ECB admits the 16.4 has brought no new fans

[Eggman]

It's that players want to play less county cricket to play in the 16.4 for more money.

That doesn’t make sense though because less than half county cricketers, get contracts for The Hundred.

I think the ‘less cricket’ thing is that they are greedy and want their money for less work.

Years ago it was a 7 day a week business with possibly 3 or 4 car journeys thrown in for good measure.

While I agree that was too much for players to maintain a performance level, all this mental health/too much cricket talk is just a modern malaise

 

[Hank Scorpio]

Are the PIF still sniffing around the possible Durham franchise?

 

[Fleagle]

That doesn’t make sense though because less than half county cricketers, get contracts for The Hundred.

I think the ‘less cricket’ thing is that they are greedy and want their money for less work.

Years ago it was a 7 day a week business with possibly 3 or 4 car journeys thrown in for good measure.

While I agree that was too much for players to maintain a performance level, all this mental health/too much cricket talk is just a modern malaise

The difference isn’t as marked as people think, especially in red ball. Partly as the season was shorter but partly as it wasn’t quite 7-day intense throughout. They allocated three day slots for the knockout rounds of the cups (possibly even for the B&H zonal as well) and there were always teams with a slot off each championship round (with an odd number of teams there had to be).

I first watched championship cricket in 1973. The schedule then had 60 days although it had more in some subsequent years. This season it has 56. What there was a lot more of, mainly because of the 16 Sunday league games each, was one day cricket (ironically, given that the narrative is that one day has taken over).

Anyway, if the offer is more pay for less work I wouldn’t be saying no so I don’t expect cricketers to!

 

[Raymondo]

Scrap The Hundred.

Put all of the money into an 18 team, two division T20 county competition where the top division is called the ‘Premier League’ and has access to two thirds of the money - therefore a division to aim for.

Each county is expected to supplement their line up with 2 overseas signings of international status.

Play 8 games each, in a small timeframe, and at the end 2 (or3) gain promotion/relegation.

Less games but at a higher intensity, while ALL counties retain their identity would make it more appealing to traditional cricket fans

Like a lot of what you say there, but I have to object to the two division structure - for me that’ll still cause too much of a ‘haves and have nots’ scenario that will essentially push some counties into the boundaries.

I like it for the CC, but I think the white ball formats need to be open to the possibility that each county can win the big prize.

I wonder if the ECB have considered the evidence for the damage it has done to the county teams since its introduction has coincided with a sharp decline in T20 attendances and the schedules have been sacrificed at the expense of domestic cricket in order to prioritise the Hundred.

What do you think?

As the Guardian article confirms they have not considered any evidence. They aren’t interested. But you don’t need evidence for this one. It’s an inevitable consequence of downgrading the county tournament to second tier status. Look at Welsh domestic rugby to see how regional franchises destroy the club game.

A good but depressing article is here.

You must be logged on to see external links

Great article and I particularly love the line in bold from the below sentence:

“They say if you can see the distant hillside, it’s about to rain, and if you can’t, it already is. It’s an old joke, but county cricket thrives on old jokes.”

So very true that.

 

[Eggman]

Anyway, if the offer is more pay for less work I wouldn’t be saying no so I don’t expect cricketers to!

Is it an offer or is it something the players are asking for ?

It’s the latter, isn’t it ?

 

[Sillypoint]

Are the PIF still sniffing around the possible Durham franchise?

the way things are going it looks like the PIF arent even sniffing around the football team

 

[NorthCountryBoy]

Let them do what they want with it. The ECB and the counties have got their money. Taking it out of the country or playing it late Septenber/earlyOctober ( after our season has finished ) is the best thing for cricket in this country. We then get August back for our competitions and means that test matches can be spread out more to avoid player burn out.

Test match series’ were being condensed way before the 100. June/ July are the perfect slots as they aren’t suffocated by PL football. Richard Thompson said the same on TMS this week.

Only freak series like the 2005 Ashes (also FTA) can get casual interest once the football starts.

 

[Aidan11]

This doesn't look good.

You must be logged on to see external links

 

[PTR]

In the summer of 2005 the sport was riding the crest of a wave and had really burst into the national consciousness. What did the brains trust do? Took the money and put the sport behind a paywall. f***ing morons.

I said this ages ago. I remember when literally everyone was in the office talking about the cricket. The players were national stars.

Then they whacked it on sky, and literally overnight nobody talked about cricket anymore. I even have sky, but I don't watch it. It works better as a general shared interest sport for whatever reason.

Then this "hundred" thing just feels totally pointless when T20 already exists.

 

[Provider]

This doesn't look good.

You must be logged on to see external links

“I just think that in future we have to make sure it’s timed in such a way that if you’re only going to have a 26-day tournament where many people invested hundreds of millions of pounds, it’s only fair that we create enough space so all the right people can play.”

This is exactly the type of thing I've been posting about in other threads.

This is bad bad news for English domestic cricket and possibly even fans of England test cricket.

