|
Post by lovelyboy on Oct 11, 2016 9:40:50 GMT
So why not keep it a county comp with two divisions with the premier league being televised and heavily marketed? Because we already have the T20 Blast, and there is no reason to dump it. We don't nered another 18 team T20 comp, even if it is split into two divisions. An eight team tournament compressed into a tight time-frame played at high intensity with four overseas stars in each team, so at least eight of the world's best are on display in every match in addition to domestic stars... can't see there is anything to dislike, tbh. No reason to dump it?! It becomes completely meaningless with this city t20. I really don't see any advantage of a City based tournament over a two division county one. I'm amazed any fan of county cricket is in favour of the city tournament but hey ho it's a done deal so no point going over old ground
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Oct 11, 2016 9:45:22 GMT
Because we already have the T20 Blast, and there is no reason to dump it. We don't nered another 18 team T20 comp, even if it is split into two divisions. An eight team tournament compressed into a tight time-frame played at high intensity with four overseas stars in each team, so at least eight of the world's best are on display in every match in addition to domestic stars... can't see there is anything to dislike, tbh. No reason to dump it?! It becomes completely meaningless with this city t20. I really don't see any advantage of a City based tournament over a two division county one. I'm amazed any fan of county cricket is in favour of the city tournament but hey ho it's a done deal so no point going over old ground At the risk of boring everyone (again), the city tournament isn't aimed at the very small number of existing county cricket fans. It's targeting a new audience, some of whom will already be familiar with T20 cricket.
|
|
|
Post by lovelyboy on Oct 11, 2016 9:50:26 GMT
No reason to dump it?! It becomes completely meaningless with this city t20. I really don't see any advantage of a City based tournament over a two division county one. I'm amazed any fan of county cricket is in favour of the city tournament but hey ho it's a done deal so no point going over old ground At the risk of boring everyone (again), the city tournament isn't aimed at the very small number of existing county cricket fans. It's targeting a new audience, some of whom will already be familiar with T20 cricket. Yes and why couldn't the two division tournament do this?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2016 9:50:45 GMT
No reason to dump it?! It becomes completely meaningless with this city t20. I'm sorry you think that the Sussex Sharks will become "completely meaningless". I really can't agree with that in any way whatsoever. How will T20 matches played in front of 25,000 at the Oval, Lords or perhaps the Olympic Stadium in late July or August impact on games played by Sussex Sharks at Hove in May and June? There will still be 5,000 there on a Friday night cheering Sussex on, even if you won't be one of them because you've decided it is "completely meaningless".
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Oct 11, 2016 10:25:04 GMT
At the risk of boring everyone (again), the city tournament isn't aimed at the very small number of existing county cricket fans. It's targeting a new audience, some of whom will already be familiar with T20 cricket. Yes and why couldn't the two division tournament do this? As I've already said (upthread): Because the 2nd division clubs would be marginalised. New brands have to be created so that eight individual county brands are not boosted to the detriment of the others. With the greatest possible respect, lovelyboy, I wonder if you've become a victim of 'confirmation bias'
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Oct 11, 2016 10:45:36 GMT
My understanding is this.
A City-Based Tournament (CBT) is preferred by the ECB over yet another revamped T20 county Blast for two primary reasons.
Deloittes who are the Boards financial consultants carried out extensive research and told them:
a) The potential annual Media rights for a CBT = £32m - a Blast = £7m.
b) The present annual attendance for a Blast is around 1m - potential attendance for a CBT is 9m. Deloittes stated their research showed there are around 9.4m people who would attend a T20 game "IF" it was marketed and packaged correctly. That these potential extra 8.4m people would rather attend a CBT but not a Blast.
Given the recent Durham bail-out, county cricket desperately requires additional monies to survive; which means the Championship format can survive; which means 18 counties can survive. Where else can the ECB gain such a substantial amount of money unless it is through a CBT?
If the Nick Hoult leaks are correct, then each county will receive around £1.5m - money taken from the £32m media rights. This money will save county cricket in the long-term; this will save the Championship format; this will keep 18 counties alive and kicking.
What is the problem?
I agree 'Deloittes' have been tarnished with their view back in 2005 that "cricket was now experiencing a halcyon period and a rosy future" after the Ashes success; but to back up their most recent research, both Australia and India have proven the point already.
The CBT will only last a month; perhaps, in the month of August; where all other county formats can be placed on hold. The present T20 Blast can still continue; as the 14 Championship matches; as the RLC 50 over.
Therefore, I am at a loss as to why lovelyboy and others hold their views and are so opposed to such an idea. The CBT will save county cricket; allow it to continue into the future; AND, hopefully, encourage millions of new people who may never have seen a cricket match before to embrace our wonderful and noble sport with the knock-on effects that may ensue.
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Oct 11, 2016 10:55:40 GMT
Good summary, S&F.
I anticipate that some of the antis will now respond "How do we know the new tournament will bring in the crowds that you anticipate?" The answer is "We don't and, like anything else in life, we won't know until we try."
|
|
|
Post by theleopard on Oct 11, 2016 10:59:03 GMT
At the risk of boring everyone (again), the city tournament isn't aimed at the very small number of existing county cricket fans. It's targeting a new audience, some of whom will already be familiar with T20 cricket. Very small number? What about the 20,000 who watch Surrey in the Blast, 10,000 at Notts, 6,000 at Somerset? Or is it only people who watch a Championship match on a Tuesday in April that count as existing county cricket fans?
