Take your mind back one year. It is summer 2021, and Liam Livingstone has just hit his 27th six of the inaugural hundred.
He is cheered on by thousands of screaming kids, many of whom would have been at their first, or one of their first, cricket games.
The ECB’s new 100-ball tournament was an absolute winner it seemed, so why doesn’t Cricket Australia do the same?
The idea for the very first professional 100-ball was proposed in 2019. It was to feature eight city-based franchises (the first ever franchise tournament in English cricket), a draft, and the inaugural season would run the following summer, although proceedings were of course delayed a year by Covid-19.
The aim? To introduce young kids (especially girls), women and anyone who hadn’t seen the sport before to cricket, and hopefully to convert those people into long-time followers of cricket.
Isn’t that part of what T20 offers, I hear you ask? It is, but I like to think of The Hundred as T20 on steroids, even simpler, quicker and more exciting than before.
So, have they achieved their aims? I would say partly, and just remember that was only the first season. They introduced many many new people to cricket, and crowds always seemed like they were enjoying the spectacle. Will these people become hooked to cricket off the Hundred, of that I’m not so sure.
Let’s use the person who brought me into this world, my mother, as an example. She is certainly part of the tournament’s target audience.
Female, part of a Swedish family that had never heard of cricket before my brother explained it to them, and crucially, someone who doesn’t like cricket.
She is exactly the sort of person the ECB would like to attend The Hundred. And so she did, with a bit of convincing, going with my brother, my dad and I to the Southern Brave vs Oval Invincibles double-header. Before the game, she said even if she “really enjoyed” the women’s match, she wouldn’t stay for the men.
Believe it or not, she stayed for the whole thing, and thoroughly enjoyed it. She described it to me earlier today as a “party” and she liked it because it was very clear on the scoring. After all that, she hasn’t bought tickets for this year. When I asked her why, she said part of how good last summer was was the “novelty” of it and I think she accidentally found The Hundred’s biggest problem, “after all it’s just cricket.”
No matter what the ECB do, The Hundred will always be cricket, and not everyone likes cricket.
What role should the short form of the game have? (Photo by Scott Barbour/Getty Images)
Having said all of that, I think The Hundred will convert some to cricket, and if it converts enough of them, then surely it has fulfilled its purpose? So back to my original question, should Cricket Australia consider a similar tournament? I think no, and I’ll explain why. The Hundred has done many things to appeal to children and not the traditional cricket audience.
As I’ve said before, it is the first franchise tournament in England, with teams such as ‘Fire’, ‘Rockets’ and ‘Invincibles’ playing in brightly coloured kits with unusual designs. There are fireworks, along with live music at every game at a fun interactive app.
Also, to encourage more kids to go, tickets are as cheap as $AUD 8.74, even for double-headers.
I instead suggest a reform of the BBL. My plans aren’t anything too radical, as it is already pretty good at attracting a diverse audience, which is why I don’t think a new tournament is necessary.
The structure is already in place to get new people into cricket. It has marketable teams, cheap tickets and some big stars. They’ve also just announced the introduction for a draft, which I think is great.
If I were Cricket Australia, I would make the BBL even more appealing to kids. There would be live music, a mobile game, or maybe even players doing stupid Tik Tok dances, to be honest, anything to make them watch it.
I would get more games on free to air TV and would revert the WBBL back to running at the same time as the BBL, and introduce double-headers.
The WBBL would also have a draft, and this draft would be the main focus of my ideas. I would pump money into this draft, having a wage structure similar to The Hundred, and attracting the biggest players, male and female. I would copy what The Hundred with allowing each team two players on central test contracts.
If possible, I would schedule it not to clash with any international cricket, as one downside of The Hundred is that players selected for a test series, both this year and last year, will only be able to play at the start of the tournament before leaving for an England tour.
Most importantly, I would pump money into the draft and the BBL, advertising it everywhere, and make sure the world is watching my T20 tournament which will challenge the best global leagues. A tournament, to rival The Hundred.
Clear as mud
Guest
Prefer to see an 88. back to 8 ball overs. and each player incl keeper having to bowl an over.
