How Rubbish Is The ECB?

Let us count the ways

Cricket in England is dying on its arse. I work as a primary school teacher as a ‘supply’ teacher, which means I go into a lot of schools. Most don’t even have cricket equipment – there may be one dust covered, lonely looking cricket bat at the back of the sports cupboard that has not been picked up since 1987 but other than that, nada. In secondary schools they may get the nets out in the summer term, but the sports hall is then used for exams from May so that is only for a few weeks. This is the main (but not only) reason that you have to go to Private School to have a realistic chance to be a professional cricketer in England. Most children in England don’t think cricket is boring - cricket does not impinge on their consciousness enough for them to take a view of if it at all. Not being able to watch cricket on the telly really doesn’t help with gaining peoples interest. When I walk around green spaces and parks in the Bournemouth area I have noticed a few that have what used to be a cricket square in the middle of them – but no longer. When I talk to people that have played cricket in this area for a couple of decades they can reel off the names of many clubs that no longer exist, as far fewer people play cricket now that even twenty years ago. The ECB is responsible for this as it is their job to grow and promote cricket. So, what incompetence can be pointed to on behalf of the ECB?

 1. They don’t know when summer is. Which for an organisation that runs a summer sport, is pretty rubbish.

Don’t be silly you say, of course the people that run the ECB know when the summer is, everyone does, its June, July and August. Well quite, so why was the first game of the season scheduled for the 5^th April and the last for 30^th September? I’m glad you asked, the answer of course being that there is too much cricket scheduled and with the summer being reserved for the 20/20 and 100 tournaments anything else is pushed to the side. So what does this mean for the professional game in England?

Well first up, it means that the County Championship is treated with ‘don’t care about it’ contempt by the organisation that is supposed to organise and grow it. Out of a 1^st Division team’s 14 games, 4 were in April, 3 in May and 3 in September. If you organise a game of cricket in April in England this can only be with the understanding that you accept there is a good chance it will not happen. May is a bit better but not summer; and the end of September? Again that comes with a ‘well, if we are lucky it might happen,’ attitude. Only 4 of the 14 games are in the summer. This means on a good year hopefully not too many games will be rained off, a normal year approaching half? A bad year you may need to only win two or three games to win the championship. The ECB, on their website and in documents probably talk about their commitment to the championship but judging them by actions rather than words and it is clear the only thing they really want to give the championship is the middle finger. Likewise, the one day cup final was scheduled for the 22^nd September. It would only take a rainy week (a decent chance of which could happen at the end of September) for the final not to happen. I’m not sure what the plans for resolving the cup final the ECB have in this situation, a coin toss? Rock paper scissors? Do they even know? 

So, how did we get to this situation? Well, it is because there is too much cricket planned for a too short summer. This is so obvious that you do not even need something like a report from the Professional Cricketers Association to spell it out. You may not need one, but it does exist anyhow

PCA Report claiming to much cricket is played

So, how did we get here? Well, until a few years ago there were 3 competitions, the County Championship, the One Day Cup and the 20/20 Blast, which all fitted around each other. But it was then decided that these weren’t exciting enough so a new event was launched – the 100. It was decided for the 100 to work the month of August had to be cleared for it, which is a decision that could be argued against but I can also see arguments in its favour. But here is the moronic, craven bit. The people making this decision, instead of saying what existing competition would be got rid of, or how the existing competitions may be curtailed, or doing something responsible and realistic like that took another route. They went with the idea of keeping the existing competitions but just playing them at times of the year that were not really suitable for playing cricket. Hmm, what could possibly go wrong?

So, we are now at a situation where something will have to give, probably sooner rather than later. Which competition could be got rid of? Well, the obvious candidate from a financial perspective is the county championship; it takes an awful lot of resources and brings in relatively little revenue. Even though I enjoy going to watch championship games, I can see the force of the arguments here. As I enjoy going to championship games precisely because they are quiet, so I can spend a day with my boy getting away from it all. Going to the Rose Bowl for a championship game is relaxing. If you want to sit behind the bowlers arm there is a little bit of a crowd, but if you want to get away from people you can go elsewhere and have a whole block of seating to yourself.  The cricket is also of a decent standard, Hampshire have a very passable seam attack. If batting, you get to watch James Vince scoring a stylish 38 before giving it away wafting outside off stump like a latter day, budget David Gower. So this makes it a pleasant day out for me, even though there are very few other people watching. However, there are good reasons to not get rid of the county championship. Firstly, England Cricket is still organised around the county system, and the championship is sort of their raison d’être. Also, while test cricket is still being played you need to give a pathway to players towards it. Scoring a cheeky quick 50 for the Southern Pom Bears not really being good preparation for facing a battery of Aussie quicks on Boxing Day in Melbourne. So, the championship stays.

Next up, it is obvious that the One Day Cup is ripe to go – the One Day format having been killed by 20/20. Gone are the days of multiple one day competitions sponsored by their own brand of fags at slightly different amount of overs. Benson and Hedges – 60 overs, Nat West (ok so not fags) at 50 and JPS at the shortest innings of 40, the good ole Sunday league.

JPS,  guarantee to shorten your innings

Was never an advertising slogan for JPS, however much I think it fits.......

The thing about sacking the last one day competition is that it would not make too much of a difference. It is already a ‘county 2s’ event, made up of players that can’t get a gig in the 100 and up and coming youngsters, so you may as well keep it, it quite often isn’t even played at professional grounds, with the counties going to the big private schools to stage games. Which is nice, as it means that the players can go and say hello to their old teachers.

So that leaves either the 20/20 Blast or the 100 that have to go. Let’s face it, they occupy the same ground anyhow, short format, quick scoring, good revenue drivers. So, which to keep? On the one hand you have the format that is by far the most popular in the world, that is driving growth across the globe, has a well established world cup with a massive TV audience second only to football. On the other hand, there is the 100. So, I feel confident that the ECB will be going with the 100 then.

 I mean, there are already well advanced plans to sell it off to private investors for anything up to half a billion pounds. Just think what such an injection of funds could do for the game nationally at the grass roots, there would be a budget to attempt to reverse crickets seeming terminal decline in England. Sorry, what’s that? Not all the money would be available for investment in growing the game. Fair enough. Firstly, obviously the people that work at eh ECB driving this would need to be awarded big bonuses, and probably their mates as well. Then the Major counties would need to be compensated for their investment. So that would leave a total budget of er, bugger all, to invest in the local game across the country.

Maybe I am being too cynical. The 100 does seems to have brought in new, young blood into the game and selling it to professional companies may help to drive this growth. More young people interested, more people playing, all good for cricket. Children and families will be able to watch the game on free to air TV helping to make cricket popular again.  But what’s that? These private companies will be looking for a return on their massive investment? And the stadiums are already full so no income growth their unless you jack up ticket prices, pricing out poorer families? They could still watch it on the TV though. But if the 100 does have decent viewing figures, why would a private company not look to maximise TV revenue through making people pay to watch? From a company’s point of view, 100,000 people paying to watch is a far bigger revenue earner than 200,000 people watching for free…..

Or again, maybe I am being overly negative and pessimistic, would be interested in people telling me so and why the situation is far better than my jaundiced eye perceives and that indeed the worrying state of cricket in England is on the verge of being turned around. I have an open mind here, anyone want to pour optimism into it?