County Championship Reduction For 2026?

[Parkside]

Yeah if all that true, makes you wonder why the counties signed up and agreed for it

They haven't a lot of choice. That haven't a majority in the ECB directorate.
Agree or you don't get your annual grant. Have you not followed the rolling out of this development?
Tail wagging the dog.
Counties own fault for ceding power like that,mind.

 

[Voice of fair play]

They haven't a lot of choice. That haven't a majority in the ECB directorate.
Agree or you don't get your annual grant. Have you not followed the rolling out of this development?

Aye I have seen possibly 520 million come into cricket in this country should the sale go through, from made up teams who never existed 5 years ago.

On pure business terms that’s a absolute massive windfall and excellent business acumen to achieve that once in a lifetime amount for money.

And that’s probably the understatement of a lifetime

The debate for me should be about the way the money has been undoubtedly unfairly distributed ( although not sure that even a debate) as we all agree that fact.

What is not a debate is that 520 million pounds is a hell of a lot of money that English cricket would not have without this sale

 

[Parkside]

Aye I have seen possibly 520 million come into cricket in this country should the sale go through, from made up teams who never existed 5 years ago.

On pure business terms that’s a absolute massive windfall and excellent business acumen to achieve that once in a lifetime amount for money.

And that’s probably the understatement of a lifetime

The debate for me should be about the way the money has been undoubtedly unfairly distributed ( although not sure that even a debate) as we all agree that fact.

What is not a debate is that 520 million pounds is a hell of a lot of money that English cricket would not have without this sale

Yes, I'm trying to point out the long term consequences.
you can't,or won't ,accept #79 ?
Or do you just keep your head in the sand?
If I was short sighted and thought it was Manna from Heaven i..e. Gift from the Gods I'd be all for it.
The buyers are business men,they're looking to profit.
i.e. Take out more than they put in.

 

[Voice of fair play]

Yes, I'm trying to point out the long term consequences.
you can't,or won't ,accept #79 ?
Or do you just keep your head in the sand?
If I was short sighted and thought it was Manna from Heaven i..e. Gift from the Gods I'd be all for it.
The buyers are business men,they're looking to profit.
i.e. Take out more than they put in.

We just going round in circles mate, of course investors looking for profit that is what investment is and how it works.

We would never have investment in anything based of your theory.

Are you seriously suggesting that we should never have investment in anything sport or otherwise because investors want a profit?

 

[Parkside]

We just going round in circles mate, of course investors looking for profit that is what investment is and how it works.

We would never have investment in anything based of your theory.

Are you seriously suggesting that we should never have investment in anything sport or otherwise because investors want a profit?

Agree ,we're going round in circles. I've made a cogent argument pointing out the inevitable consequences.
"We" aren't investing. "'We" are selling.

 

[Aidan11]

To simplify it...

ECB now has (or will have) a large wad of cash thanks to the franchise sale.

A lot of this cash will go to the counties.

That money will eventually be spent and there will no longer be any wealthy Indians/Saudis to give us cash.

County cricket becomes skint again.

The end.

 

[Voice of fair play]

To simplify it...

ECB now has (or will have) a large wad of cash thanks to the franchise sale.

A lot of this cash will go to the counties.

That money will eventually be spent and there will no longer be any wealthy Indians/Saudis to give us cash.

County cricket becomes skint again.

The end.

That depends how well the counties spend the money they get, in your words they getting a lot of cash.

If cricket goes skint after a 520 million windfall and 20 million approx per county?

Where would that leave them now without it?

And would the end as you put not come a lot earlier?

 

[Parkside]

That depends how well the counties spend the money they get, in your words they getting a lot of cash.

If cricket goes skint after a 520 million windfall and 20 million approx per county?

Where would that leave them now without it?

And would the end as you put not come a lot earlier?

Sensible husbandry with the resources now available i.e. International cricket revenue and a properly promoted domestic T20 and cricket remains solvent. Sell your assets and insolvency eventually beckons. £20m isn't a massive windfall when annual turnover is £5m-10m.