Anirban Mukherjee
Roar Rookie
One important point lot of people missing about these T20 leagues.. Attracting IPL franchises doesn't guarantee success.. In that case WI CPL20 would have been a success already as IPL owners bought teams there since last few years.... The main thing is availability of Indian players. India has a massive cricket following population but they want to watch Indian players... They have no interest in South africa T20 leage where Mumbai plays against Chennai but 22 players doesnt include a single Indian players. It almost guaranteed that the new SAF and UAE T20 leagues will not generate indian interest because they will not have any indian players..
Joshua Makepeace
Roar Rookie
You're right, it does feel like there's been a lot less coverage of The Hundred than last year.
Ian
Roar Rookie
Hi Simoc. I'm back living in England and I must be missing something. I can barely find anyone talking about or showing an interest in this ridiculous tournament. To find out the scores you have to download Cricinfo etc to find out who's playing who and who actually won. The crowds have allegedly been good but that's mainly due to the number of free tickets given away. It has destroyed what was a wonderful cricket summer with 4 wonderfully exciting Test matches. The summer has lost all it's momentum. We have a 3 match series against South Africa starting soon but it's hard to find a word written about that. That's only going to get worse what with the EPL starting over the weekend. As a cricket tragic I find it actually quite depressing. I accidentally stumbled over some radio commentary the other day .I have no idea who was playing who, who was playing for who but had to turn it off after 10 minutes due to the ridiculously over hyped commentary. Everything was brilliant, stunning or magnificent. At risk of sounding like an old so and so...it's definitely a no from me. Please wake me when it's over.
Jeff
Roar Rookie
"The BCCI doesn’t contribute to ICC revenue, it takes revenue from the ICC. Its the sale of rights to the world cups to India that contributes the revenue." That misses the point. The BCCI generates 70% of the value that the ICC receives from its revenue (commercial rights and broadcast rights) by having India involved in events. Yes it takes a revenue distribution from the ICC. However it's only 10% of the $2.7b projected ICC revenue over the current 8 year cycle - although that is still at least double of what any other member gets. Whereas, the BCCI's current 5 year broadcast deal alone is $6.2b. Then add in the licensing fees from the 10 IPL franchises - the two new franchises last year paid $1.7b. It dwarfs what the ICC makes, even with India involved in ICC events. So across multi-year cycles, that's $270m the BCCI receives from the ICC out of the $1.9b its involvement generates for the ICC. Versus $10b+ the BCCI makes from it's broadcast deals and domestic IPL. Hence why the BCCI sees the ICC revenue sharing as an issue and come the new ICC revenue sharing period commencing in 2024, it will no doubt be pushing for a higher percentage of revenue. If it doesn't get it, then the BCCI may well consider simply (further) expanding its own BCCI-controlled or BCCI-influenced events; the broadcast and other revenue is there in the market for events involving India or Indian product, but at present it's seeing its ICC value generation mostly being distributed to other cricket boards. And also hence why unilateral expansion of the BCCI and its related parties (IPL franchises) is a real thing. We're likely only seeing the start of it this year. The T20 revolution seems more to be about Indians gambling habits and T20 leagues in backwaters can provide that, all year round without affecting proper cricket. It's ranked 6th in the world re average attendance for all sporting leagues. It's not just gambling, although there is a lot of money in that. And broadcasters aren't just paying the BCCI (and ICC) simply because of gambling. -- In contrast, CA's 6 year broadcast deal is $0.8b (plus another $175m selling overseas rights for 7 years) and most discussion is that the next domestic broadcasting deal will be less. "Its wrong to assume just because the subcontinent has a cricket gambling addiction and need cricket every day and hour that its going to catch on elsewhere." This also misses the point. The BCCI via it's IPL proxies can, will and is starting to pay big money to cricket boards for establishing competitions or teams in many established cricket markets. And new ones. As the new CSA T20 League and the new UAE T20 League show (both dominated by IPL franchises/Indian money and both of which will have up to 228 overseas players across the 12 squads, being paid up to $700k per tournament, both of which are playing as the same time as the BBL), not only is the cricket calendar being squeezed, but the IPL-backed comps are direct competitors to CA and unless CA can find a way to increase its revenue and pay players more, not only will it increasingly find it difficult to attract o/s players, it will face a challenge to retain