**Official** County Cricket 2017

[S.Kennedy]

You're looking at the tournament in comparison to itself and other County competitions. If you look at it compared to the IPL, Caribbean T20, Big Bash etc. then it falls behind massively on the global market. The attendances are decent, but that's really a minor point. The estimated value of the TV rights for the new competition are £30m a year higher. Add on another good few million from marketing/sponsorship and the benefits of high quality, high profile matches being on terrestrial TV.

Yes having another T20 competition going, with a 50 over competition running at the same time as the new T20 is a mess. But ultimately cricket needs money and exposure to survive. The city-based T20 will do that.

We are England. Those competitions are situated in different countries.

- Australia and to a lesser extent India and the West Indies barely have to worry about rained off matches, drizzly draws and perplexing Duckworth-Lewis outcomes. They can get a full competition's play. The weather - as anyone who follows English cricket knows - is a huge factor during the season.

- mainland Australia's population is centered around four distinct urban centres (I know Tasmania is a little different) which dominate their retaining state; most of the population of say, New South Wales is located in Sydney. There is not a serious rival to Sydney in that state demographically or culturally. England is a bewildering mosaic of small towns, large towns, small cities, large cities, counties and nations (Wales). Take the Midlands for example which has the cities Birmingham, Nottingham, Coventry, Northampton (etc.) all competing for sporting allegiances, regional identities and sporting attendances.

- India and to a lesser extent Australia are cricket mad. In India, cricket is a religion. Since it was paywalled, cricket is a minority sport in England. Football is England's religion.

- The counties are better supported than Australia and India's Shield and Ranji side. County membership still reside at around 80,000 - 90,000, all paying around £200 per year. In contrast, you can just walk into any Shield or Ranji game for free. The Shield Final is being played in Alice Springs in front of one or two Kangaroos and a few flies. Nobody (sadly) seems to care about those competitions (although CA to their credit have it all streamed, and Star put Ranji matches on television).

- The Big Bash is all on free-to-air television (Network Ten); it is ubiquitous. Even in this early stage, England's competition is only discussing eight out of 36 matches on terrestrial. Harrison is quite adamant that cricket will be still basically paywalled in England,

we're a pay-TV business. We're underwritten by pay TV. Right now, there aren't too many alternatives to that

 

[fredfertang]

Chris Read retiring at the end of the season. Been massive for Notts and he will be 20 years there come the end of the season.

I played against Chris Read once - he was 16 and playing for a Cornish side we had a tour match with - doubtless didn't help that it was one of the great mismatches - we were a bunch of itinerant lawyers with one good club cricketer, a couple of guys who had been decent cricketers a few years previously and eight beer match players - the whole team (I think it was St Austell) were very good about it - except for the little gob****e behind the stumps - what a **** he was

 

[theegyptian]

That Podmore dismissal looked like it missed his bat by a long way. Did well to walk off in a quick manner.

This is a cracking game.

 

[SeamUp]

I played against Chris Read once - he was 16 and playing for a Cornish side we had a tour match with - doubtless didn't help that it was one of the great mismatches - we were a bunch of itinerant lawyers with one good club cricketer, a couple of guys who had been decent cricketers a few years previously and eight beer match players - the whole team (I think it was St Austell) were very good about it - except for the little gob****e behind the stumps - what a **** he was

Nice

Couldn't have been much before this then. Quite a collection in this England u19 side from 1997.

 

[Scaly piscine]

That Podmore dismissal looked like it missed his bat by a long way. Did well to walk off in a quick manner.

This is a cracking game.

Yea that's what I thought too, missed the bat by miles.

 

[S.Kennedy]

You've obviously not been on here long enough if you think I give a toss what most people think, let alone the majority of a fraction. Preaching to the choir and all that.

I was around supporting T20 against the naysayers when it first arrived. I'm not going to be swayed by the naysayers now who've reluctantly joined the T20 bandwagon. Like yourself they put one foot in the camp and then actively rail against the newest developments with it.

http://www.cricketweb.net/forum/cricket-chat/10053-20-20-cricket.html

You have that wrong as I do not like Twenty20. I sometimes go to the games based on the premise that,

A/ it is a piss up
B/ I've paid for it
C/ it is better than staying at home

but it is a load of nonsense really.