 

[Sillypoint]

I said this ages ago. I remember when literally everyone was in the office talking about the cricket. The players were national stars.

Then they whacked it on sky, and literally overnight nobody talked about cricket anymore. I even have sky, but I don't watch it. It works better as a general shared interest sport for whatever reason.

Then this "hundred" thing just feels totally pointless when T20 already exists.

so you are slating the ECB for moving the game behind a paywall, now theres a lot more cricket on free TV because of the 100 and its "pointless"?

 

[Parkside]

so you are slating the ECB for moving the game behind a paywall, now theres a lot more cricket on free TV because of the 100 and its "pointless"?

No,he's stating quite clearly that creating a new short form of cricket is pointless when we already had a proven and popular short form in T20 available to all via utube.
There's limited coverage of the new tournament on free tv and whilst T20 is accessible to spectate in all areas of the country the new tournament isn't accessible to large areas of the country. Using the above criteria it's surely fair to say it's pointless.

 

[Turner the Cat]

I watched the highlights from the 1999 Natwest Trophy last night. Full house at Lords and a raucous crowd having a great day out watching some exciting cricket with a big pitch invasion at the end. Its sad to see how far the One Day game has declined in just a couple of decades, being a side show and the final played out in a ground that is less than half full.

 

[PTR]

so you are slating the ECB for moving the game behind a paywall, now theres a lot more cricket on free TV because of the 100 and its "pointless"?

People loved the Ashes, it make stars out of the players. The whole country were talking about it.
Then it went behind the paywall.
10 years later "hmmm, test cricket isn't popular anymore"

Wonder why.

 

[columbo70]

So today I've been reading about the 6 bought Hundred franchises with more purchases to come ...and these foreign owners been now able to dictate the future of the competition and when it's played , rules ,timing etc etc

So my question is....is this now set in stone forever....these franchises will now have their competition in our summer on our grounds, for potentially 6 weeks and more.....and there is nothing we can do about it.....they ll pay our stars thousands to abandon their county's and country during this time....and we will be no longer be able to plan future scheduling of our summer events until these franchises decide when we can....I'm aghast at how this will threaten our cricketing summer.....or is this a good thing and it's me who can't see anything good.

 

[Parkside]

So today I've been reading about the 6 bought Hundred franchises with more purchases to come ...and these foreign owners been now able to dictate the future of the competition and when it's played , rules ,timing etc etc

So my question is....is this now set in stone forever....these franchises will now have their competition in our summer on our grounds, for potentially 6 weeks and more.....and there is nothing we can do about it.....they ll pay our stars thousands to abandon their county's and country during this time....and we will be no longer be able to plan future scheduling of our summer events until these franchises decide when we can....I'm aghast at how this will threaten our cricketing summer.....or is this a good thing and it's me who can't see anything good.

The fact that every franchise owns the majority of shares i.e. at least 51% gives you the answer as to who now owns English cricket and controls future scheduling.
Or rather have the ability to attain that majority which will give them control. The Leeds franchise have full ownership,others majority ownership,slippery slope until control is lost.

 

[Voice of fair play]

So today I've been reading about the 6 bought Hundred franchises with more purchases to come ...and these foreign owners been now able to dictate the future of the competition and when it's played , rules ,timing etc etc

So my question is....is this now set in stone forever....these franchises will now have their competition in our summer on our grounds, for potentially 6 weeks and more.....and there is nothing we can do about it.....they ll pay our stars thousands to abandon their county's and country during this time....and we will be no longer be able to plan future scheduling of our summer events until these franchises decide when we can....I'm aghast at how this will threaten our cricketing summer.....or is this a good thing and it's me who can't see anything good.

First of all the players will not be abandoning their country (England) as rightly or wrongly there is no international cricket planned for the period of this competition that’s another debate that people not happy about but no top players from England will be playing in this competition instead of for England during this time

Secondly top English players already hardly play for their county as their central contracted by the ECB and again rightly or wrongly the ECB decides whether they can play for their county or in this competition.

In not the owners in this competition that will decide which top English stars play for their counties it will be the ECB as it’s been since central contracts

 

[Parkside]

The fact that every franchise owns the majority of shares i.e. at least 51% gives you the answer as to who now owns English cricket and controls future scheduling.
Or rather have the ability to attain that majority which will give them control. The Leeds franchise have full ownership,others majority ownership,slippery slope until control is lost.

How the sale will impact on future tv contacts is a further concern.
Some centrally contracted play in the IPL so central contracts do not debar them from involvement in franchise cricket.
Others chose not to sign central contracts as franchise options are more lucrative-ECB can't enforce central contracts.net

 

[Steak Pie]

First of all the players will not be abandoning their country (England) as rightly or wrongly there is no international cricket planned for the period of this competition that’s another debate that people not happy about but no top players from England will be playing in this competition instead of for England during this time.

Wrongly.

The answer, quite obviously, is wrongly.

 

[Voice of fair play]

Wrongly.

The answer, quite obviously, is wrongly.

Either way no player is abandoning their country or likely too to play a game at the same time