As the 2022-23 season warms up, the Australian T20 Big Bash League faces a crossroads.
As it stands, in the BBL, Cricket Australia possesses an entertaining product. The decision they need to make is whether or not they’re happy with that, or want to consider creating a meaningful sports league.
In 2018 the Adelaide Strikers hosted the BBL final at Adelaide Oval in front of nearly 41,000 fans. All of them cheered heartily as the final ball was bowled and Adelaide took out the title. That cheering lasted about half an hour, and by the time everyone was leaving the stadium, most people looked more like they were thinking about what to pack for lunch at work the next day.
Compare that with the veritable month-long meltdown that would occur if either of South Australia’s AFL teams won a flag. It’s a stark contrast.
In its short life thus far, the BBL has prioritised entertainment over substance. For many reasons, this may have been a strategically clever move.
The hype machine at Cricket Australia is certainly well oiled and it’s probably fair to say that they’ve maximised sets of eyes on the league. Fireworks, dancers, music, activations – there’s no shortage of things to see and do at a BBL match. It’s so entertaining that I think sometimes people actually forget to watch the cricket.
Economically, the sacrifice of substance at the altar of spectacle has been an irrefutable success for CA. But at what cost to sustainability? Last season’s average attendance across the competition was 7371.
Pandemic factors can’t be ignored in that figure. But whichever way you parse the numbers, you see a steady decline in attendance since 2017, with a dramatic drop for the 2021-22 season. So far in 2022-23, on available crowd figures, the average attendance is 11,420. But a couple of outliers are carrying that statistic.
Without wanting to sound like a cardigan-wearing traditionalist, one does wonder if this a symptom of surpressing the cornerstones of the game in favour of more shots that reach the fence.
But more importantly, where to from here for the BBL? It seems clear that they must ascertain what’s causing the drop off in interest.
(Photo by Sarah Reed – CA/Cricket Australia via Getty Images)
Can the pandemic truly be blamed? Still? Or have people finally fatigued of the meaningless hit and giggle? What part does the media’s complete lack of analytical coverage have to play? Is a sports league that is now more entertainment than sport sustainable?
Ultimately, they must raise the stakes. They have to make the results mean something. At this point, the BBL has more in common with a concert, or the theatre, than it does with sports. It has completely failed to capture the imagination of analytically-minded sports fans and journalists.
A Sheffield Shield win currently carries more weight than an entire BBL title. Broadly speaking, no one really cares who wins a BBL match. That has to change if the competition is to survive.
Losses need to hurt and wins need to heal. Weekday afternoons at the pub, we want to be talking about the strategy required to win, not how many times the flames went off.
So, how is that achieved? Here are some thoughts on the matter.
Bring back the parochialism
The pseudo-franchise model, removing association with state programs, was a mistake. Especially given the popularity of the earliest iterations of the league when state teams still featured. The Blues, Redbacks, Bushrangers etcetera are iconic monikers in Australian sport.
The creation of wholly new colours and motifs was contrived and ultimately damaging. How people in Melbourne chose whether to follow the Stars or the Renegades is still unclear, but whatever the case, it wasn’t based on any sense of geographical identity. This aspect of the competition must be revived.
If that means fewer teams, so be it. But rather than decreasing the number of teams, they might consider putting the NT and the ACT into the competition. This creates games in Darwin and Canberra without having to make other teams play there and opens up new markets.
There’s also no reason to remove the fluidity of player movement or signing of imports.
(Photo Getty Images)
Tone it down
Putting on a show is fine. But at the end of the day, if the peripheral activities are more exciting than the play, something is wrong. If our younger generations grow up loving T20 but having no patience for the long form, how will we fill a Test team in 20 years?
One also wonders how much the decline in attendance has to do with T20 being aimed almost exclusively at families. For those with kids, Sunday afternoon games at 3pm are great. But for everyone else, they’re rubbish. Kids love loud music in between every ball, but most people over the age of 40 can’t stand it.
T20 doesn’t need to be at odds with Test cricket. They can co-exist, but not as long the BBL is hell-bent on the narrative that Test Cricket is boring. The differences can be celebrated without the markets for both forms being seen as mutually exclusive by Cricket Australia.
Give cricket analysts something to care about
The contest between bat and ball has been lost in the bright lights of T20. Batters can basically do as they please, switch hitting and dancing around in their creases at will. At the other end, bowlers are penalised for anything other than delivering the ball at the required speed directly into the hitting zone of the hitter. I use the term hitter in place of batsman deliberately.
This year’s Adelaide Strikers squad is doing its best to prove me wrong here. But make no mistake, as devastating as Thornton, Agar, Khan and Siddle can be, without Short’s form with the bat they wouldn’t have won as many games as they have.
Aside from making the game frustrating to watch at times, making the game all about batters also deprives cricket analysts of any real fodder because wickets have become largely extraneous – at least in so far as they contribute to the bowling side’s chances of victory.
What analysis is there to be done on a game that has so aggressively simplified cricket? Make runs, chase runs. When there’s no realistic chances of a team being bowled out, there’s little to discuss. Losing wickets means real trouble in a 50-over game, but as long as you don’t lose more than one every two overs on average in T20, you’re golden. And that’s fairly rare.
The obvious solution to making wickets more valuable? Have fewer of them.
Nine-a-side would mean eight wickets to bowl a side out and fewer fielders – both of which would sharpen the value of the bowler. It would create a fairer scenario, and one closer to the original intent of T20; a faster paced true cricket format. Yet, none of the attrition would be sacrificed.
Timmuh
Roar Guru
The Redbacks didn’t get that name until the mid 1990s. Until then, they were just South Australia. edit: That reminds me, I am still to write those articles on changing the calendar. Probably to be three parts.