 

[Aidan11]

That depends how well the counties spend the money they get, in your words they getting a lot of cash.

If cricket goes skint after a 520 million windfall and 20 million approx per county?

Where would that leave them now without it?

And would the end as you put not come a lot earlier?

I don't think it would. County Cricket has been in trouble since after the war. This resulted in the introduction of one day cricket in the 60s.

Fast forward to the 21st century and T20 is created. Almost 20 years late came the 16.4.

The trouble with the most recent invention is that it doesn't fit the framework of cricket. Enhancing the T20 would have been a better idea.

Unfortunately for us cricket lovers, back in 1997 the TCCB became the ECB and appointed Lord McLaurin as the head of it. He was also known as Lord Tesco and having made a success of the supermarket he felt that cricket should be run like a business too.

The big mistake with these entrepreneurs is that they think they can turn it into a huge success. Cricket's version of the football Premier League. It doesn't work like that for cricket.

It may have worked for T20 but thenext chairman - Giles Clarke - became jealous if how India lapped it up and brought in millions of dollars. He was so desperate to make cricket bring in megabucks, he was almost sucking the balls of Allen Stanford. A simple due diligence check could have shown him not to have anything to do with him.

So now we have the 16.4. Or we did. Once again the ball-suckers at the ECB have seen the money and have signed away the future of county cricket.

I hope I'm wrong but - if as you say each county may get about £20m - it sounds like a lot of money but it really isn't in the long term.

 

[Turner the Cat]

I've said it before and ill say it again. Every new reinvention of cricket, every new form of the game is a nail in the coffin of the county game.

I love following the county game, I love the tradition but its dying a slow death. Other than the tradition and history of being about the sport played by counties, I cant see much argument for it continuing. And thats coming from someone who does follow it.

I love following it. But I haven't put a penny into it. I don't watch it live because Chester le Street is too far away, and I couldn't go regularly because of work.

It needs reform, but it needs reform in a way that protects and improves it. I dont know what the answer is, but something needs to happen. Because currently its almost unsustainable

I think, or hope at least, that as long as test cricket is thriving then county cricket will have some sort of future. It does feel like the ECB treat it as some sort of neccessary inconvenience rather than an integral part of the game but without county cricket there is no pathway to test cricket.

 

[Parkside]

I think, or hope at least, that as long as test cricket is thriving then county cricket will have some sort of future. It does feel like the ECB treat it as some sort of neccessary inconvenience rather than an integral part of the game but without county cricket there is no pathway to test cricket.

And test cricket is still by far the biggest source of revenue.

 

[UpTheDuff]

In answer to your first question yes as it will benefit that county and make them sustainable for years and years.

They will not be relatively worse of than before imo, in fact they will be over 20 million richer.

I totally take your point it’s disgraceful that it’s not shared more equally.

But they definitely benefit as that a hell a lot of money that they would have had no chance at all of getting their hands on otherwise.

Not to mention the chunk of cash going to recreational cricket that also what not have happened without the sale

Yes but when the bigger teams get even more money and the gap rises, then it’s harder for smaller teams to compete and easier for them to overspend and go bust.

Look at football. Teams in the Championship keep getting more and more money from TV, but they keep losing more and more money trying to compete as the Premier League teams get even more TV money and pull away even more and player wages get inflated.

 

[Voice of fair play]

Yes but when the bigger teams get even more money and the gap rises, then it’s harder for smaller teams to compete and easier for them to overspend and go bust.

Look at football. Teams in the Championship keep getting more and more money from TV, but they keep losing more and more money trying to compete as the Premier League teams get even more TV money and pull away even more and player wages get inflated.

Yeah I agree that is the concern and the unfairness the rich get richer which means the competitiveness of the competition is too heavily weighted in favour of a small number of teams much like you say in football.

Not disputing that in anyway as fuller agree.

However the money counties get all counties and recreation cricket is a hell of a lot of money too make them more sustainable that they otherwise have not got.

