Tuesday 17 August 2010 | Twenty20 feed

Advertisement

Steve James: The Twenty20 franchise system simply will not work

Those proposing a franchise system for county cricket – or at least for county Twenty20 – should be aware of one fundamental, very important fact: very few will watch.

 
Steve James: The Twenty20 franchise system simply will not work : Beckenham Twenty20
Parochial: Crowds turn out for a match between Kent and Surrey in an early Twenty20 match at Beckenham Photo: GETTY IMAGES

Franchises may well work successfully in other parts of the world (some shindig in India involving such entities is apparently still drawing crowds in what feels like its 158th week of competition), but they won't work here. We simply don't do sporting mergers and amalgamations, certainly not glitzy, big-name-sponsored franchises. Our allegiances cannot be transferred at the drop of a hat. We are simply too tribal and parochial. We want our teams to remain linked to the communities their names represent, even if their personnel have often long since failed to reflect that.

Yes, we might also be stuffy and resistant to change, but we do have a rich history and tradition that others can only dream of.

And this is not just in cricket. Football, for all its obscene opulence – transparent or not – retains supporter bases through its roots. Many teams began as being representative of their workplaces. Munitions workers at the Royal Arsenal in Woolwich would be rather proud of how their team has progressed over the years. So too those in the Lancashire and Yorkshire Railway depot at Newton Heath, whose team eventually became Manchester United. Other teams, like Aston Villa and Everton, were formed around churches. These are strong bonds.

Rugby has tried mergers. It once had a go at a regional set-up in England. It was an unequivocal disaster. Yes, regional rugby currently exists in Wales, and has done since 2003, but to call it a success would be stretching a point. The crowds hardly flock. The numbers, when compared to England's Guinness Premiership, based on stand-alone cities, are embarrassing. Deep-seated loyalties, and indeed enmities, simply refuse to waver. The once-vibrant valleys club of Pontypridd is supposedly part of the new Cardiff Blues region, but will their inhabitants travel the few miles south down the A470 to support? Will they heck. A merger between Celtic and Rangers might have been easier.

Back in cricket, one of the eight proposed franchise centres is in Cardiff. Presumably Gloucestershire and Somerset will merge with Glamorgan. Bet that will work. As someone brought up in the Forest of Dean, I can confirm that the nearer the border the greater the Anglo/Welsh rivalry. Some might even go as far to call it antipathy.

There is, of course, an argument that Twenty20 has a power of its own, an ability to break down barriers previously considered unmovable. And that, presumably, is the hope of the eight counties with Test-match grounds (Lancashire, Yorkshire, Warwickshire, Durham, Hampshire, Nottinghamshire, Surrey and Glamorgan), who have formed an alliance with the MCC and are considering a franchise-style Twenty20 tournament. But I am not so sure. Domestic Twenty20 crowds have actually been decreasing in recent years. And this year's bloated schedule of 16 matches will certainly test enthusiasm and durability. You wonder how that damned golden goose will be feeling after all that.

In reality, the leaked news of these franchise plans (or of a commission to Deloitte to compile such plans) last week smacked of two things. Firstly, fear. We now simply have too many Test grounds. Millions of pounds have been spent in redevelopment, with huge debts being serviced as a result, and none of these grounds has an alternative plan should the promise of Test cricket suddenly vanish. If seven Tests per home summer are sustainable, and I personally doubt it is, then two of those are always destined for Lord's (every touring team, quite rightly, demands to play there and it is by far the most profitable venue) and one for the Oval, which hosts the second-most profitable Test and has a long-term staging agreement with the England & Wales Cricket Board. That leaves four Tests to be allocated among seven grounds each year. The mathematics is not encouraging.

Secondly, the shocking lack of leadership at the ECB. Chairman Giles Clarke really does need to get a grip of matters. This domestic season already had the makings of being the messiest ever, with so much uncertainty over its future. Now this. It might be a wonderful feeding-ground for us avaricious journalists, but it does little for the image of the game.

The smaller counties knew nothing of these plans and are understandably irate. They are contenting themselves with the knowledge that this is more of a fight between the bigger counties themselves than big versus small, but they also know that it is only a small step from franchise cricket in Twenty20 to its application over all forms of the game. And whether they are receiving a cut or not, that would spell the end for most of them.

Of course, fewer counties would be preferable. Everybody knows that. But we are where we are, and this is no way to be moving from there.

 
 
blog comments powered by Disqus