Big Bash selling-out Australian prospects
Roar Pro By Keagan Ryan, 27 Nov 2011 Keagan Ryan is a Roar Pro
There are appeals upcoming Australian crickters like Patrick Cummins are being let down by the Big Bash competition (AAP Image/Dale Cumming)
Twelve months ago, Patrick Cummins had just finished high school. He was playing grade cricket in New South Wales for Penrith, unsure of what his future held.
Now Cummins is the future of Australian cricket at the tender age of 18, following his match-winning 6/79, which led the Australians to a series-leveling victory against South Africa.
His meteoric rise to the Test team came through the domestic T20 competition, the KFC Big Bash. The New South Wales Blues gave Cummins a chance and he did not let them down, finishing the tournament as the leading wicket-taker, with 11 scalps from six matches.
It was Cummins’ raw pace that had Australian selectors excited, calling him up to the T20I and one day international squads for the tour of South Africa.
Yet, now the newly formed Big Bash League is turning its back on youngsters like Cummins, instead offering lucrative contracts to has-been players of previous eras who will not be part of the future of Australian cricket.
Shane Warne, Brad Hogg and Stuart MacGill are all spin bowlers who will be taking part in this summer’s Big Bash League, at the expense of young players; those who could strengthen and develop the meagre depth of spin bowlers in Australia.
Obviously, the financial benefits of Warne are undeniable, yet you would think Australia’s desperation for a quality spin bowler far exceeds the financial needs of our national sport.
The proof of domestic T20 cricket developing players is irrefutable, following the unearthing of Cummins as well as current Test spinner Nathan Lyon.
Similar to Cummins, Lyon was not competing in domestic cricket 12 months ago. He was the curator at the Adelaide Oval, who would occasionally train with the South Australian Redbacks.
Redbacks’ coach Darren Berry was impressed by the 24-year-old off-spinner and offered him a contract for the KFC Big Bash, where he excelled, finishing with 11 wickets, equalling Cummins as top wicket-taker.
So, I feel that the proof is in the pudding and that Australian cricket is selling out and essentially stunting the development of the next generation cricketers.
Passionate about your cricket? Then sign up to The Roar's brand new daily cricket email, delivering Roaring articles directly to you day-in, day-out. You'll love it!
Click here to join now!
Looking to join The Roar team? We're searching for an experienced Group Sales Manager to lead our team in Sydney. Yes, this does mean you get to work with the site all day long! If you're a digital media sales star, we want to hear from you. Apply now.
The Crowd Says (12) | Page 1 of Comments
Have Your Say
- Explore:
- Nathan Lyon, Patrick Cummins, south australian redbacks
November 27th 2011 @ 5:32am
Saveourspinners said | November 27th 2011 @ 5:32am | Report comment
“Obviously, the financial benefits of Warne are undeniable, yet you would think Australia’s desperation for a quality spin bowler far exceeds the financial needs of our national sport”…..
Totally disagree – Without the Warnes, McGills ect… the Big Bash would have very little interest and the tournament would be a failure. Also the last thing we need is our future test cricket spinners being belted into submission by what is a form of cricket in strong favour of the batsmen. Best keeping these guys in Shield cricket where they can grow their confidence and experiment without being hit for 20 an over.
November 28th 2011 @ 11:01am
spock18 said | November 28th 2011 @ 11:01am | Report comment
“Best keeping these guys in Shield cricket where they can grow their confidence and experiment without being hit for 20 an over.”
If it weren’t for the Big Bash Cummins and Lyon wouldn’t be playing shield let alone test cricket. This is how they got their chance
November 27th 2011 @ 7:49am
formeropenside said | November 27th 2011 @ 7:49am | Report comment
*shrug*
When I start to care about 20/20, please shoot me.
November 27th 2011 @ 11:03am
sheek said | November 27th 2011 @ 11:03am | Report comment
Ditto…..
November 27th 2011 @ 8:16am
Jack Russell said | November 27th 2011 @ 8:16am | Report comment
More big names = more money through the gates = higher pay for players. Don’t underestimate the impact of money being a major draw for sportspeople. The great weakness of cricket has been that it has struggled to attract elite sportsmen that have excelled at other sports – mostly football – because they can draw a decent wage almost immediately. That’s why cricket needs to find a way to attract these guys without asking them to cop 5+ years of terrible wages playing in front of nobody.
It’s fine to say ‘they’re better off playing shield cricket’, but it might be a case of losing them to cricket, which does no-one any good.
Not to say this abortion of a ‘league’ will do that in the longer term.
November 27th 2011 @ 8:51am
mds1970 said | November 27th 2011 @ 8:51am | Report comment
It’s also worth noting that there are 8 teams in the Big Bash compared to 6 in the Shield. That’s an extra 22 places – and although we’ve got marquee signings and imports, there’s less than 22 of them; so additional places are created for young up-and-comers.
November 27th 2011 @ 11:13am
sheek said | November 27th 2011 @ 11:13am | Report comment
Actually, I think this is the way the Sheffield shield must go – create more teams. Perhaps the days of state/provincial teams are numbered. I would be sad to see state/provincial teams consigned to the dustbin of history, but I have to be realistic.
