Kennington Kadavers St John's Wood Velocity Edgbaston Egrets Trafford Super Soppers Hampshire 2.0 Cardiff City United Are You There God? It's Me, Leeds Nottingham Surely
Here’s another cricket fan who won’t be going. Stuff a southern team full of players from my county and funnily enough I still won’t be going. Why ? If you need to ask, simply because it’s not my county! It might work in other countries but I’m not so sure here. We’ll see of course but I hope most don’t touch it with a barge pole. Franchises have no part in sport.
It will be absolutely huge and do wonders for getting a larger proportion of the next generation involved in cricket. Look at the positive effects of the IPL and Big Bash in India and Australia.
It won't be Kent so I won't be following a specific team (at first) but I will be tuning in. Just because Charlton aren't in the Premier League doesn't mean I won't watch and enjoy Premier League matches.
London Lions (at Oval) London Royals (at Lords) South Coast Storm Birmingham Bears Cardiff Cobras Red Rose Raiders White Rose Warriors Midlands Mavericks
Quiet looking forward to it, watching the worlds best play in this country.
Be interesting to see how they brand the teams, suspect the Cardiff team will be a Welsh team, and the Headingley team might not have a city name. Otherwise the Manchester Bees would be a good name.
London Lions (at Oval) London Royals (at Lords) South Coast Storm Birmingham Bears Cardiff Cobras Red Rose Raiders White Rose Warriors Midlands Mavericks
Haha not going anyway - but calling the imposters as London Lions seals it. Why not just Millwall and be done with it?
London Lions (at Oval) London Royals (at Lords) South Coast Storm Birmingham Bears Cardiff Cobras Red Rose Raiders White Rose Warriors Midlands Mavericks
Haha not going anyway - but calling the imposters as London Lions seals it. Why not just Millwall and be done with it?
Don't want to upset Canters again but I just can't resist. How about, instead of Lions, they are called the London Eagles?
It seems like a double negative to me. I won't be going to any franchise games and, assuming it is concurrent, I will stop going to see Sussex in the T20 as it will just be a team comprised of 6 youngsters and the worst 5 county players. Does anyone know if it will be concurrent with the T20 Blast or will completely ruin the County Championship as well?
It seems like a double negative to me. I won't be going to any franchise games and, assuming it is concurrent, I will stop going to see Sussex in the T20 as it will just be a team comprised of 6 youngsters and the worst 5 county players. Does anyone know if it will be concurrent with the T20 Blast or will completely ruin the County Championship as well?
The T20 Blast, or whatever it'll be called by then, will run as a separate event, later in the summer
It seems like a double negative to me. I won't be going to any franchise games and, assuming it is concurrent, I will stop going to see Sussex in the T20 as it will just be a team comprised of 6 youngsters and the worst 5 county players. Does anyone know if it will be concurrent with the T20 Blast or will completely ruin the County Championship as well?
The T20 Blast, or whatever it'll be called by then, will run as a separate event, later in the summer
This means that the better players will be off to the IPL or be in the Franchise T20 in England for much of the short English summer. This will mean that some players will probably only play 5 or 6 County Championship games for their county. I can see the counties offloading those players and getting non-T20 players for the County Championship. I guess there will eventually be a split once there is a year round T20 circus. Test cricket in 10 years might be limping on at best.
Franchise cricket disenfranchising cricket fans across the country. Too bad if you're a Sussex, Kent, Durham or Somerset fan, or any of those other unfortunate, out of the way places.
And which marketing nobend comes up with these useless team names anyway?!
It seems like a double negative to me. I won't be going to any franchise games and, assuming it is concurrent, I will stop going to see Sussex in the T20 as it will just be a team comprised of 6 youngsters and the worst 5 county players. Does anyone know if it will be concurrent with the T20 Blast or will completely ruin the County Championship as well?
The T20 Blast, or whatever it'll be called by then, will run as a separate event, later in the summer
Yes, we'll have two T20 tournaments in a summer, which seems rather excessive and will completely screw up the county championship
Franchise cricket disenfranchising cricket fans across the country. Too bad if you're a Sussex, Kent, Durham or Somerset fan, or any of those other unfortunate, out of the way places.
And which marketing nobend comes up with these useless team names anyway?!
But evidence from India and Australia suggests not, the Australian state game is in a good state, and counties are going to get a shed load of cash (£1.3m each for 2020) from this competition to invest in themselves
London Lions (at Oval) London Royals (at Lords) South Coast Storm Birmingham Bears Cardiff Cobras Red Rose Raiders White Rose Warriors Midlands Mavericks
Haha not going anyway - but calling the imposters as London Lions seals it. Why not just Millwall and be done with it?
Don't want to upset Canters again but I just can't resist. How about, instead of Lions, they are called the London Eagles?