The stuff about The Blast's success is fact and outside my subjective orbit - heck, if it was truly left to me, I'd axe all Twenty20 and reinstall the two games of the championship which were axed.

 

[Scaly piscine]

We are England. Those competitions are situated in different countries.

- Australia and to a lesser extent India and the West Indies barely have to worry about rained off matches, drizzly draws and perplexing Duckworth-Lewis outcomes. They can get a full competition's play. The weather - as anyone who follows English cricket knows - is a huge factor during the season.

- mainland Australia's population is centered around four distinct urban centres (I know Tasmania is a little different) which dominate their retaining state; most of the population of say, New South Wales is located in Sydney. There is not a serious rival to Sydney in that state demographically or culturally. England is a bewildering mosaic of small towns, large towns, small cities, large cities, counties and nations (Wales). Take the Midlands for example which has the cities Birmingham, Nottingham, Coventry, Northampton (etc.) all competing for sporting allegiances, regional identities and sporting attendances.

- India and to a lesser extent Australia are cricket mad. In India, cricket is a religion. Since it was paywalled, cricket is a minority sport in England. Football is England's religion.

- The counties are better supported than Australia and India's Shield and Ranji side. County membership still reside at around 80,000 - 90,000, all paying around £200 per year. In contrast, you can just walk into any Shield or Ranji game for free. The Shield Final is being played in Alice Springs in front of one or two Kangaroos and a few flies. Nobody (sadly) seems to care about those competitions (although CA to their credit have it all streamed, and Star put Ranji matches on television).

- The Big Bash is all on free-to-air television (Network Ten); it is ubiquitous. Even in this early stage, England's competition is only discussing eight out of 36 matches on terrestrial. Harrison is quite adamant that cricket will be still basically paywalled in England,

Last season 15 games were rained off out of 126 group games. That's nothing like as big a deal as you're making out, also that's with the matches starting in late May.

You're mainly arguing stuff about people attending matches, which as I've already said is a minor issue, but you'll see good attendances anyway as evidence by international matches and other T20 - remember most are going to be entertained not because they're huge fans of a particular team. Cricket isn't Australia's main sport, aussie rules is. But again it isn't about ratios or whatever else, it is about marketability and money. It is about what people will watch on TV. English sport is potentially very lucrative, because if it's done right it is marketable internationally and domestically.

Eight matches is still more than none, that exposure is still enough for hook people in, just as the Ashes was. Unfortunately this is how it is in England. The vast majority of sport is paywalled, if people can see freely try something then they're much more like to get into it, and get around the paywall.

 

[S.Kennedy]

Last season 15 games were rained off out of 126 group games. That's nothing like as big a deal as you're making out, also that's with the matches starting in late May.

You're mainly arguing stuff about people attending matches, which as I've already said is a minor issue, but you'll see good attendances anyway as evidence by international matches and other T20 - remember most are going to be entertained not because they're huge fans of a particular team. Cricket isn't Australia's main sport, aussie rules is. But again it isn't about ratios or whatever else, it is about marketability and money. It is about what people will watch on TV. English sport is potentially very lucrative, because if it's done right it is marketable internationally and domestically.

Eight matches is still more than none, that exposure is still enough for hook people in, just as the Ashes was. Unfortunately this is how it is in England. The vast majority of sport is paywalled, if people can see freely try something then they're much more like to get into it, and get around the paywall.

That is not true. Aussie Rules is not even liked in New South Wales and isn't as popular in Queensland either (maybe some of the Australians can verify this). I believe Aussie Rules is only popular in Victoria, South and Western Australia and the Northern Territories. The Rugby codes are more popular in New South Wales and Queensland. Cricket is Australia's national sport.

