New t20 proposals: the Pros and Cons

Joined: 12 Jan 2016, 18:41

24 Feb 2016, 14:16 #21

a working party has presented proposals to the counties to be agreed at a meeting on march 7th. (espn cricinfo) apparrently the counties are retained so the franchise idea has been shelved. from 2017 promotion and relegation in 2 divisions, the top 8 teams reaching the quarter final this season will form division 1 along with a 9th county from a play off. it is not yet decided whether it wil be 2 up and down or 1........ so if we want to be in div 1 we need a top class t20 player to help us out.
It so happens that, this year, the first division of the county championship comprises all of the 8 counties with Test venues. (I exclude Glamorgan because that seems to be a political deal.) The only exception is Somerset.

I rather suspect that the ECB would like these 8 (richer) counties with big grounds to become the elite T20 teams. We would have Durham, Yorkshire, and Lancashire in the North. Nottinghamshire and Warwickshire in the Midlands. Middlesex and Surrey in London. And Hampshire in the South.

Unless T20 games can be played at football stadiums with drop-in pitches, I cannot readily see that a city-based franchise system would work without the involvement/co-operation of the county cricket clubs who play at these larger venues.

Conversely, I cannot see how some-one could readily bid for a franchise that displaced one of these 8 teams.

Perhaps a 10-team system would be viable - in which case Glamorgan would presumably become the 9th team.

Perhaps some other teams could combine? Say Gloucestershire and Worcestershire? Kent and Sussex? Derbyshire, Leicestershire and Northamptonshire? Somerset with Devon and Cornwall? Essex to cover East Anglia? I cannot see that all happening in a hurry - to put it mildly. Perhaps all these counties, as at present, or some combined, could have an annual 2nd division competition whose winner joined the top 9 for the following year only.

To my mind, the concept of a city-based franchise system for an elite T20 competition would be horrific if it were to displace all the counties - because it would ruin them financially and thus end the county championship. However, I can't really see how such a franchise would work without the participation of the 8 counties with the bigger grounds.
Reply
Like

Joined: 20 Aug 2013, 11:26

02 Mar 2016, 14:22 #22

.......as county chiefs get radical.

From Cricinfo

http://www.espncricinfo.com/county-cric ... 76907.html
Reply
Like

Joined: 07 Sep 2015, 21:28

02 Mar 2016, 17:30 #23

"It remains likely that the compromise solution - a two-division T20 competition involving all 18 counties with teams financially compensated for a lack of derby games - will be ratified, but it does seem that resistance to more radical change is crumbling."

Every time I read this I don't know whether to laugh or cry. I thought the idea was to try and get people in to watch.
Reply
Like

Joined: 02 Apr 2014, 17:47

02 Mar 2016, 17:57 #24

Give each team a couple of spare dates when they can play the local derbies if they wish.
The marketing people would drum up the interest.
Or arrange the calendar for each team to play a doubleheader on a Saturday or Sunday with the local rivals as one of the opponents.
Reply
Like

Joined: 17 Oct 2013, 18:36

02 Mar 2016, 19:17 #25

Confirmation perhaps of the clubs' view (3rd item from the end ) :-

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... iasco.html
Reply
Like

Joined: 21 Aug 2013, 19:47

02 Mar 2016, 20:57 #26

Of the various options mentioned I'm in favour of the status quo! County based, regionialised early stage, knock out and then finals day with as many games as possible being 'Friday night lights'. Whats actually wrong with it?

However back with franchises. Has the idea of a mix of 'city' and 'county' been explored? I can see why the broadcasters would prefer South London poshboys rather than Surrey or Birmingham as opposed to Warwickshire however surely the nailed on northern brands to attract viewing figures are teams called Yorkshire and Lancashire? Could this happen?
Reply
Like

Joined: 17 Oct 2013, 18:36

04 Mar 2016, 19:35 #27

Reply
Like

Joined: 17 Oct 2013, 18:36

07 Mar 2016, 17:07 #28

Perhaps no change after all (4th item down):

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... tter.html-
Reply
Like

Joined: 20 Aug 2013, 11:26

07 Mar 2016, 17:58 #29

I will wait for the announcement, but if the Daily Mail report is true it is excellent news.

The meeting is today and no news yet!!
Reply
Like

Joined: 20 Aug 2013, 11:26

07 Mar 2016, 18:40 #30

On another thread, it looks like the DM have got it wrong.
Reply
Like