Call em whatever the fack you want. I will be boycotting this laughable farce of a money making exercise for the ECB that is pretending to be about cricket.
Franchise cricket disenfranchising cricket fans across the country. Too bad if you're a Sussex, Kent, Durham or Somerset fan, or any of those other unfortunate, out of the way places.
And which marketing nobend comes up with these useless team names anyway?!
But evidence from India and Australia suggests not, the Australian state game is in a good state, and counties are going to get a shed load of cash (£1.3m each for 2020) from this competition to invest in themselves
I'm not sure £1.3m qualifies as a shed load, and it still leaves the other counties way behind the city teams who also benefit from TV fees and bigger attendances and the hospitality revenues. The poor country cousins will remain worse off after losing their biggest earner, T20. Try to make a living off of 3 old men and dog snoozing through a four day match instead.
Franchise cricket disenfranchising cricket fans across the country. Too bad if you're a Sussex, Kent, Durham or Somerset fan, or any of those other unfortunate, out of the way places.
And which marketing nobend comes up with these useless team names anyway?!
I can assure you fans of those counties who do have a franchise team using their ground are very much unhappy with this too.
We have a team that doesn't use our name using our stadium for 6+ weeks of the busiest part of the season so the Championship games that run at the same time will be at some crappy outground (where we havent won in 13 years) and where the facilities are poor and with a much weakened side.
It's ridiculous and laughable.
Surrey refused to poll their members because they knew they would be fully against it. Members ran their own poll which found something like 90% against 7% unsure 3% for the change. The surrey management were very against the move as well but eventually voted for it as the motion was going to win (more than half the counties votes decided for them because they owed the ECB money) and voting against would incur financial penalites of more than 1Mil.
They then gave us a lot of rhetoric about 'Only Surrey play at the Oval', 'no side will take prioirty at the Oval above Surrey' and 'We wont let any other team play there unless it is for the good of Surrey'. Seems they lost their backbone, or they were threatened with more financial penalites.
I have laid out all the reasons further up this thread, why this is the wrong move and wont work in my opinion. I may go back and quote a few comments.
Make no mistake this move is the beginning of the end of all county cricket in this country.
I agree with change but this isn't the way to go about it. We're copying other countries but completely ignoring the aspects that made theirs successful.
Some points I made about this on just the previous page.
8 matches out of 38 to be on terrestrial TV is not making it more available to the masses, cheap tickets to guarantee full grounds will do more if only 8 are shown on free to air, although Surrey is very reasonable already, only £1 for my son and £18 for me I think the last couple of years
The issue is its not like the grounds weren't selling out for T20 anyway. The grounds I have been to (all in the south) Oval, Lords, Beckenham/Canterbury, Hove, Chelmsford are all packed out every T20 game and these clubs already make good money from them. Attendances at T20 was never the issue.
It's not just Root and Stokes. There is also Moeen Woakes and possibly Wood Buttler and Rashid all in the test squad so missing out. Yes many of the T20 side will be available but to do it properly there should be an international break.
As for your second point. I have said before I agree change is needed. I have never argued against changing what I think is a flawed setup. However this is not the right change. In fact it is fundamentally wrong. This is a classic case of the suits at the ECB working out that change is needed and looking at what other countries have done and copying that. But instead of tailoring it to us and making it work for us they have gone headfirst into what I think will be a disaster. They haven't worked out what made the IPL and big bash and success. In fact they have done the exact opposite.
Those leagues moving from state to city cricket meant:
More teams. We have less (10 less) More games. We have less (not sure how many but significantly less) More locations. We have 10 less locations. Theirs are solely on terrestrial TV. Ours will be 1/4 on terrestrial TV for the first year. After that it's subject to the ECB and the pull of sky money. They weren't selling out grounds for T20 before. We are already selling out most grounds for most games.
All these things for them make the cricket kettle more accessible. For us the opposite. Less people watching less cricket and having to travel further to do so.
That is the fundamental reason those leagues were a success and the fundamental reason ours won't be.
Other problems I can spot with it. Less English players playing in the English league. With 10 less teams that's minimum 90 less English players. Plus with say 2 extra over seas players that's 16 less in the teams that do play. So over 100 less English players in our T20 competition!
Who will get a contract? Stephens because he is bloody effective on English pitches and is experienced. Likewise Cook Bell Trott Compton Balance etc will all get contracts on name even though they will never play t20 for England again. At what cost? Young up and coming players are going to miss out. The players that are known to county coaches as they have been in the system for years. So those coachs would give them all chance. A franchise? No chance.
I keep harking back to the Currans. But 3 years ago when neither of them had made any county appearances only those who followed academy cricket closely were aware of them. If there was a bidding process for franchises would either of them have been bought? No chance. Yet they both were given their debuts by Surrey that year in the T20 and both excelled and became regulars. That is the route through for young players. Why ruin it?
