Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 1, 2016 21:50:47 GMT
You mean after re-branding the entire county system No idea what that piece of meaningless, content-free jargon even means... I know your misguided website and petition makes the histrionic claim that "over the next few months the future of our county cricket is at risk." But you know full well that is a downright lie. |
|
|
|
Post by squarelegs on Sept 2, 2016 11:42:27 GMT
re-branding the T20 competition to introduce county players into a new city franchise.
I note you've not yet answered my question about what would happen if the ECB's plan fails to produce the predicted 80% attendance?
Leaving your much-liked personal comments aside, perhaps you could help to convince me of the ECB plans better by explaining what you see as the main advantages of the city proposal?
Perhaps you could explain how you feel the income of the old T20 will be affected by the introduction of a new competition?
Maybe you could also explain to me how the ECB intend to centralise the entire marketing/ticket sales operation successfully? I'm not aware they hold any local ticket data regarding the audiences for the current competition?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2016 11:57:23 GMT
re-branding the T20 competition to introduce county players into a new city franchise. You contradict yourself with every post you make. Is that the same as "re-branding the entire county system", which is what you wrote yesterday? In any case the T20 competition will not be "rebranded". The proposal seems to be that the Blast will continue as at present as will the County Championship and we will get a brand new high-class competiton which will be sold for lucrative TV rights around the world. Bring it on. It's actually the only thing that is going to save county cricket, the very future of which you histrionically claim is "at risk" over the next few months. It will only be at risk if a bunch of selfish 'traditionalists' derail the ECB's proposals - a prospect which happily seems to be receding as more and more counties come on board and recognise that the £1 million per season the ECB is offering them creates the the prospect of the kind of financial stability they haven't enjoyed in decades. Ask Jim May... |
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Sept 2, 2016 12:08:57 GMT
re-branding the T20 competition to introduce county players into a new city franchise. You contradict yourself with every post you make. Is that the same as "re-branding the entire county system", which is what you wrote yesterday? In any case the T20 competition will not be "rebranded". The proposal seems to be that the Blast will continue as at present as will the County Championship and we will get a brand new high-class competiton which will be sold for lucrative TV rights around the world. Bring it on. It's actually the only thing that is going to save county cricket, the very future of which you histrionically claim is "at risk" over the next few months. It will only be at risk if a bunch of selfish 'traditionalists' derail the ECB's proposals - a prospect which happily seems to be receding as more and more counties come on board and recognise that the £1 million per season the ECB is offering them creates the the prospect of the kind of financial stability they haven't enjoyed in decades. Ask Jim May... I agree with BM. Squarelegs - your inaccurate and conflicting statements serve only to destroy any credibility you might have wished to enjoy. Your campaign has a strong touch of Daily Mail about it, and it's no wonder your petition has attracted so few supporters. A couple of weeks ago, you had acquired around 470 signatures - what figure are you up to now? |
|
|
|
Post by squarelegs on Sept 2, 2016 12:55:02 GMT
I'll try again to get an answer to ANY of the questions I have put in my previous threads?
It's all very well talking about how wonderful it will be but it would be great if that could be backed up with any evidence?
If you're finding the previous questions tricky, maybe these will be easier?
Do you know what TV value the ECB place upon the current competition? Do you know how that compares to the estimation of the new one?.....or indeed to any comparable sport? Rugby perhaps?
Do you know how much the ECB have put aside to market/brand the new competition?
To answer your question FB - 570
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2016 13:15:08 GMT
Yawn.
|
|
|
|
Post by squarelegs on Sept 2, 2016 13:16:27 GMT
lol...as I suspected
|
|
|
|
Post by squarelegs on Sept 2, 2016 13:17:48 GMT
Detail can be so tiresome can't it!  |
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Sept 3, 2016 14:36:16 GMT
I'll try again to get an answer to ANY of the questions I have put in my previous threads? It's all very well talking about how wonderful it will be but it would be great if that could be backed up with any evidence? What EVIDENCE do you expect us to be in possession of? Ask the ECB - they're in charge.If you're finding the previous questions tricky, maybe these will be easier? Do you know what TV value the ECB place upon the current competition? Do you know how that compares to the estimation of the new one?.....or indeed to any comparable sport? Rugby perhaps? Do you know how much the ECB have put aside to market/brand the new competition? These questions can only be answered by the ECB. How can we have this inside knowledge? You seem to think that you can argue your case by asking us for information that you know is not available to us. To answer your question FB - 570
When are you going to present your petition to the ECB? You'll have them up against the ropes with such overwhelming support - an average of 32 people per county! Why don't you wait for the proposals before you start trying to assess how the counties will be affected? |
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Sept 6, 2016 7:31:37 GMT
Interesting to see that this national movement that boasts 570 signatories is posting on the Surrey noticeboard urging a Special General Meeting, which it acknowledges requires 250 signatories to trigger. It isn't very clear what this self-appointed group of guardians wants to do with their SGM other than to "to scrutinise, question or object to such proposals [as the ECB has put forward]".In any event Surrey have made it clear that they have much bigger fish to fry than give up any of their revenues to support the English county system. ovalworld.freeforums.net/post/7006/thread |
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Sept 6, 2016 8:33:54 GMT
To remind people of the original article that kick-started off the recent debate. www.telegraph.co.uk/cricket/2016/07/26/ecb-plan-english-crickets-most-radical-ever-overhaul-with-t20-co/What happens if the ECB don't get their 12-18 majority? Do they still have the power to plough on with the EPL? And on Sept 14th, is this where the true debate begins, and not the vacuous knee-jerk one from squarelegs; as one presumes the ECB will deliver then their proposals and plans? In the Media Centre last week a discussion took place where David Hopps reckons the non-TMGs will need to be bribed with £3m a year to fob 'em off and get them onside. If true, how the hell can counties like Sussex, Northants, Leicestershire etc.. then say no? Particularly, if a T20 Blast type competition remains alongside an EPL. Money seems the simple answer to end the traditionalist cries. Bribe 'em and let's be done with it! |
|
|
|
Post by theleopard on Sept 6, 2016 10:25:06 GMT
The one thing I would be really interested to know is if there is to be a new T20 tournament co-existing with the Blast, how is this to fit into the calendar?