Anyway, NSW would become Sydney Blues; Victoria the Melbourne Bushrangers; Queensland the Brisbane Bulls; SA the Adelaide Redbacks; WA the Perth Warriors; while Tasmania Tigers would remain unchanged (because of the north/south rivalry). So that tradition remains anyway.
To this you could add the Canberra Comets & Newcastle Miners (my suggestion). Down the track other possible additions might be West Sydney, East Melbourne, Gold Coast & Geelong, among others.
One of the criticisms directed at cricket was the lack of opportunity for young players. With only 6 professional teams in Sheffield Shield & one-dayers, that provided about 150 openings, roughly the same as for Australian rugby, but way behind the A-League (200 plus), NRL (circa 400) & AFL (750 plus) in ascending order.
November 27th 2011 @ 5:15pm
Russ said | November 27th 2011 @ 5:15pm | Report comment
Sheek, there is no reason (and never was) to remove the state names. You can add the Melbourne Migrants and Sydney Squatters with only one caveat. Victoria/NSW are no longer representative sides, which is partly true now with central contracting, but players in Melbourne district/ Sydney grade cricket will only be allowed to play for one of each state’s ides per season, and the team played for in the previous season will need to be given first option to offer a contract. CA made a big thing about not mixing state and city names, but almost every franchise competition has a few state-based team names.
In the long run I’d like to see 4 new sides and a merger with the six sides in NZ to create two divisions of eight (retaining the Shield names: Sheffield and Plunkett). But at the very least Australia could use more teams, and play more games. The competition structures were created in an amateur age when players couldn’t play weekly. That is no longer the case.
November 27th 2011 @ 7:24pm
sheek said | November 27th 2011 @ 7:24pm | Report comment
Russ,
If it’s no longer a state comp, then I see no reason keeping state names. Especially as the transition from NSW to Sydney; Victoria to Melbourne, etc, is seamless anyway. Tasmania can be referred to either as a state (state system) or island (metro-region system).
Of course, I would like to see the state system retained, but whether or not that happens, remains to be seen.
As for NZ participation, I don’t know. One day I’ll wake up & say it’s a great idea; the next day I’ll wake up & say no, they should develop independently. At present NZ seem to have a well evolved comp for both the men & women.
I note that apart from netball, which is split 50-50 between Australian & NZ teams, all other comps (NRL, A-League, NBL) only have one NZ team. The super rugby can’t be compared as it is unique again.
November 27th 2011 @ 7:51pm
Russ said | November 27th 2011 @ 7:51pm | Report comment
Sheek, let’s just say I’m attached to the existing names and leave it at that.
I think, from an NZ perspective, there is too large a gap between f/c and test cricket. The only time they had significant success at test level most of their players were involved in county cricket. Merging with Australia would lift that standard, a lot.
From an Australian viewpoint, expansion and NZ involvement will drop the standard, but I think the expansion of opportunities would be worth it. Certainly for bowling, where there is a lack of f/c experience in every current player involved in the test side.
Other sports are less concerned with developing players for the national side, which also makes them hard to compare. There is a lot to be said for administrators merely trying to make the best, most interesting competition they can.
November 28th 2011 @ 8:16pm
sheek said | November 28th 2011 @ 8:16pm | Report comment
Russ,
Both NZ & SA rugby (& cricket) were able to expand their provincial teams by cleverly sub-portioning existing larger provinces.
In South Africa, under the old regime, Western Province, Eastern Province, Border & Griqualand West all came from Cape Province, while Transvaal was sub-divided into Northern, Western & Eastern as well as Transvaal itself.
In NZ, Auckland was further sub-divided into North Harbour & Counties-Manakau. Canterbury also has a Mid & South.
Let’s take NSW. If you want a team in each of Canberra & Newcastle, you can call them ACT or Monaro, & Eastern Australia, as examples.
Basically, ACT-Monaro would cover Southern & Inland NSW with Canberra as it’s capital; NSW would cover Central & Western NSW with Sydney as its capital; & Eastern Australia would cover Northern & Inland NSW with Newcastle as its capital.
Wollongong/Illawarra & Gosford/Central Coast would remain in the Sydney/NSW orbit.
Re NZ, it’s probably true they would gain more from a combined comp than Australia would. Yes, I agree it would dilute our system. I think in matters rugby union & cricket, the two countries are better off running their own affairs.
November 27th 2011 @ 1:45pm
sheek said | November 27th 2011 @ 1:45pm | Report comment
BTW,
Of the top 10 draft picks in the AFL, 8 of them came from Victorian clubs. Of all cricket sides, Victoria seems to have struggled most in unearthing new talent. Does this give us a clue to the obstacles faced by cricket generally in recruiting outstanding young talent?
However, I’m not sure the giggle & hit Big Bash is the way to attract new players & fans. It will be a short-term money spinner, most likely, but is it in the best future interests of Australian cricket…..?