|
|
ECB faces challenge
Big counties seek to muscle in on EPL
Cricinfo staff
October 15, 2008
There is a growing rift between leading first-class counties and the ECB, according to a report in the Daily Telegraph, which could result in them trying to seize control of the English Premier League (EPL) from the board.
Earlier this year the ECB announced the launch of the EPL in 2010, but there is speculation that the counties are considering setting up their own company to run the event, which would enable them to share profits that could run into tens of millions of pounds. It would also expose them to all the risks inherent in such a scheme.
"We realise there are a lot of questions about this and we want to look at all the options," Paul Sheldon, Surrey's chief executive, told the newspaper. "We could have a standalone company looking after the competition or a different model of distribution. This is the counties' prized asset and a chance to benefit from a unique set of commercial circumstances."
Surrey were one of the leading proponents of the mooted franchise-led EPL, which was thrown out earlier in the year, and it is likely support this time will again come from the bigger counties.
The proposal does not have as widespread support as Sheldon might like. "Paul's agenda is to make Surrey bigger and is not necessarily in the best interests of the game," David Smith, Leicestershire's chief executive, told Cricinfo. "The ECB are the right people to run the game as they have the best interests of everyone at heart and I have every confidence in them. The plan is fraught with danger and we will be giving the ECB our wholehearted support."
For the idea to get off the ground it would need the backing of 75% of ECB members, a group which includes all 39 county boards. However, the first-class counties are understood to have taken legal advice and are confident that they alone have the right to vote on issues involving only them.
"We have an obligation to hand the game down to the next generation in a robust financial state," Smith said. "This is only likely to benefit a few counties, and if they get richer then we could end up with a situation like the FA Premier League where three or four sides dominate because they have so much more money than the rest. And that can't be good for the game."
© Cricinfo
 Read Comments (6)
|
|
Comments have now been closed for this article
|
|
If Paul Sheldon and company have their way, county cricket will be destroyed. Counties like Surrey will stop producing players, they are already going down this road, and buy in talent from elsewhere. Remember, when football's Premier League started it promised that it would improve the national team significantly within ten years. Paul Sheldon and his £££pals in the test match counties will prevent counties like Leicester from supplying England with players like Stuart Broad. Young players need somewhere to develop and county cricket does the job well which is why a lot of young Australians and S.Africans improve after playing here.
Posted by bcowling239 on October 19 2008, 11:29 AM GMT
|
|
It really takes the biscuit that the CEO of Leicestershire can say that, "The ECB are the right people to run the game as they have the best interests of everyone at heart". No they haven't. They aren't committed to providing me with a winning England team or a reasonably priced ticket to a test match, like I could get if I were Australian. The ECB represents the eighteen counties. Its prime directive is to maintain the jobs of the people who work for the eighteen counties, regardless of the wider interests of the game. The fact that it is controlled by people like the CEO of Leicestershire for their own benefit is the main reason why it fails to treat cricket fans well and fails to deliver a winning team.
Posted by OliverChettle on October 16 2008, 10:00 AM GMT
|
|
Interesting proposal, but one that must be dealt with very carefully. England is the home of Twenty:20 and must try to keep it so!!
What is wrong with a similar system to the two-division structure we have in other cricket being copied? They could always make it one-up and one-down if they wanted to make it a bit more exclusive.
re: Patrick_Clarke's comment, remember that the England test team only exists because of County Cricket. It's a symbiotic relationship. Of course it would be better if counties were more self-supporting, but that is what Twenty:20 does!
Any solution must not jeopardise the structures that hold it together.
Posted by Roby on October 16 2008, 08:07 AM GMT
|
|
being from leicester i completely agree with David Smith. Our county was the leader in the game during the 90's. But the fact we werent to an international standard and being based closed to trent bridge meant that we were completely ignored as both a cricket team and a location. The bigger more financially viable counties are bullying the little ones into these type of deals where it will only benefit their own pockets.
For me cricket has gone down the drain, since the end of the 20/20 world cup nothing has felt right. Take for example the boycotting of the champions trophy, or the fact that a series featuring India & Australia isnt billed as a super series like it would have 2-3 years ago. Money is ruining cricket...the same way it has ruined Football & the English Premier League. Where can i enjoy my cricket and watch players who are playing for the game and not the millions they are earning?
Posted by chakdey on October 15 2008, 22:56 PM GMT
|
|
One feels for David Smith, Leicestershire's CEO, but I would be nice for his remarks to come from a county which hasn't had a balance sheet in the black for decades, hence subsidised - it holds county cricket back at least half a century some would say more. A slimmed down structure with two divisions containing five teams each and all having a test match/ ODI programme would be best. Of course it won't happen. The 39 county boards will see to that.
Posted by Kit_Silver on October 15 2008, 16:43 PM GMT
|
|
If county cricket is to survive as anything other than a subsidised lame duck then this proposal should be allowed to go ahead. Its constantly stated that County Cricket only survives because of test match revenue but it should be remembered that TV rights also include payments to transmit county competitions such as the Friends Provident Trophy.
A debate over some kind of domestic financial restructuring, giving counties the opportunity to at least partly stand on their own feet is to be welcomed.
Posted by Patrick_Clarke on October 15 2008, 12:08 PM GMT
|
|
|
| Top ^ |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