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Oct 11, 2016 11:31:04 GMT
At the risk of boring everyone (again), the city tournament isn't aimed at the very small number of existing county cricket fans. It's targeting a new audience, some of whom will already be familiar with T20 cricket. Very small number? What about the 20,000 who watch Surrey in the Blast, 10,000 at Notts, 6,000 at Somerset? Or is it only people who watch a Championship match on a Tuesday in April that count as existing county cricket fans? Sorry, I should have said Championship Cricket fans. I believe the 18 counties can muster only around 70,000 members in total (someone please correct this figure if necessary - I'm speaking from memory.) so in terms of numbers, and age, they are not the future of cricket in this country.
|
|
|
Post by glosexile on Oct 11, 2016 14:05:08 GMT
Well, l for one am becoming totally bewildered regarding the total raft of supposed well informed opinion/speculation/supposed leaks that have appeared from a whole range of different sources. And there was l impatiently waiting for the 18th October for the actual details to be announced. Just a few random thoughts: - Based on a limited window of availabilty, we had appearances from Gayle, McCullum, Guptill, Andre Rusell etc etc in the 2016 version of the T20 Blast. The best available overseas stars will be playing in the CBT in the future. Sorry borderman.....it is quite easy to see why people would feel that the T20 Blast would be devalued.
- Are we looking to directly compete with the staging of the Caribbean Premier League? Would be far more sensible to consult with them and attempt to dovetail, allowing the international mercenaries to play in both.
- Are 9.4m people really prepared to attend a CBT match, or is it the Bransgrove version that "some 9.4m people in the UK profess some interest in cricket". Would love to know how this figure was extrapolated.
- Still not sure what cricket (if any) will be played alongside the CBT month. Did see it suggested elsewhere that the displaced hosting counties would be expected to play on out grounds during this period.
- Significantly cheaper tickets for a higher quality tournament. Creates an immediate pricing dilemma for the 18 counties involved in the Blast.
However, having made the above points, l can easily see how a CBT targeted towards a new audience (the Andrew Strauss model aimed at 6 to 12 year old kids) could be highly successful. Perhaps their parents could be entrusted with family picnics, without the need to try and smuggle in a small amount of alcohol. A real attempt at family friendly cricket would be wonderful....takes me back to the original concept of the John Player League.
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Oct 11, 2016 15:06:32 GMT
Hopefully, tomorrow evening, we may gain a clearer picture from the two ECB representatives.
I, for one, am tired of basing arguments more on Nick Hoult speculation and would like to hear the actual facts from the horse's mouth; although, we still won't have a full picture until after October 18th.
|
|
|
Post by lovelyboy on Oct 11, 2016 19:46:43 GMT
Yes and why couldn't the two division tournament do this? As I've already said (upthread): Because the 2nd division clubs would be marginalised. New brands have to be created so that eight individual county brands are not boosted to the detriment of the others. With the greatest possible respect, lovelyboy, I wonder if you've become a victim of 'confirmation bias' That makes no sense! Every county would have a chance of the riches and the exposure thanks to relegation and promotion just like in any competitive sport! The city tournament does however disadvantage the counties who don't host the games by the tune of 300K and there is nothing they can do about it because it's a closed shop!
|
|
|
Post by lovelyboy on Oct 11, 2016 19:49:06 GMT
My understanding is this. A City-Based Tournament (CBT) is preferred by the ECB over yet another revamped T20 county Blast for two primary reasons. Deloittes who are the Boards financial consultants carried out extensive research and told them: a) The potential annual Media rights for a CBT = £32m - a Blast = £7m. b) The present annual attendance for a Blast is around 1m - potential attendance for a CBT is 9m. Deloittes stated their research showed there are around 9.4m people who would attend a T20 game "IF" it was marketed and packaged correctly. That these potential extra 8.4m people would rather attend a CBT but not a Blast. Given the recent Durham bail-out, county cricket desperately requires additional monies to survive; which means the Championship format can survive; which means 18 counties can survive. Where else can the ECB gain such a substantial amount of money unless it is through a CBT? If the Nick Hoult leaks are correct, then each county will receive around £1.5m - money taken from the £32m media rights. This money will save county cricket in the long-term; this will save the Championship format; this will keep 18 counties alive and kicking. What is the problem? I agree 'Deloittes' have been tarnished with their view back in 2005 that "cricket was now experiencing a halcyon period and a rosy future" after the Ashes success; but to back up their most recent research, both Australia and India have proven the point already. The CBT will only last a month; perhaps, in the month of August; where all other county formats can be placed on hold. The present T20 Blast can still continue; as the 14 Championship matches; as the RLC 50 over. Therefore, I am at a loss as to why lovelyboy and others hold their views and are so opposed to such an idea. The CBT will save county cricket; allow it to continue into the future; AND, hopefully, encourage millions of new people who may never have seen a cricket match before to embrace our wonderful and noble sport with the knock-on effects that may ensue. That Deloitte rights valuation is utter utter nonsense
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2016 7:51:24 GMT
That Deloitte rights valuation is utter utter nonsense Could you tell us the correct valuation which you and your international accountancy firm have arrived at after your extensive research?
|
|
|
Post by lovelyboy on Oct 12, 2016 8:34:36 GMT
That Deloitte rights valuation is utter utter nonsense Could you tell us the correct valuation which you and your international accountancy firm have arrived at after your extensive research? Is the huge disparity in what Deloitte says the blast could earn and what they say the city tournament could earn in tv revenue nonsense? Of course it is! Does this Deloitte report suit the Ecb agenda? You bet it does!
|
|