Another Big Bash done and dusted and it’s not pushing the hyperbole to say the 2015-16 edition was a tremendous success.
Attendances were strong, TV viewing figures the same, and the overall impression created is one that can only be looked at in a favourable light.
From a distance – and nothing I have read or heard contradicts this view – Cricket Australia, when developing the competition, went all-in prior to the hand being drawn and then received a royal flush.
More cricket
» David Warner’s big night at the Allan Border Medal
» Warner upsets Smith to take Border Medal
» Ellyse Perry wins Belinda Clark Award
» Do players even care about Twenty20 internationals?
» 2016 Allan Border Medal live coverage, updates
Anything that jumps away from tradition has to be seen as a punt in the world of cricket, which is still largely conservative in nature, and if satisfied, smug grins are doing the rounds at Cricket Australia headquarters then no one can really criticise.
In the aftermath of any successful event or tournament, and before the cold light of day has once again come into being, those involved will inevitably talk of expansion, be it in the number of teams or fixtures, of new markets to be conquered and of lengthening the revolution’s lifespan.
All this is admirable, after all, why wouldn’t you want to strike while the iron is smoking hot? But personal experience would encourage a ‘not too hasty’ approach from those doing the administrating.
When the Twenty20 Cup was first introduced into the county game – three groups of six teams playing five games apiece – it was surprising how well it gained traction with the public.
Fifteen thousand at Old Trafford for Lancashire versus Yorkshire, full houses at Leicestershire where two men and a dog was considered a bumper attendance, and sellouts at Worcestershire and Bristol.
Wherever it was played, it did well.
Bums on seats meant cash in the bank and once the counties had the former they wanted more of the latter.
The six games of the first two seasons became eight from 2005-2007, ten in 2008 and 2009, 16 in 2010 and 2011, back to ten for 2012 and 2013 and, with the competition switching to a once a week format, 14 for the past two seasons.
If you ever studied economics at school, and paid attention, the law of diminishing returns may ring a bell somewhere in your subconscious.
“If one input in the production of a commodity is increased while all other inputs are held fixed, a point will eventually be reached at which additions of the input yield progressively smaller, or diminishing, increases in output” is the wordy definition.
In this instance it can be reduced down to ‘more games equals reduced attendances’.
The England and Wales Cricket Board, via the counties themselves, decided that if they could sell out eight games then it stands to reason that, as such a foolproof strategy, by doubling the number they would be laughing.
I’m sure you know exactly where this is heading, but by turning a novelty into a run-of-the-mill occurrence, the goose that laid the golden egg was put into a pen, only venturing outside for the odd fixture.
Only in the last couple of years or so has a recovery of sorts taken place, but the days of plentiful full houses are no more.
A winning formula had been found and while saying it was wasted might be a bit on the harsh side – myriad factors contribute to any alteration in any competition – avarice got the better of those in control.
And so back to the Big Bash. Careful consideration should be given to any proposed expansion, whether this is going into other countries or forming franchises in different cities.
There are positive factors that could arise from manufactured growth, i.e. more people given the chance to watch live cricket, but there is a very real risk of giving the public too much of what you think they want.
CA have hit upon the perfect storm with the scheduling, marketing and broadcasting of their tournament, and to see 50,000 at the Adelaide Oval or 80,000 at the MCG for a domestic encounter is all the evidence that should be necessary.
Just remember that the extra beer at the end of the night isn’t always the tastiest.
ross
Guest
when one talks about expansion one must consider if there is enough players to fill the squads of any new teams added and whether expansion may diminish the competition - currently there are 8 teams - maybe Canberra would be one additional team option??- one thing i would change is the current semi finals series - it should be 1 vs 2 (winner through to the final) and 3 v 4 (winner players loser of 1 v 2 with that winner through to the final to play the winner of 1v 2 and loser of 3 v 4 out) - if another team is added a 5 team final series like the old days of the NSWRL comp
The Bush
Roar Guru
I also remember them talking about getting Blake and Bolt involved. Mind you, I've also been told that Blake at least is a more than adequate cricketer. Whilst it obviously never eventuated and it would still be odd if it ever did, he'd hardly be the first guy to transfer sports. I personally 'em not a fan of it, but I always wasn't a fan of Izzy playing Aussie Rules... Call me old fashioned...
VivGilchrist
Guest
I hear you Bush, but if he doesn't like it....he doesn't like it.
