Southern Brace lifted their first men's 100 trophy after beating Birmingham Phoenix at Lord's in the final. Photo: Action Images via Reuters/John Sibley
There are many cricket fans, especially among Telegraph readers, who will dance a jig with delight if the new regime that rules the English game decides to sack the Hundred.
Our recent Skild Berry's manifesto for change in English cricket caught the attention of England and Wales Cricket Board officials because readers' love for the red ball, first-class cricket, was loud and clear.
But the 100 is here, it's a reality and it will be the only cricket played in England in August as the country hopefully basks in the Ashes' victory.
Debate about its future after 2025, when the current county agreements expire, will dominate the next two years and determine the success or failure of the Richard Thompson-Richard Gould era just as it did before. for their predecessors and probably their successors.
The current status of the halfway house doesn't help anyone
Roughly speaking, there are two options: throw away the 100 or support it, because at the moment it's a halfway house, and it doesn't help anyone.
To back it up means selling shares in eight teams to Indian businessmen; attracting IPL owners eager to be associated with the bastions of English cricket — The Oval, Lord's, Edgbaston, etc.
This will raise huge funds for the English game, allow teams to pay a decent salary to attract top talent, arrange an auction players who will create buzz around the tournament and bring in sponsorship and advertising revenue from India, the world's largest cricket market. .
At the moment, the maximum salary in the Hundred is £125,000. Ben Stokes and some of the England internationals see this as a chance to take a break, rather than top up their bank balance. Things might have been different if they were paid according to the income of these players in the modern era.
Indian influence boosts broadcasters' revenues and brings new ideas and new money to English cricket. Isolationism pushes such investments into the hands of others. Cricket Australia decided to go it alone with Big Bash, so the Indians from Mumbai and others have turned the other way — to South Africa and the UAE — and now these teams can offer Australian players more money than their own board.
The T20 competition starting in the United States is colliding with an English summer that offers IPL teams another path to continue if England is closed. What happens then? The 100 won't be able to compete for the best talent. The best players will go elsewhere.
«Franchises are powered by reputable clubs»
Of course, franchises are fed by reputable clubs. They don't produce talent, they steal it. A county like Leicestershire deserves a proper reward for producing Rehan Ahmed if he continues to manage millions on the franchise. Proper compensation to districts to support their talent development paths should be part of any stock sale.
Then there is another way: throwing out the Hundred. What would it achieve? This will consolidate the game into one shortest format, Twenty20. This would ensure that the existing counties were back in the spotlight.
But that would probably also mean that England's T20 main event is the middle of the road, a second division competition compared to the IPL. More teams produce more cricket and full stadiums in England (perhaps). That's fine for the English game, but without outside investment, where does the money come from to pay the best players? In this scenario, the ECB recognizes its place in the world order, and competition suits the domestic market and causes little excitement elsewhere.
It seems unlikely that Sky will have the same appetite for an 18-team tournament with promotion and downgrade. Franchise owners don't like danger. They're not going to pay for a team if there's a chance it could be relegated and relegated from the premier league. The counties abandoned this idea when it was put forward earlier because they were afraid of losing lucrative local derbies if the teams were in different divisions.
Wages will remain at current levels, and the ECB risks damaging its relationship with Sky. . Wherever you take part in the free-air debate, Sky has been funding English cricket for two decades and supporting the ECB's 100 dream. Taking them for granted can be dangerous.
But what do we have at the moment? A 100 that the new regime at the ECB doesn't really believe in, no matter what is said publicly. The salaries are small but the fees are decent, families are large and there has already been a £400m offer from Bridgepoint to buy a majority stake in the tournament. The Women's Hundred is thriving and a valuable source of future income. A mixture of a women's hundred and a men's T20 would be highly unsatisfactory and give the wrong impression of the women's game.
There's a lot to discuss and how counties have dealt with the Strauss reforms — basically doing nothing but saying no does not inspire confidence that any decisions will be made that go beyond what suits each club. It's up to Thompson and Gould to provide the vision.
The 100 has lost money so far, but it's the same with all new leagues. County cricket is leaking cash every day and is backed by broadcast deals based on the England team and two-way cricket under threat. You don't have to look far to find a county in financial trouble.
So throw it away or bring back the 100. It's time to make a decision.
Свежие комментарии