They will be more sustainable because of it but I agree some less competitive

 

[Parkside]

However the money counties get all counties and recreation cricket is a hell of a lot of money too make them more sustainable that they otherwise have not got.

They will be more sustainable because of it but I agree some less competitive

Untrue.
Given that there's ongoing discussion which has been continuing for 4 months so we don't know whether it's a good deal until agreement has been reached on the terms of the buy out. The impasse is over tv deals which are worth £billions. One off £500m but hand over the bulk of tv revenue forever doesn't appear such a clever deal to me. There 's a further demand that no England games be played during the Hundred window i.e. high summer which will serious erode test match revenue.
It may well be a disastrous deal.
I'm sorry but I liken your elation to that of a kid in a sweet shop.

 

[Raymondo]

Aye I have seen possibly 520 million come into cricket in this country should the sale go through, from made up teams who never existed 5 years ago.

On pure business terms that’s a absolute massive windfall and excellent business acumen to achieve that once in a lifetime amount for money.

And that’s probably the understatement of a lifetime

The debate for me should be about the way the money has been undoubtedly unfairly distributed ( although not sure that even a debate) as we all agree that fact.

What is not a debate is that 520 million pounds is a hell of a lot of money that English cricket would not have without this sale

The problem domestic cricket now has, however, is that they’ve sold the family silver.

You can only do that once.

It’s now gone forever to foreign entities whose sole aim is to make as much money as they can for themselves and their shareholders/investors. When it no longer does, they’ll move on and won’t give a care to what destruction they leave behind.

 

[Aidan11]

The problem domestic cricket now has, however, is that they’ve sold the family silver.

You can only do that once.

It’s now gone forever to foreign entities whose sole aim is to make as much money as they can for themselves and their shareholders/investors. When it no longer does, they’ll move on and won’t give a care to what destruction they leave behind.

This.

No one at the ECB seems to be looking at the long term picture. Maybe they just don't care and are just looking forward to a big bonus for securing these deals.

 

[Struts]

To simplify it...

ECB now has (or will have) a large wad of cash thanks to the franchise sale.

A lot of this cash will go to the counties.

That money will eventually be spent and there will no longer be any wealthy Indians/Saudis to give us cash.

County cricket becomes skint again.

The end.

And Cricket is still declining in popularity regardless

 

[Parkside]

And Cricket is still declining in popularity regardless

As are most sports- local amateur football league's are obsolete, impromptu games of football.in the school playground are no longer commonplace; cricket in schools is almost non-existent.Excellent article on this topic on the Minto thread #66. Decline is inevitable but to stop it becoming obsolete clubs ,both club and county,have to go into schools and promote domestic T20 where kids can identify with the local players.
Paying average professionals obscene salaries in a sport which is declining in popularity cannot make financial sense.

 

[Steak Pie]

Aye I have seen possibly 520 million come into cricket in this country should the sale go through, from made up teams who never existed 5 years ago.

On pure business terms that’s a absolute massive windfall and excellent business acumen to achieve that once in a lifetime amount for money.

And that’s probably the understatement of a lifetime

The debate for me should be about the way the money has been undoubtedly unfairly distributed ( although not sure that even a debate) as we all agree that fact.

What is not a debate is that 520 million pounds is a hell of a lot of money that English cricket would not have without this sale

Untrue.
Given that there's ongoing discussion which has been continuing for 4 months so we don't know whether it's a good deal until agreement has been reached on the terms of the buy out. The impasse is over tv deals which are worth £billions. One off £500m but hand over the bulk of tv revenue forever doesn't appear such a clever deal to me. There 's a further demand that no England games be played during the Hundred window i.e. high summer which will serious erode test match revenue.
It may well be a disastrous deal.
I'm sorry but I liken your elation to that of a kid in a sweet shop.

It's been pointed out a few times, but he'll just ignore you and repeated the once-in-a-lifetime thing.

 

[Parkside]

It's been pointed out a few times, but he'll just ignore you and repeated the once-in-a-lifetime thing.

I am familiar with that trait