The Bush
Roar Guru
Oh I "get" why he calls it bashball Viv, I just find it incredibly frustrating (for the reason I listed). Giving something a condescending and deliberately "offensive" nickname is usually the action of someone who has closed their mind off to any possibility of seeing something in a different light. I generally like sheek's posts, but frequently I find that he's made up his mind about something and no amount of evidence to the contrary will result in him changing his views at all.
Red Kev
Roar Guru
Thanks, that explains why I didn't remember it when Eddie mentioned it. I do definitely remember them talking up getting Yohan Blake and Usain Bolt involved though.
The Bush
Roar Guru
No technique to his bowling? Or are you referring to his batting? His batting is nothing special, he's simply one of many bowling "allrounders" who can smash it into cow corner when he wants. But there's nothing wrong with his limited overs fast bowling. It's actually very good. Please explain how he was found out and what was wrong with his bowling technique?
Mister Football
Roar Guru
Really good points, a small increase in the number of games in the season can be achieved without minimal fuss. But I'd say the window for expanding to a 10 team comp is a bit closer than 15 years because there are already keen bidders for a license on the horizon right now, with cricket grounds ready to go, and they'll keep agitating. Also, I thought CA had already mentioned 2018-19 as a possibility for expansion.
VivGilchrist
Guest
I watched enough to see plenty of dropped catches and retired guys dominate the comp.
VivGilchrist
Guest
I've seen him fully exposed in ODI cricket... no technique. He's a one trick pony. If everyone went down his path, the game would die.
VivGilchrist
Guest
I think he calls it Bashball because they bash the ball.
The Bush
Roar Guru
Why do you insist on calling T20 "bashball". Did you use this name when you first watched One Day Cricket in the 1960s and '70s? To be honest, it negates for your ability to make an actual point about the changes in cricket, because it displays your bias before you've even finished making a point.
The Bush
Roar Guru
Andrew Russel is not a two-bit international player. The bloke is a T20 star. If you actually watched him bowl, you would have seen some of, if not the, best fast bowling of the summer.
Don Freo
Guest
That thinning out does happen but it also uncovers an unparalleled breadth of talent. In WA they uncovered Andrew Tye and David Moody, the batting babies in Qld, Dean in Victoria...even Canberra's Jono Dean for the Strikers... It's just as much a good thing as a bad thing.
Don Freo
Guest
Thank goodness, Sheek, for admin committees. A sole administrator could get it so wrong. With viewing numbers like they have had, TV bidding for telecast rights will keep them going. Cheer up. You still have half a glass to drink.
sheek
Roar Guru
I would suggest the standard of Sheffield Shield quality players has decreased. With so much peripheral cricket being played, as with the introduction of bashball, players are being asked to spread their talents over three formats, plus numerous different comps. Water the whiskey, spread it thin, lose the quality.....
sheek
Roar Guru
A mate of mine (I hope I can call him a mate) who is a big name in cricket administration circles, refutes my concerns that BBL will kill off test cricket through administrators love of the money trail, by suggesting that BBL is costing CA a lot of money & is unsustainable. By unsustainable he means, the popularity of the sport is unlikely to continue ad infinitum, & CA will be forced to pour more money in as time goes by. I hope I have expressed his thoughts reasonably accurately. The reason BBL doesn't have Indian players is because the BCCI won't allow them to participate. India rules world cricket. I respect his opinion greatly so I'll watch & wait to see what happens.....
Don Freo
Guest
Aussie cricket is just fine Alec.
matthew_gently
Guest
How much did you watch? With an open mind? I'm a die-hard Test match fan, but not such a snob to see that, overall, the quality of the cricket was outstanding. Some of the matches this season were a genuine privilege to watch.
Joey Johns
Roar Guru
Sorry Viv, but this line of thinking is bullocks. Currently, there are 9 Australians and 2 international players in each team, per round. Which means 72 aussies featured per round. Compared to Shield which has 66 Australians featured per round, and has since Tasmania was introduced in the late 80's. (Which means our talent pool hasn't increased in 30 years) By your standards there are 6 "club" cricketers filling the gaps in the Big Bash, and because Australia hasn't doubled in population since the Shield expansion (it has) we most definitely can't support any more terrible grade cricketers...
VivGilchrist
Guest
We're more words meant to follow?