketers have been occasional winners – before Fred was Botham in 1981 – but not what you’d call regular performers.

The answer’s a bit glaring if you ask us – it would have been as simple as Strauss achieving his victories on free-to-view television.

To our minds, England men’s success in the expert vote combined with Strauss’ poor showing in the public vote can only mean that putting the matches behind a paywall was detrimental to public perceptions of the game.

Now, to say this is probably to put a stick in a hornet’s nest and stir. For a start you have to fork out to A Certain Company to see winning footballer Ryan Giggs participate in Manchester United’s games live. But football is ubiquitous in this country, there is still Match of the Day, plus Giggs plays international football for a home nation.

And second-placed Jenson Button, who took this year’s Formula One World Championship plus 18.7 per cent of last night’s vote, could be seen in his white, yellow and black Brawn GP racing car every other Sunday afternoon on the BBC.

For another, Giles Clarke of the ECB has been vocal on the subject of rights money funding cricket development in the UK. Now, The Nurdler is no expert on the detail of how these things work. But we do know that one of the reasons England Women are so successful is because they are well-enough funded and supported to function as a professional outfit, unlike so many of the world’s women’s sides.

And doubtless the argument will be put that selling the rights to screen Test cricket behind a paywall was one of the things that facilitated their appearance on that platform last night. But whether Clarke should be obliged to make an exception for The Ashes is yet another factor in this complicated argument, along with the reported reluctance of the BBC to screen what it sees as a “difficult” event.

However, one of the few sportsmen to score fewer votes than Strauss was Britain’s newly-minted boxing Heavyweight Champion of the World, David Haye.

Boxing fans, a fine company of people among which The Nurdler is proud to count itself, have been complaining bitterly of late about the havoc being wreaked in their sport by screening bouts as pay per view events.

We cannot express how unspeakably ridiculous a format this is any better than by pointing the gentle reader in the direction of Amir Khan’s recent title defence. It lasted 76 seconds, for which subscribers had paid £15. You do the maths.

Haye’s recent title win was a travesty as far as viewers were concerned. It was shown on Sky Box Office, and at least those who took a punt on paying for it did see 12 rounds of boxing, but it was scheduled to take place from 10pm onwards in order to avoid The X-Factor.

Behind a paywall and last thing at night. No wonder the British public didn’t see fit to vote for its latest boxing champion in the numbers in which they once supported Henry Cooper, Lennox Lewis or Frank Bruno.

To finish, it’s worth saying that no matter how aggrieved you feel this morning on Charlotte Edwards’ or Andrew Strauss’ account, you undoubtedly came out of yesterday evening in a better mood than one punter highlighted by William Hill bookmakers.

A press release this morning reveals that it had received its largest ever bet on the award in the run-up to last night’s contest. The Gloucestershire bettor was backing Jenson Button on odds of 4/5.

That decision cost them a stake of £24,560 and a potential return of £44,208.

Which just goes to prove that there’s always someone worse off than you.

Read the full story here.

Read the full story here.

Having greatly enjoyed the confection that was the World Twenty20 every bit as much as (we are sure) Ricky Ponting enjoyed his stay in Leicester, we are now poised for The Greatest Show on Earth.

Is it our sun-soothed imaginations, or are the popular prints behaving as if the 2007 Ashes never happened and we are, in fact, successfully defending the 2005 trophy? Or maybe it’s just us.

In any case, please do join us, or add us to your feed reader, for a daily dose of humour, quirkiness and very, very brief insight. We’ll look forward to the conversation.

More here.