Does those fifteen games factor in the multitude of freezing cold reduced over ones? I'm sure you have been to these games where the players come on, then they go off, then they come on, then they go off, and from which every spectator leaves scratching their heads at the Duckworth-Lewis outcome? This is pretty much a regular event. Understand that they are marketing this new venture at families, non-cricket fans (or hypothetical fans), and in doing so they are competing with sports which can play through rain and other forms of media and entertainment. These will not be hardened county veterans with their scorecard and copy of Playfair tucked under their arm - chaps who are used to the vagaries and impracticalities of cricket in England.

You are starting from year zero with these new 'fans'. They - if they even exist - are going to be complete newbies to cricket's eccentricities. Will parents really enjoy taking little Tarquin to a 20/10 drizzly farce at Headingley or Old Trafford? And If the media backclash is even a microcosm of general opinion, it seems most cricket fans will boycott the venture (and anyhow, we have been told it is not aimed at cricket fans)! So who does that leave? The drunks with their beer snakes much like The Blast?

''Marketability and money''. ''Lucrative'', ''Marketable internationally and domestically'' - I can see you are fluent in ECB speak? Well done.

 

[theegyptian]

105.3 (+2 for change of innings) overs for Notts Cambridge today. wtf. Luke Chapman, with no dob or previous games on his cricinfo profile, taking 6-78 off 32 overs with his offies including dismissing Samit and Wessels for first ball ducks.

 

[S.Kennedy]

Just a curious point. I've read and listened to a lot on this and as a general rule,

The non-cricketing journalists dislike the ECB proposals; the ex-cricketing pundits - especially those working for Sky or BT - are besotted with the ECB proposal to a point where it is slightly worrying. The fans (almost) universally loath the idea. Of the players Bresnan and Morgan are supportive - you'd expect that as they have played franchised cricket. Root didn't exactly seem overwhelmed with it speaking on Vaughn and Tuffers (he diverted the question to playing for Yorkshire upon being asked) but he said it would interesting.

One exception is Flintoff who said we should just persevere with The Blast.

Truly we are divided haha

Speaking rather facetiously and taking to its logical conclusion, the players will be playing in an empty stadium frequented by Vaughan, Nasser, Atherton and Lloyd, while thousands of fans and cricketing journalist (and Fred) will be packed into a full stadium staring at an empty field!!

 

[Starfighter]

- The Big Bash is all on free-to-air television (Network Ten); it is ubiquitous. Even in this early stage, England's competition is only discussing eight out of 36 matches on terrestrial. Harrison is quite adamant that cricket will be still basically paywalled in England,

This is such an important factor. The first two BBL seasons which were broadcast on Fox saw ground ground attendances average 17.8 and 14.4k, the same as the previous State based competition whose last three seasons saw ground attendances of 10.4, 18.2 and 15.4k. Since C10 began broadcasting in 2013/14 ground attendances have averaged 18.8, 23.6, 29.4 and 30.1k per match. No more people were interested in seeing the matches than previously until they could actually watch it on TV.

 

[S.Kennedy]

This is such an important factor. The first two BBL seasons which were broadcast on Fox saw ground ground attendances average 17.8 and 14.4k, the same as the previous State based competition whose last three seasons saw ground attendances of 10.4, 18.2 and 15.4k. Since C10 began broadcasting in 2013/14 ground attendances have averaged 18.8, 23.6, 29.4 and 30.1k per match. No more people were interested in seeing the matches than previously until they could actually watch it on TV.

It seems to me that having the entire thing free-to-air means people follow every ball from their living rooms and are acutely aware of the 'tournament situation'. It also seems to have a 'nationwide' inclusive character analogous to the Olympics. What is your opinion on our wonderful ''British muddle'' of 8/36 matches on free-to-air, the remaining 28 pay-walled by Sky or BT? Or to change the angle of the question, how successful do you think Australia's Big Bash would've been if only 8/35 matches were on Ten, the rest on Fox?

Even supporters of the proposed ECB competition are left with an, ''it is better than nothing'', to defend the paltry terrestrial content (or if they're Yorkshiremen, ''tis better than nowt'').