If you think the 'lesser' T20 competition will continue more than a year then you're crazy.
The argument it will make England better at T20/ODI cricket is null and void. A change of coach and approach has changed our side around. We reached the final of the T20 world cup we have shot up the rankings we have some of the best players in the world and some of the most expensive in the IPL auction. We are expected to do well at the champions trophy. We have depth in this format like never before. Could name 2 T20i teams who I would be confident they could compete internationally.
As said change was needed but they've gone around it the wrong way.
What should have happened: Keep the counties. 3 groups rather than 2 to reduce no of games slightly. Play it all in one 4 week block in the summer holidays. Complete international break. 4 overseas players per team. But no Kolpak all must be current internationals. Have it all on Terrestrial TV. Have all the cheerleaders/stump mic/whatever franchise type stuff you want. Finals day at the Olympic stadium. Make as much song and dance out of it as you like. Keep the established set up that works but build on making it better.
Mr President do you not think that proposal (something very similar was put to the ECB) would not be better and more suited to English cricket?
Let's be honest, it's all about money. Raising more money from sponsors and TV so the top players get paid a lot more. It has nothing to do with the cricket paying public. Each team will play 4 home games so a max of 8 in south east England. This compares to significantly more (sorry not sure of number) of packed crowds for existing T20 which also allows people of Chelmsford, Canterbury, Hove, Beckenham and Tunbridge Wells to go. Still we can't have all these oiks going can we? It has to be convenient the City based. Certainly cricket needs a revamp but I feel this is a big step backward.
Further to my previous post on the topic I have one final point.
I have just read that the ECB have confirmed that championship cricket will run at the same time of this. So could it's will be robbed of their best players for championship matchs as they will be playing games for their franchise team on the same day.
Not only is that a compete shambles it it will significantly dilute the quality of the championship game. And make the title/promotion/relegation laughable.
Not doing much to help the test side which is, arguably, the format we are struggling most at currently.
One further point on the argument it will drive interest in cricket. If you think that franchise cricket will pull in different people to watch than the blast did. It certainly wont/can't have more people watch it as there are less games, less grounds less accessible etc. So if we are working on the assumption that it won't attract the people that usually watch the blast and are already cricket fans but will attract an entirely new audience (in itself a ridiculous assumption) then are we really sure that this people will go on to have any meaningful interest in cricket going forwards. Are they going to choose a county to support or start following test matches? Don't think so. The blast was already pulling these people in and it gave them a natural progression to following other forms of the game.
All about the requirements of Sky etc and sating their target audience namely those with money to burn and the attention span of a gnat.
No doubt very lucrative to those at the top end but another contribution to the death by a thousand cuts of proper cricket as the longer form of the game takes yet another hit to accommodate it.
Cricket has sold its soul, like other sports, for short term gain and will eventually pay the price.
Totally agree with the last couple of posts. County cricket is now shoved to either end of the season to accommodate the one day stuff. Days on end without any cricket and certainly 4 day games. The knock on effect to the pinnacle of the game, i.e. test cricket is obvious. As observed about, it’s all about the money. Very sad.
Comments
No patience for the 4 day reply, and just after the instant thrills of the T20 response.
Ageas Bowl
Edgbaston
Emerald Headingley
Kia Oval
Lord’s
Emirates Old Trafford
SSE SWALEC Stadium
Trent Bridge
(Ans: we did Valentine's yesterday)
What will the new franchises be called. The South London sloggers, the North London nurdlers, the Leeds larrupers...
St John's Wood Velocity
Edgbaston Egrets
Trafford Super Soppers
Hampshire 2.0
Cardiff City United
Are You There God? It's Me, Leeds
Nottingham Surely
It won't be Kent so I won't be following a specific team (at first) but I will be tuning in. Just because Charlton aren't in the Premier League doesn't mean I won't watch and enjoy Premier League matches.
London Royals (at Lords)
South Coast Storm
Birmingham Bears
Cardiff Cobras
Red Rose Raiders
White Rose Warriors
Midlands Mavericks
Be interesting to see how they brand the teams, suspect the Cardiff team will be a Welsh team, and the Headingley team might not have a city name. Otherwise the Manchester Bees would be a good name.
The Edgbaston Shoulder Chips
Headingley Parsimonious
Oval Window Replacements
Thomas Lord’s Grave Spinners
Old Trafford New Format
SSE SWALEC SSIX-HITTERS
The Trent Bridge Disappointments
And which marketing nobend comes up with these useless team names anyway?!
I'm not sure £1.3m qualifies as a shed load, and it still leaves the other counties way behind the city teams who also benefit from TV fees and bigger attendances and the hospitality revenues. The poor country cousins will remain worse off after losing their biggest earner, T20. Try to make a living off of 3 old men and dog snoozing through a four day match instead.
