Slipstream wrote: In 2015 Graves, Harrison and Strauss came together and by the end of 2016 the ECB starting losing millions, before the idea of the 100 came about. That is after having reserves of £70m for quite a number of years. I remember reading an article about it by Dobell that has since disappeared. Is the answer to the ECB's losses? They are in big trouble if it is not the answer.
Durhamfootman wrote:the counties had £1.2M waved under their noses. hard to criticise them at a time when many have big debts
Alviro Patterson wrote:Should the City Based tournament not take off, do Sky:
Durhamfootman wrote:and....... in order to make the 8 matches really worthwhile, the counties that have been stripped of their best players for 2 months by the franchises, will not be allowed to bring any overseas players to improve the quality of the competition, in case they become more exciting than the franchise event
sussexpob wrote:
Literally the only way this works is to attract new fans in massive numbers, and to attract them from ball one. Otherwise, someone has to fall. And with the ECB and the counties so reliant on each others fortunes, the collapse of either will be like a domino effect.
sussexpob wrote:
The 100 is a crazy, risky and frankly unloved idea. It makes zero sense. I simply cant see how it doesnt completely destroy the historical structure of cricket in this country. But too much is invested in it now to pull out. Why oh why didnt they just put a few more blast games into the mix, raise the foreign import per team to 8 starters, and just go with that.
Durhamfootman wrote:sussexpob wrote:
Literally the only way this works is to attract new fans in massive numbers, and to attract them from ball one. Otherwise, someone has to fall. And with the ECB and the counties so reliant on each others fortunes, the collapse of either will be like a domino effect.
well, thank goodness the ECB are professional enough and effective enough to make this happen :facepalm
no pressure
sussexpob wrote:Alviro Patterson wrote:Should the City Based tournament not take off, do Sky:
Arthur uses the word "Murky", but it has been announced that Sky will have "input" into a lot of the competition criteria, such as choice of venues/teams/format. Sky havent only bought the rights to show the cricket, they have bought the rights seemingly to define how the competition operates. And, who will actually own the Franchises? I havent worked that out yet, I doubt the ECB can own them all or run them, so that leads to the question about who will be appointed to filter off the profits to be made, and take them away from the game.
At this point, you start to answer your own questions about Sky's motivations. No doubt they have taken a risk, but they will be getting their cut of the pie from all levels, no doubt.
captaincolly wrote:According to The Times the new competition will have IPL style strategic timeouts ...despite the fact that one main reason for playing the 100 ball format was to have shorter, broadcaster friendly games. So there will be a pointless 2.5 minute delay " at any point between the 26th and 75th deliveries of the opposition's innings."
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 49 guests