The cutting of the Championship to 14 matches was said to make the season more sustainable for players with a mangeable schedule. To have less matches.
If the Blast was cut to a shorter group stage, then surely that would defeat the object as far as the counties were concerned, as they would lose money from having less games. They made enough of a fuss when it was cut from 16 to 14 group games not long ago. I can't see Surrey taking kindly to losing a couple of 20,000 attended matches.
Obviously England matches are a big money-spinner, so there isn't going to be a serious reduction there. As it is, England are already making rotation of players to deal with a heavy schedule. I can't see how the England management would have any interest in their players being flogged in a T20 tournament, even if there was a window for it. Root and Bairstow have been told they can't play for Yorkshire this month when there is effectively a 'window' for the Championship.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Sept 7, 2016 23:32:54 GMT
At 10pm last night the news hit Twittersphere. Surprise, surprise, no way could 18 county Chairmans and 18 county Chief Execs keep their mouth shut over a gagging order placed on them by the ECB; for either someone has blagged to Nick Hoult or Nick has called in a favour. As expected the ECB are using good ol' fashion bribery to push through an EPL starting in 2018. Hoult says each county will be paid £1.5m annually with another £300,000 to TMGs who host matches. There will be 8 city-based teams and the tournament is to be played - initially - over a month. If a success I am sure this will be stretched to 6 weeks. Television rights for the new tournament have been valued at around £35m annually with another £10-£12m per year from marketing and sponsorship. The competition will be played alongside the current Natwest Blast T20, allowing the counties to keep their popular Friday night matches; while it is understood the ECB is close to gaining the two-thirds majority vote it will need for the project to be ratified. So, are Jim and Zac going to turn down £1.5m a year, when the domestic county T20 will still go ahead? Of course not. And all this rubbish perpetrated by the likes of Squarelegs and his mates is nothing more than vacuous nonsense because no-one until now has known the actual facts. Bribery is a wonderful thing and I can't wait for the tournament to begin in June/July of 2018. Yippee!  www.telegraph.co.uk/cricket/2016/09/07/counties-to-be-given-18m-a-year-if-two-thirds-agree-to-new-eight/ |
|
nemmo
Captain 2nd XI
Posts: 285
|
Post by nemmo on Sept 8, 2016 0:51:17 GMT
Your link is 404ing fluffy. Here is the article in question: www.telegraph.co.uk/cricket/2016/09/07/counties-to-be-given-18m-a-year-if-two-thirds-agree-to-new-eight/Sounds excellent in my opinion. A lot of boxes ticked including most crucially some of the games being shown on free-to-air television. However surely one fewer county championship game and the removal of the bye does not facilitate a T20 competition? All clues would point to a reduction of the ODC so how do we think that will turn out? Hopefully they also stick to their guns and keep the franchises free of any county influence giving them completely new names and squad. If one of the teams is named "Surrey" anythings (and I highly doubt it will) then I will be mightily annoyed. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 8, 2016 7:00:26 GMT
If accurately reported (and it surely is because the leak came not from one of the counties but from the ECB, I suspect) then this is fantastic news.
If you read back in this thread, I suggested the only reason for clubs such as Sussex and Kent to consider voting against the proposal (which we believed at the time to involve a payment to the counties of £1m per annum) , was in order to hold out for £1.5m.
Well lo and behold, Graves and Harrison came to the same conclusion and have gone straight to the £1.5m , rather than waste time with risking rejection of the £1m and then having to come back with a second higher proposal.
There is no way Jim May is going to vote against a windfall of £4.5m to Sussex over the three years between 2018-2020. And frankly if he did, the membership should demand his resignation.
The news that there will be a player draft for the new tournament and all ticketing and marketing will be handled centrally by the ECB is also terrific news. It means there will be no 'us and them' between TMG counties and the smaller clubs. All 18 will be on an equal footing, the players of Sussex and Kent going into the same draft as the stars of Yorkshire and Surrey.
Surrey will make no more money than Sussex from the deal, the additional £300k to the Ovalites will merely cover their overheads as they play host to an independent franchise team with no control over either the selection of players, or the maketeting and ticketing which will all be handled centrally by the ECB and then redistrbuted evenly between all 18 counties. (Although presumably the host grounds will get to keep the catering proceeds?)
Far from widening the gulf between the TMGs and the rest, this will actually level the playing field between the 18 counties as the additional £1.5 million per annum allows the likes of Sussex, Leics, Derbys, Northants etc. to become genuinely competitive again in the on-going county competitions.
Sounds to me that Graves and Harrison have come up with a plan that is going to save the 18 county structure and those such as squarelegs who have accused them of seeking to destroy it may consider a diet of humble pie...
|
|
