I am not a Durham supporter. I’ve never even been to Riverside. But I’m still appalled that the ECB might penalise the county – probably with a points deduction that could relegate them – for needing financial support at the end of the season. Why do I think this? Because Durham’s problems are partly the ECB’s fault.
The ECB feel obliged to punish Durham because they’ve had to reschedule their staging fee (just shy of one million quid) for the third test against Sri Lanka earlier this summer. They’ve also had to give the most northern county extra financial assistance so it can pay off debts to the local council.
My question, however, is why counties should be forced to pay six or seven figure sums for the right to host test matches – particularly ones in early summer that last three days and frequently make a loss – in the first place? The whole system whereby counties bid for the right to stage matches stinks. A cynical outsider might wonder if it’s just another way for the ECB to make money?
Durham feel aggrieved because they’re obligated to bid for these international matches even if they don’t really want them. When the county were promoted back in 1992, one of the conditions was that they must build an international standard venue. It hardly makes sense to develop the Riverside and then play domestic matches only.
The whole system whereby international matches are allocated is more than a little odd. Durham, Lancashire, Yorkshire, Nottinghamshire, Warwickshire, Hampshire, Glamorgan, Middlesex and Surrey all have international standard grounds. Why does the country need nine, yes nine, international venues? Why were they all encouraged to develop these facilities? Why is it sensible to have a bidding war every time a blue ribbon event is up for grabs?
Every time Durham want to stage an international fixture, they’re forced to compete with richer counties. Therefore they either end up with less desirable games or have to pay over the odds for the attractive fixtures they do manage to secure. This is hardly conducive to sensible financial planning.
Rather than punishing Durham – they might not fine them but relegation will have financial implications too – the ECB should look at itself. Although the counties rely on ECB handouts to survive, what is the ECB doing to grow the county game?
Thus far all we’ve seen is the reduction of division one to eight teams, and a proposed city-based T20 competition which might raise significant money, but could also cannibalise the successful NatWest Blast and undermine the counties’ identity. What is being done to breathe new life into the championship and Royal London Cup – measures that might increase attendances and therefore boost revenue for struggling clubs?
County cricket is beset with problems. Most of these problems are at least in part the ECB’s making. So when a county hits hard times, and needs extra support, it seems both disingenuous and unfair to lay the blame purely at the county’s door. After all, these counties operate within a world the ECB has shaped – whether it’s by hiding the sport behind a television paywall or designing a confusing domestic structure that frequently makes little sense.
Durham have already lost Mark Stoneman and Scott Borthwick to Surrey this off-season. Now they could lose their division one status too. Doesn’t a county that has produced England players like Paul Collingwood, Ben Stokes and Mark Wood deserve a bit of a break? Punishing Durham will simply make the poor even poorer.
James Morgan
I can’t believe that the ECB would act in this way – a week after Strauss of all people said they were going to help everybody by making changes to the county game.
I don’t really believe that the ECB really has everybody’s future at heart. I think they are in the early stages of developing a rich man’s club county championship, with perhaps 8 members and only one division.
This is an insidious move to get a division one county relegated. I dare bet anything that Kent (runners up in division 2), wouldn’t get automatic promotion in Durham’s place because Canterbury is not deemed an international level venue. A more likely scenario would be to re-instate Hampshire because they have a top level venue.
Let’s face it, the ECB is not about cricket – it’s about money!
It’s hard to believe the ECB would do anything supportive of Durham. Think they have proved many times that they have no idea what justice is.Just looking after themselves again.
A better idea would be to scrap (or, more realistically postpone to June) the early season test matches. Most of them are a joke, and you can tell the visitors don’t relish the Riverside or Headingley in May, and the crowds reflect this. That would also allow the players (particularly the ODI and T20I players who also play tests) to play in the IPL, and gain experience.
Partly the ECB’s fault? Partly?
They’ve driven Durham into the ground through total incompetence.
Even worse, I smell lawyers…
Time for the Northern counties to consider declaring UDI when current contracts run out ?
Chances are they’d be able to field the strongest test and limited overs sides….
I like that. Love it if someone could find a way to get shot of ECB. How about if all the counties said “dear ECB, we’re not going to give you any players”?
It’s a serious question.
The ECB has no divine right to run the game; some imaginative thinking could apply real pressure for change.