 

[Starfighter]

It seems to me that having the entire thing free-to-air means people follow every ball from their living rooms and are acutely aware of the 'tournament situation'. It also seems to have a 'nationwide' inclusive character analogous to the Olympics. What is your opinion on our wonderful ''British muddle'' of 8/36 matches on free-to-air, the remaining 28 pay-walled by Sky or BT? Or to change the angle of the question, how successful do you think Australia's Big Bash would've been if only 8/35 matches were on Ten, the rest on Fox?

Even supporters of the proposed ECB competition are left with an, ''it is better than nothing'', to defend the paltry terrestrial content (or if they're Yorkshiremen, ''tis better than nowt'').

Putting only a few contextless matches on free TV probably won't do all that much. I doubt attendances would be more than 2 to 4k higher than having it completely on pay TV, if that.

It's also worth mentioning that Australia doesn't really have anywhere close to the same regional history and identity that the UK does and a city based competition here doesn't sacrifice state support like it would with the counties in the English competition.

 

[TheJediBrah]

UK T20 could work with more teams if they managed to get more overseas players (good ones) per side, similar to the IPL. Otherwise the quality of the cricket suffers much like it does with the regular county sides now.

 

[S.Kennedy]

The overseas allocation is 3/15-man squad. And like the Australian Bash the internationals will rarely - if ever - be involved.

 

[91Jmay]

I am not in the minority here in loathing this idea. You do realise you people supporting it here are in the minority? Everybody hates the idea elsewhere (cricinfo, Guardian, the tweets on the MCC/Middx match)? People are absolutely slating the idea for all the obvious reasons, dilutes historic counties, scheduling, etc.

I don't support the idea, I just think your arrogance at declaring what English people like about cricket is very wearing.

 

[Watson33]

Lets move the topic off of this franchise T20 shall we? Getting very boring reading S.Kennedy and others essentially post the same thing with different wordings at least 15 times a day.

Early predictions:

Div One winners: Middlesex
Relegated: Lancs, Essex.
Promoted: Notts, Durham.

One Day Cup: Surrey
T20 Blast: Hampshire

Has Division Two now gone back to two promoted?

 

[Woodster]

Lets move the topic off of this franchise T20 shall we? Getting very boring reading S.Kennedy and others essentially post the same thing with different wordings at least 15 times a day.

Early predictions:

Div One winners: Middlesex
Relegated: Lancs, Essex.
Promoted: Notts, Durham.

One Day Cup: Surrey
T20 Blast: Hampshire

Has Division Two now gone back to two promoted?

Ok, I'm going to put my completely biased Essex head on and say we're going to avoid the drop this season. The loss of Masters and Napier with the ball is inevitably going to be huge, but Neil Wagner could be an inspirational signing. With Mohammad Amir supposedly arriving in the second half of the season, these two players go some way to replacing the Essex legends, backed up by the ever-improving Jamie Porter and young Aaron Beard. The experienced South African spinner Simon Harmer also looks a steady signing.

But it's with the bat where I think Essex will impress, sufficiently to maintain Division One status. Tom Wesley and Nick Browne were excellent last season and both will hope to push their England claims with a solid season in Division One, which they're both capable of. Alastair Cook is going to be available for a fair chunk of the season and the experienced faces of Ten Doescahte, Foster, Bopara, etc, gives the side a solid look, throw in the returning Varun Chopra and Adam Wheater, and it does look a pretty strong batting line-up for a newly promoted side.

 

[theegyptian]

Essex need some really big runs from Cook if they want to stay up imo. They'll probably stack the batting with Foster at 8 but whilst Cook is there I'd be looking at playing the extra bowler and trying to go for results.

Cook, Browne, Westley, Bopara, Lawrence, RTD, Foster, Harmer, Wagner, Porter, Quinn/whoever.

They'll probably fudge it though and play Wheater or Chopra instead of a bowler. I hope Lawrence doesn't get dropped though.

Bowling is weak even with Amir/Wagner and Harmer imo although it'll be interesting to see how Harmer goes. Chelmsford doesn't seem to turn much.

 

[Howe_zat]

Didn't know they'd signed Harmer, seems a pretty clever signing.