Sta£e of the Nation - County Cricket Finances

 . . . time for you to get off the fence, HHS!  

I would be amazed if this development occurs. Rather like the 'Lords' extravaganza the plans will be watered down and
then watered down again. And anyway, how are Yorkshire going to find the money? This is £50m - the most expensive
proposed build of all the TMGS. Even more than the 'Ageas Bowl' and 'Old Trafford'. The club already owe £20m to Leeds
City Council, so I doubt any other councils will show interest.

It's crackers with bells on it! 

The 'Cricinfo' report states, "The development, which will be in conjunction with Leeds City Council and Leeds Rugby,
is scheduled to take place in six phases over the next 20 years." So, perhaps, the club will seek money for each phase
as it comes along. No mention of where the funding is coming from.

To repeat given the club is already in debt to £24m and that deficit has increased by £4m during the last 16 months,
who is going to lend to them?

Most certainly true. The "alien" is Colin Graves.

What a financial disaster last week was for Yorkshire.

Reeling under £24m debt, gaining maximum monies from both on and off-field commercial ventures
is essential and CEO Mark Arthur must have been rubbing his hands with glee a few weeks ago with
the prospect of a 5 day Sri Lankan Test and the club's biggest match of the season - a Roses Friday
evening T20 against Lancashire.

Instead, the Sri Lankan Test attracted a disappointing crowd which barely covered 45% ground capacity
and to make things worse their hallowed sell-out Roses game was a complete wash-out. Not a ball
was bowled -  not even 5 overs each team. The match being abandoned to rain.

Martyn Moxon, Yorkshire’s 
director of cricket, admitted it was a bad night for the club financially,
referring to the loss as an "unquantifiable sum”. “Although we don’t have to give money back, people
can exchange their tickets and potentially we could lose a lot of money,” he said. “Financially, the
Lancashire match is always a big money-spinner for us. It’s a significant night in terms of the club’s budget."

So significant that Yorkshire make more money from this one game than all their Championship matches
held at Headingley combined. That is how significant.

To rub salt in the wounds, the Club claim they could have sold an additional 5,000 tickets on top of their 17,000
seating capacity.

So, how do all those supporters feel when they can't get their money back and have to either wait a whole year until
next year's comparable game or use the ticket up by watching one day of Yorkshire Championship cricket when most
are at work during the week. Do Lancastrian followers even care?

Once more the ECB fall flat on their face and fail to steward the county game. For, there is such an easy resolution
to the problem. Surely, for such an important T20 match, a reserve day is put aside in case of rain. The idea that
supporters have to wait a whole year and leave their tickets in a dusty draw is absurd.

Rain on Their Face

Bracewell confirms Will Gidman departure

There has been a spirited debate on another thread about this player, and whether or not Sussex could or should have bid for him, but I think Bracewell's statement speaks of the wider issues that belong here:


Gloucestershire's director of cricket John Bracewell has confirmed the departure of Will Gidman ahead of the County's LV= County Championship clash with Worcestershire and dropped veiled hints that he regards Nottinghamshire - his likely destination - as "a bit parasitic".
Gidman, outstanding since leaving Durham in 2011, is thought to favour a move to Notts - although Yorkshire and Durham have also been linked with him.
Bracewell said: “Will spoke to the lads today and it's pretty much a done deal that he will be leaving. We were unable to keep him financially – that's the bottom line of it.
“Our budget reduces again this year and we are just unable to compete with the big boys, which is a shame. There are some clubs that are a little bit parasitic and there are some clubs that spend a lot of time developing players, and economically they just can't hold onto them. The big-paying Test clubs just cherry pick the biggest apples at the top of the tree.
“Until we become a destination club and put ourselves financially in the right position this is going to happen, so it's a warning to our club."

Leicestershire have experienced this for some years, and are probably even more entitled to describe their near neighbours as parasitic after losing Broad, Taylor and Gurney to them after years of development through age-group cricket. But Gloucestershire can feel very let-down, having taken a player who had endured three years at Durham without a first-clss appearance and guided his maturity into a really first class all-rounder.

The point is, at what stage can a club rightly be regarded as a "destination club"? Is this dependent on wages or onfield success, and what kicks off that virtuous cycle? Here at Sussex we experienced injuries and unavailability of key players after an excellent start, and having limited reserves because of budget constraints we struggled for much of the season until the loan of Tredwell and the arrival of Cachopa helped to spark a revival. Next year we will have similar, and perhaps worse problems as players age and lose form and fitness. Our position is better than Gloucestershire's in that our younger and developing players are not yet poached, but look ahead a year or two to a possible future if we are relegated and then find hope in Hobden, Machan and others. How long could we hold on to them in those circumstances?

Yorkshire are only charging £15 and it is free for members so I am expecting a very large crowd. Durham always bring quite a few and it is still school holidays. The two previous 50 over matches at Headingley were well attended despite charging £22 for non members.