We have a team that doesn't use our name using our stadium for 6+ weeks of the busiest part of the season so the Championship games that run at the same time will be at some crappy outground (where we havent won in 13 years) and where the facilities are poor and with a much weakened side.
It's ridiculous and laughable.
Surrey refused to poll their members because they knew they would be fully against it. Members ran their own poll which found something like 90% against 7% unsure 3% for the change. The surrey management were very against the move as well but eventually voted for it as the motion was going to win (more than half the counties votes decided for them because they owed the ECB money) and voting against would incur financial penalites of more than 1Mil.
They then gave us a lot of rhetoric about 'Only Surrey play at the Oval', 'no side will take prioirty at the Oval above Surrey' and 'We wont let any other team play there unless it is for the good of Surrey'. Seems they lost their backbone, or they were threatened with more financial penalites.
I have laid out all the reasons further up this thread, why this is the wrong move and wont work in my opinion. I may go back and quote a few comments.
Make no mistake this move is the beginning of the end of all county cricket in this country.
Some points I made about this on just the previous page. It's not just Root and Stokes. There is also Moeen Woakes and possibly Wood Buttler and Rashid all in the test squad so missing out. Yes many of the T20 side will be available but to do it properly there should be an international break.
As for your second point. I have said before I agree change is needed. I have never argued against changing what I think is a flawed setup. However this is not the right change. In fact it is fundamentally wrong. This is a classic case of the suits at the ECB working out that change is needed and looking at what other countries have done and copying that. But instead of tailoring it to us and making it work for us they have gone headfirst into what I think will be a disaster. They haven't worked out what made the IPL and big bash and success. In fact they have done the exact opposite.
Those leagues moving from state to city cricket meant:
More teams. We have less (10 less)
More games. We have less (not sure how many but significantly less)
More locations. We have 10 less locations.
Theirs are solely on terrestrial TV. Ours will be 1/4 on terrestrial TV for the first year. After that it's subject to the ECB and the pull of sky money.
They weren't selling out grounds for T20 before. We are already selling out most grounds for most games.
All these things for them make the cricket kettle more accessible. For us the opposite. Less people watching less cricket and having to travel further to do so.
That is the fundamental reason those leagues were a success and the fundamental reason ours won't be.
Other problems I can spot with it. Less English players playing in the English league. With 10 less teams that's minimum 90 less English players. Plus with say 2 extra over seas players that's 16 less in the teams that do play. So over 100 less English players in our T20 competition!
Who will get a contract? Stephens because he is bloody effective on English pitches and is experienced. Likewise Cook Bell Trott Compton Balance etc will all get contracts on name even though they will never play t20 for England again. At what cost? Young up and coming players are going to miss out. The players that are known to county coaches as they have been in the system for years. So those coachs would give them all chance. A franchise? No chance.
I keep harking back to the Currans. But 3 years ago when neither of them had made any county appearances only those who followed academy cricket closely were aware of them. If there was a bidding process for franchises would either of them have been bought? No chance. Yet they both were given their debuts by Surrey that year in the T20 and both excelled and became regulars. That is the route through for young players. Why ruin it?
If you think the 'lesser' T20 competition will continue more than a year then you're crazy.
The argument it will make England better at T20/ODI cricket is null and void. A change of coach and approach has changed our side around. We reached the final of the T20 world cup we have shot up the rankings we have some of the best players in the world and some of the most expensive in the IPL auction. We are expected to do well at the champions trophy. We have depth in this format like never before. Could name 2 T20i teams who I would be confident they could compete internationally.
As said change was needed but they've gone around it the wrong way.
What should have happened:
Keep the counties.
3 groups rather than 2 to reduce no of games slightly.
Play it all in one 4 week block in the summer holidays.
Complete international break.
4 overseas players per team. But no Kolpak all must be current internationals.
Have it all on Terrestrial TV.
Have all the cheerleaders/stump mic/whatever franchise type stuff you want.
Finals day at the Olympic stadium. Make as much song and dance out of it as you like.
Keep the established set up that works but build on making it better.
Mr President do you not think that proposal (something very similar was put to the ECB) would not be better and more suited to English cricket? One further point on the argument it will drive interest in cricket. If you think that franchise cricket will pull in different people to watch than the blast did. It certainly wont/can't have more people watch it as there are less games, less grounds less accessible etc. So if we are working on the assumption that it won't attract the people that usually watch the blast and are already cricket fans but will attract an entirely new audience (in itself a ridiculous assumption) then are we really sure that this people will go on to have any meaningful interest in cricket going forwards. Are they going to choose a county to support or start following test matches? Don't think so. The blast was already pulling these people in and it gave them a natural progression to following other forms of the game.
No doubt very lucrative to those at the top end but another contribution to the death by a thousand cuts of proper cricket as the longer form of the game takes yet another hit to accommodate it.
Cricket has sold its soul, like other sports, for short term gain and will eventually pay the price.