Australian-based talent. And if it doesn't, the brand value of the BBL will reduce and so will the revenue it can attract from broadcasters and sponsors. In light of CA's current broadcast revenue ($800m over 6 years, or $130m p.a.), let alone uncertainty over what the next broadcast deal will look like, what do you think CA would do if the BCCI came to CA and said: "-keep the BBL mostly as is -keep the city names -sell the 10 BBL teams to the 10 IPL franchises -use their branding including nicknames -allow up to 8 o/s players per squad, half from India -and for that you'll get $350m annually from the IPL franchises (that's $35m per franchise - chicken feed really) -plus you'll have a much-strengthened BBL product to sell to your domestic broadcast partners -and we'll also share in your o/s broadcast rights which will increase from $25m p.a. to $200m p.a."? CA may be wealthy compared to CSA, but it's dwarfed by the BCCI and could, if it were so tempted, become much wealthier. The IPL comp in South Africa is one thing re domestic interest in India, hence why the IPL is investing there. An IPL franchisee-based BBL in Australia would be much much bigger re interest in India, even with the timezones not being optimum.
Brainstrust
Roar Rookie
What is South Africas domestically generated revenue compared to Cricket Australia domestic revenue? The BCCI doesn't contribute to ICC revenue, it takes revenue from the ICC. Its the sale of rights to the world cups to India that contributes the revenue. The difference is Australia pays big money for rights to cricket in Australia in the summer and hardly anything to the ICC events held overseas. Even England pays a lot more than Australia do for overseas rights. Australia does pay good money for world cups held locally. Australian cricket is very myopic, Australians cricket fans most of whom are part timers who switch over to the cricket in the offseason of AFL and NRL, are not interested in the IPL either. Cricket Australia problem is dumping money in the BBL which doesn't make a profit , what they should be doing is offering South Africa players and others money to tour Australia in their national team not play in the BBL or other t20 leagues as well as other national teams. Cricket Australia needs to keep its international cricket revenue not sacrifice to copy the BCCI and IPL, and its scam of not paying touring teams for the revenue which they help generate needs to end. The BBL should be made as short as possible and fit in some gap. Whether its sold to the IPL or not is irrelevant. The T20 revolution seems more to be about Indians gambling habits and T20 leagues in backwaters can provide that, all year round without affecting proper cricket.The Euro T20 league they look ridiculous, played without spectators, on any field, and in countries without local interest. Its wrong to assume just because the subcontinent has a cricket gambling addiction and need cricket every day and hour that its going to catch on elsewhere.
Jeff
Roar Rookie
Hi Brainstrust. My view is that the "IPL" expansion is now confirmed as a global expansion (we have, I think, 5x Knight Riders teams across tournaments, plus multiple other IPL-branded teams across these comps). Knight Riders in SAF, WI, UAE, IND, USA for example. This "IPL-branded expansion" will continue to grow exponentially in the near term re commercial value - it's feeding off itself at this point. And the commercial value is similarly growing exponentially. On the other hand, CA is faced with - most likely - a situation where its next broadcast rights deal will be (much) less than the last deal. So CA's revenue is dropping, at the same time as the IPL's (BCCI's) income (mostly via media rights) is massively increasing. That's probably an unstainable situation going forward given CA will increasingly struggle to lock in top talent given alternative financial offerings. Particularly as the IPL branding becomes quickly globalised. Unless CA can find the money (and again, its next broadcast deal is very likely to be lower than the last), it's going to be paddling upstream against an overwhelming current of alternatives re player retention/attraction. There will come a point where BCCI/IPL "share" (i.e. a share that CA could tap in to) of income opps (franchising via licensing and o/s broadcast value) even dwarfs CA's domestic international (including BBL) revenue base. -- So, I don't think it's a case of Australia as one of the "Big 3" wanting to reduce its revenue. I think that likelihood is already on the cards - it's not a case of "wants" rather than reality. The "Big 3" was a term coined around 2014/2015. Since then - with BCCI now contributing 70%+ of ICC revenue (and only going to continue to grow proportionally at an accelerated rate) - I'd now suggest the landscape has seismically shifted to a Big 1 (BCCI), with a Big-ish 2 (ECB and CA) + 3-7 other "Full Members"; though the reality is the rest of the other Full Members' financial contributions are immaterial re influence. Indeed many of those are now linking into the BCCI's IPL franchising as a revenue-guarantee.