Champs
Roar Rookie
Interesting perspective. I will say this though, I’m nearly 40 and I’ve been supporting the ‘Redbacks’ my whole life. So I can’t agree the state teams were a gimmick.
Timmuh
Roar Guru
I can't agree with the idea that the state teams were ever iconic brands. The "Bushrangers", "Warriors", etc, stuff was a gimmick added as the state teams were fading from people's minds. Not to the point they are now of course. Had the state based Big Bash been retained it might have rejuvenated those names a little - certainly the focus on the franchises has made it more difficult for state brands to gain a foothold. But if the idea is money, and that is the only idea of T20 or 50 over cricket, then the franchise brands have been successful and in NSW and Vic allowed to brands (three with the state ones, four when the womens state team has another name again). The other key was that by not being the state sides, players could play with one state and play T20 with a team in another state. Tying T20 to state contracts was a problem for players looking to maximise T20 earnings while retaining their long form chances; the openings were not always at the same team. "wickets have become largely extraneous – at least in so far as they contribute to the bowling side’s chances of victory" I do think that was true earlier in T20, when regardless of the situation one slap-happy-slogger would just be replaced with another. T20 has advanced, and wickets do tend to have meaning now, IMO. Especially a few early wickets, batting sides don't want to be into the lower order by the halfway stage. I'm not sure T20 can ever have "meaning". Certainly it will always struggle for the best players while played at the same time as internationals. That is one advantage, beyond just Indian cash, the IPL has. It is played outside the international and first-class window, not smashing the First Class season, not getting players into T20 habits just as they might get picked for a Test, and played without the host nation's best players because of internationals. Personally, I would bite the bullet, suck up the media hit, and play the BBL in October to get Australia's international players playing in it sometimes and start the summer with a marketable event. However, for obvious reasons - both broadcast cash and wanting to appeal to kids over school holidays - that is unlikely to happen.
Steven
Guest
Your are joking right barely more coverage than the a league, every hour of the day there is mention on the TV sports news of the bbl . That right every hour. You would be lucky to have football get a mention once a week or month.
Anth
Roar Rookie
When T20 first started, a match was done and dusted inside three hours. Bowlers hurried through their overs, batsmen ran on when they came in to bat, and hustled off when dismissed. Now, nearly 2 decades later a match runs nigh on four hours. The only urgency attached to the game now, happens on the periphery with the mindless music and hyperbolic commentary. Perhaps strip it back to what gave the game a point of difference in the first place.
Mitchell Hall
Roar Rookie
Common criticism of the BBL is a "glorified club cricket comp" and that is a hard line to argue against.
Mitchell Hall
Roar Rookie
Nothing more annoying that a loud pop song you hate echoing off the concrete and plastic. Horrible.
Mitchell Hall
Roar Rookie
Nothing more predictable that C.A. overcooking a good thing. BBL had buzz and excitement. So C.A. whack on more games and what was a good sharp tournament that attracted the world's best players soon became a drag. No one goes to BBL for the DJ. What i would do to shake things up is that the test team have to be available for all games. So have the test series and clear the rest of the summer for a short tournament. I also feel a thought that should be entertained is the weaker test nations like Sri Lanka, Ireland, Zimbabwe play as a wildcard in the tournament.
Maximus Insight
Guest
I would suggest CA cooked the goose with BBL in the following 2 ways: -over exposing it by stretching the season out to way before Christmas and into February. Madness. -treating it like a reliable cash cow and failing to pay what was necessary to ensure enough world class cricketers -handing the cricket rights to 7 and foxtel I suspect also the over the top loud music turns off more people than it attracts. Perhaps it works in America with everyone juiced up on high fructose corn syrup but it doesn't translate here I don't have a big problem with the franchise model. People are romanticising if they think state teams were getting sustained massive t20 crowds and interest. A Stars v Rebels match got over 80K. It should be a 5 week tournament from boxing day to Australia day.
Maximus Insight
Guest
You've got to be joking, right? You are deliberately parodying the soccer persecution complex? There are still well over half a million people watching when the BBL is on (across all platforms). There is far more interest than the A-League and I would suggest it barely gets more coverage Next to nobody is going to or watching the A-League. There is simply no basis for this endless whining about how it doesn't get enough media coverage. Why should it?
MKUltra
Roar Rookie
To be fair to the BBL the games so far this season seem to be better attended than for the last few years,covid aside,the quality of the matches does feel like it has improved as more international players (or ex international players) have returned to play in the competition. The difficulty I see for the BBL ahead will be when the new South African T20 comp begins as it will take place at the same time of the year as the BBL therefore I think it will be difficult to attract international players to the BBL as majority will go and play in the more lucrative SA competition.
Steven
Guest
If the BBL had the same level of publicity as football commands from mainstream media their average crowd would be less than 500 people per game
Simoc
Roar Rookie
The players are ordinary. Who wants to pay big bucks to watch club cricketers not perform? The extra entertainment is a killer for me. I hate loud music spoiling a sporting event along with all the other rubbish like batting surge etc, meaningless drivel concocted by a non cricketer. It gives commentators something to dribble on about but thats all. They can't even show you what the other team scored on the TV screen. So amateurish. Talking to onfield players adds zero to the broadcast. I prefer the IPL every day of the week. I reckon the IPL gets it right and CA arent up to the challenge.
Rellum
Roar Guru
The State comp had meaning. It was thrown out for something that was meaningless, soulless. Having something shoved down your throat by the CA marketing department will never do that other than a quick sugar hit. It worked in India I guess because of their unwieldy FC system and the sudden creation in realaive terms of a large middle class