I wish them luck. Many of the top players benefit (hugely) from central contracts and the fees from playing in foreign T20s. They would lose the former and I would expect the ICC to ban them from the latter (rather as Packer/Rebel tourists got banned – except they were able to replace their income). I rather suspect the top players loyalty is more to their pockets than to their counties.
Having attended many an attempted bladderation session at brewery’s around the country at the invite of the ECB. I can confirm the old adage.
I hope the booze was free and not £5 a pint!
The ECB organised the whole thing. There was plenty of free beer about but no glasses to serve it in..
I hope you sucked the pipes / pumps clean instead. Sounds typical.
Agree with all stated above. Only the ECB could come up with such a ridiculous idea. Durham is a a county which stuggles to sell out come international matches. Although a lot of venues struggle with the exception of OT, the oval, Lords, Edgbaston and maybe Trent Bridge
Agree with all stated above. Only the ECB under Giles Clarke could come up with such a ridiculous idea. Durham is a a county which stuggles to sell out come international matches. Although a lot of venues struggle with the exception of OT, the oval, Lords, Edgbaston and maybe Trent Bridge. Durham have been driven into the ground. Can’t see the sense but as Giles Clarke would have us believe mere unimportant mortals like us couldn’t possibly understand
A bit unfair on Giles Clarke (and I am hardly a supporter, having branded him a lost descendant of Lord Percy Percy on a recent blog). The problem goes back to the requirement to build an international facility, which long predates Clarke. Durham have been caught in a cleft stick. They could simply low bid everything and not get any internationals – but they need them for cash flow. Or they could bid enough to get them and make an inevitable loss given that they are bidding against grounds which are both bigger and have more revenue potential.
Clarke can only be blamed for failing to address this problem; he cannot be blamed for creating it.
Agree completely James. The ECB should be taken to task on this.
And let’s not forget that next year we welcome yet another international venue in Taunton. (Only T20 at this stage)
Seems very unjust though also indicative of the stupidity of competitive tendering for international matches which should never have been allowed.
Pedantry alert Middlesex do not have an international standard ground MCC do. All the money goes to MCC NOT Middlesex who just play there
Yes that’s a good point re: Middlesex. I was just trying to demonstrate that half the counties play at international venues. Why is it necessary to have so many top grounds? It might help when it comes to World Cup bids etc, but part of the charm of world cups is playing at smaller venues. Did you know that Kapil Dev once made over 170 at Tunbridge Wells against Zimbabwe? The ground still only has one stand (the pavilion) yet the cricket was fantastic.
International cricket was always part of the plan at Durham – the board realised early on that domestic cricket was never going to pay the bills on its own. The ECB were right to give us the chance to host Tests, as they have done for the Rose Bowl and Cardiff – there’s no good reason why the 6 historic grounds should have a permanent monopoly on Tests. The whole point of giving Durham first class status was to give a north east audience the chance to see big games that an accident of history had denied them.
In the early years, though, Riverside only had a 6000 capacity for county games and bolted on temporary seating for internationals. Where the ECB have been particularly egregious is to encourage Durham to further invest in developing the ground, and then hand the old grounds the bigger Tests and leave us with the pointless May ones we have no hope of selling. The whole concept of bidding for Tests sucks – having got us in this mess in the first place, it would be a disgrace for the ECB to then punish us for it. Even before today’s news, I’d heard the Durham board had already made up their mind to bid only for ODI and T20I cricket in the future.
For what it’s worth, I want to wish the very best of luck to Durham CC.
I’m going off topic so sorry about this. Just wanted to comment on Daryl Mitchell’s sacking as Worc’s captain.
I say it’s wrong, certainly unnecessary, and an exercise in Steve Rhodes shifting the blame for yet another year of himself taking the club sideways – at best. Rhodes is bulletproof at Worcester. Daryl could’ve been given one more year. What difference would one more make? Is he the one holding the club backwards? How many more will Rhodes get? A decade?
Joe Leach is now being saddled with having to be a strike bowler, significant lower order batter AND captain.
I think Daryl Mitchell’s been thrown under the 144 bus for the benefit of the coach. Am I wrong? Sorry if I’m lacking facts. I’m just commenting on what I see.
I’m sure many of you have now heard of the ECB’s decision to basically throw Durham to the wolves. I’m sad to say that nothing shocks me. What an utter disgrace this is.