by Some senior county figures believe privatization is inevitable and have been hit by “Luddite” members holding back clubs.
In a new book published this week, a number of county chief executives have backed private investment in ailing clubs but warned the game is at a “vulnerable time” in its history.
I Batting for Time: The Fight to Keep English Cricket Alivea book about the current state of county cricket by former Sports telegraph journalist Ben Bloom, Durham chief executive Tim Bostock leads the calls to reduce the influence of county members.
Durham is one of three privately owned counties and therefore not accountable to members, of whom there are around 60,000 across the country.
Bostock has previously talked about lining up Saudi investment in Durham while Hampshire, another privately owned club, has attracted interest from part-owners of the Delhi Capitals IPL franchise, who have been in talks with the club’s former chairman, and majority shareholders. , Rod Bransgrove.
It comes at a time when the game is dealing with the sale of equity in the First franchise that some counties may be considering outside bids and private ownership.
Section i the Cricket The magazine recently revealed that five counties have needed emergency financial help from the England and Wales Cricket Board in the past two years and that on average 47 per cent of clubs’ income is generated through payments from the governing body. Some smaller counties, Worcestershire (63 per cent), Middlesex (64 per cent), Leicestershire (65 per cent), and Gloucestershire (60 per cent) – are higher.
The members’ revolt two years ago was partly responsible for quashing Andrew Strauss’s review of the domestic structure which recommended a reduction in the number of championship games, which are popular among non-Certified members. The most.
“The members don’t understand that what they are trying to say will kill the game. We’re running a multi-million dollar professional sport and yet the big long-term decisions are made by a handful of people… I don’t want to call them activists because they get on their high horse but they are. act effectively,” said Bostock.
“Of the millions of people who watch cricket in an English summer, the whole structure is run by what could only be about 10,000 people. You have chairmen threatened with removal if they don’t do what a small handful of Luddites say – and they are Luddites. They are passionate Luddites, but they are Luddites. I don’t know how it will survive without radical change, they think. The lowest common denominator ultimately rules our day.”
Will Brown, chief executive of Gloucestershire, backed the view of Bostock, who hopes to fund a land transfer from Bristol in the next decade.
“You get that passion, heart and love, but I don’t know if it’s a model for the future,” he said of the county membership. “If county cricket was run the way the membership wanted it to be run it wouldn’t be sustainable – even because the T20 Blast wouldn’t have music screens or replays because that takes away from the cricket. I am being facetious but there is potential for disconnection.
“Within the next five years I can see private equity ownership in half of the counties, if not more. The moment the first couple go – further than Hampshire, Northants and Durham have done before – the rest will follow, because you’ll have no choice. Maybe that’s how 18 counties survive. It becomes a much more commercial beast, which is scary.”
Under the current proposals being discussed, the grounds will be that 51 percent of the host’s equity commitments on the First franchise will be sold, while the ECB will retain 49 percent. If the ECB sells its bets, the money will be shared across the entire game. If the club sells its bets, it will keep the money, which for some could be hundreds of millions.
‘We have to find a way to protect ourselves against the future’
“Can we maintain and sustain this model? I do not know. As the gap widens between counties, we must find a way to protect ourselves in the future. I don’t think there has ever been a more vulnerable time for the whole game,” said Worcestershire chief executive Ashley Giles.
Simon Harmer, who has years of experience in county cricket in Essex, supports a reduction in the influence of members. Harmer is from South Africa and in his home country the SA T20, which was launched last year, was a huge success, but South Africa managed to pick a third string team for a recent Test tour to New Zealand . “In an ideal world you wouldn’t have member-run clubs. It probably breeds an average culture. In an ideal world you would want your club to be run by cricket people who understand the cricket side and the financial side of a successful county team. I don’t think there would be as much politics, and it would be better for the game.”
There is still strong support for the member structure at the top of the ECB and Richard Gould, the chief executive, believes that the fans should have a voice. Gould greatly increased Surrey’s membership when he was chief executive at the Oval and is wary of giving too much control over private finances while leading the Centurion’s purchase plan.
“When clubs claim that their members want them to do something they don’t do, clubs often neglect their membership base. Some clubs have found them difficult to deal with. The problem is, the smaller the number you have, the more talk some of them will have in a smaller pond. More members means more different voices, more opinions and it’s much easier to represent the region,” he said.
“While the cricket membership model may be a bit slower to respond, the reality is that it provides a much more stable model for clubs in the community.”
Batting for Time: The Fight to Keep English Cricket Alive published this week