Rellum
Roar Guru
I had to google that :stoked: Yes I am Vegan, have been for a few years now
Rowdy
Roar Rookie
Are you vegan. I try to maintain an Ayurvedic diet. Not always successfully
Simoc
Guest
I see the following in England is huge with this season already outselling last. So folks are going in droves. That must be good for cricket.
Cricket Online Site
Guest
The standard political answers. Was just checking out the first game of the hundred. Half full ground with some horrible cricket. Given how much they put into this guff you would think the second season would be a sell out. Even the A-League managed big crowds in his seasons 2-4
Bobbo7
Guest
Nope. Fix the BBL.
Brainstrust
Roar Rookie
Australia unlike South Africa makes heaps of money and profits through international cricket in the hundreds of millions. How do you now accomodate selling the teams to the IPL, assuming they want them, who will demand all Australian players be there for the whole BBL season which cancels international cricket during that period. That would result in a huge fall in revenue. South Africa doesn't have anything to lose as their domestic revenue is so low. Australia has the big Melbourne and Sydney tests in particular that generate a large portion of the revenue. I though the initial plan to sell the teams and that fell through because of the inability to get Indian players, Cricket Australia has been begging the BCCI for the last 10 years to loosen those restriction so they can get bigger foreign TV rights. I think your assuming a lot now that South Africa have accomodated them that the BCCI will change their tune. I am not sure why one of the big three in Australia would want to reduce its revenue to become part of the IPL circuit.
Joshua Makepeace
Roar Rookie
Not a great start for the ECB was it? Fortunately, the second game was much better unless your closest team is Oval Invincibles which is sadly the case for me.
Rellum
Roar Guru
The standard political answers. Was just checking out the first game of the hundred. Half full ground with some horrible cricket. Given how much they put into this guff you would think the second season would be a sell out. Even the A-League managed big crowds in his seasons 2-4
Jeff
Roar Rookie
The best take-away from the interview is the question re the impact of T20 Leagues on the schedule: "The time set aside has changed a little bit" A Little bit?? What, the IPL expanding from a 4 week to a 10 week window? The BBL expanding from a 5 week to an 8 week Dec-Feb window? The T20 Blast/Hundred expanding from zero to 5 weeks in what is comparatively a short UK summer window? South Africa clearing its international schedule for 6 weeks in Jan/Feb to accommodate its new T20 League? One has to sit back and (disconcertingly) smirk at the way they respond to these questions, offering nothing-answers that are clearly detached from reality!
Rellum
Roar Guru
:laughing: Cheers mate
Jeff
Roar Rookie
Haha yes $250m (US). Not billion. Imagine if it were billion! That would be on par with what Tiger was being offered to join LIV Golf :laughing: Here's the Cricinfo interview published today: https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/icc-the-volume-of-odis-and-t20is-in-the-calendar-is-very-much-up-to-every-member-1327455
Rellum
Roar Guru
$250b? Do you mean $mil? I can't find that interview, any links. If there is any change to colours and names to mimic IPL teams it wont matter how they structure it, even the 15 year old impressionable BBL fans will reject it. The only way that works is if the IPL teams invest in current BBL franchises with little involvement and that is not happening
Jeff
Roar Rookie
Yes. So this talk about a 100 comp in Australia is ridiculous. Where's the product differentiation? Globally we have 120 ball. The UK has 100 ball. The Caribbean will have 60 ball. Blind Freddie could tell one that the maths alone re global comps - 60-xxx-100-120 - dictates that the gap in the market for CA is The Eighty. THAT is the pot-of-gold CA should be developing.