Author Topic: Big bash comparison  (Read 23468 times)

Offline bobw

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 262
Big bash comparison
« on: January 18, 2015, 05:58:24 PM »

Offline sufcessex

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 282
Re: Big bash comparison
« Reply #1 on: January 19, 2015, 08:16:16 AM »
that's a really good read.

As mentioned in the article T20 needs to be in the summer months when school children, on holidays can attend.

Offline Valentines Park

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3891
  • In Ron We Trust
Re: Big bash comparison
« Reply #2 on: January 19, 2015, 08:34:26 AM »
Essex want boozers on a Friday night though.

Offline sufcessex

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 282
Re: Big bash comparison
« Reply #3 on: January 19, 2015, 01:38:07 PM »
Essex want boozers on a Friday night though.

True enough.

tonk

  • Guest
Re: Big bash comparison
« Reply #4 on: January 19, 2015, 01:59:00 PM »
I have watched it and it is far better than ours.It is condensed so you can get in decent overseas players(Flintoff excluded)for the whole thing and the ECB need to look at the franchise system because the whole thing is more concentrated-less is more.

Offline sufcessex

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 282
Re: Big bash comparison
« Reply #5 on: January 19, 2015, 02:47:58 PM »
I have watched it and it is far better than ours.It is condensed so you can get in decent overseas players(Flintoff excluded)for the whole thing and the ECB need to look at the franchise system because the whole thing is more concentrated-less is more.

This is the first year that i've watched it and agree, i think its better than ours, but as mentioned in that article ours is a few years older and probably just needs a bit of refreshing.

Offline bobw

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 262
Re: Big bash comparison
« Reply #6 on: January 19, 2015, 04:37:24 PM »
Regardless of the quality, if the BB loses money then is that the way to go. Our T20 is profitable and that is what matters!

If the T20 is concentrated in the Summer then there would be even less than the one or two CC games in July/August. The CC would become an April/may/June then September/October competition on wet wickets with the weather dictating who wins each year.

Offline Valentines Park

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3891
  • In Ron We Trust
Re: Big bash comparison
« Reply #7 on: January 19, 2015, 05:15:37 PM »
the weather dictating who wins each year.

Larry does love an excuse ...

Offline sufcessex

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 282
Re: Big bash comparison
« Reply #8 on: January 20, 2015, 09:14:44 AM »
Regardless of the quality, if the BB loses money then is that the way to go. Our T20 is profitable and that is what matters!

If the T20 is concentrated in the Summer then there would be even less than the one or two CC games in July/August. The CC would become an April/may/June then September/October competition on wet wickets with the weather dictating who wins each year.

If you move the One Day Cup to the start of the year like the old B&H Cup then you'd have more days available for CC cricket in July and August.

Offline DT

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 965
Re: Big bash comparison
« Reply #9 on: February 02, 2015, 01:20:46 PM »
Same old argument with t20 in this country - everyone calls for it to be played in a block when previously they wanted it spaced out as we have now!!!

Having watched most of the Big Bash it is for me the best t20 comp in the world - it's very well designed and organised and comes across very well on tv.  People here at work were begging me to keep putting it on the tv each morning because they loved it, not least the flashing bails and stumps!!!

The problem is a franchise comp in England will not work because there are too many counties and so you can't have games at all grounds.

Where do we go from here?  I think the group format is fine - I think the block format as previous would work well as long as it's in a block where there is no international cricket meaning all England players can play for their counties and as long as teams have no more than 2 home games a week and at least 4 days between.  To accommodate you could have teams play each other just once in the group - less could be more!

Offline nat

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7616
Re: Big bash comparison
« Reply #10 on: February 02, 2015, 03:52:30 PM »
Same old argument with t20 in this country - everyone calls for it to be played in a block when previously they wanted it spaced out as we have now!!!

Having watched most of the Big Bash it is for me the best t20 comp in the world - it's very well designed and organised and comes across very well on tv.  People here at work were begging me to keep putting it on the tv each morning because they loved it, not least the flashing bails and stumps!!!

The problem is a franchise comp in England will not work because there are too many counties and so you can't have games at all grounds.

Where do we go from here?  I think the group format is fine - I think the block format as previous would work well as long as it's in a block where there is no international cricket meaning all England players can play for their counties and as long as teams have no more than 2 home games a week and at least 4 days between.  To accommodate you could have teams play each other just once in the group - less could be more!

and then when it rains ...
...
you lose a lot of games/income/interest.

(Rhetorical) Q: How many BB games were lost to rain this year?
MEGA (Make Essex Great Again)

Offline afinetickletoleg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1003
Re: Big bash comparison
« Reply #11 on: February 02, 2015, 04:21:49 PM »
Give in to demands for a franchised T20 like the IPL and Big Bash.  Off the top of my head you could have the 8 teams/grounds as follows:-

London - Lords
Birmingham - Edgbaston
Manchester - Old Trafford
Leeds - Headingley
Southampton - Rose Bowl
Nottingham - Trent Bridge
Newcastle - Riverside
Cardiff - Swalec

All players plus overseas go in to an auction and are allocated to teams regardless of which county they play for.
ALL profits at the end of the tournament are divided equally across all 18 first class counties.
That should keep everyone happy, including those who decry crash and wallop matches.

Onlyproblem for this format, which most calling for it seem to have overlooked is where does the cash come from to fund it?

Online JasonP

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3379
Re: Big bash comparison
« Reply #12 on: February 02, 2015, 05:10:46 PM »
Give in to demands for a franchised T20 like the IPL and Big Bash.  Off the top of my head you could have the 8 teams/grounds as follows:-

London - Lords
Birmingham - Edgbaston
Manchester - Old Trafford
Leeds - Headingley
Southampton - Rose Bowl
Nottingham - Trent Bridge
Newcastle - Riverside
Cardiff - Swalec

All players plus overseas go in to an auction and are allocated to teams regardless of which county they play for.
ALL profits at the end of the tournament are divided equally across all 18 first class counties.
That should keep everyone happy, including those who decry crash and wallop matches.

Onlyproblem for this format, which most calling for it seem to have overlooked is where does the cash come from to fund it?


It wouldnt keep Surrey, Sussex, Kent, Somerset and Essex supporters happy.  There's absolutely no evidence to suggest that more people would want to watch Nottingham play at Trent Bridge than Nottinghamshire or more people would watch Manchester play at Old Trafford rather than Lancashire.  I honestly think that reducing the counties to 8 francise teams would be a disaster.  I think you would lose far more people than you would gain.

Offline afinetickletoleg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1003
Re: Big bash comparison
« Reply #13 on: February 02, 2015, 05:58:28 PM »
Give in to demands for a franchised T20 like the IPL and Big Bash.  Off the top of my head you could have the 8 teams/grounds as follows:-

London - Lords
Birmingham - Edgbaston
Manchester - Old Trafford
Leeds - Headingley
Southampton - Rose Bowl
Nottingham - Trent Bridge
Newcastle - Riverside
Cardiff - Swalec

All players plus overseas go in to an auction and are allocated to teams regardless of which county they play for.
ALL profits at the end of the tournament are divided equally across all 18 first class counties.
That should keep everyone happy, including those who decry crash and wallop matches.

Onlyproblem for this format, which most calling for it seem to have overlooked is where does the cash come from to fund it?


It wouldnt keep Surrey, Sussex, Kent, Somerset and Essex supporters happy.  There's absolutely no evidence to suggest that more people would want to watch Nottingham play at Trent Bridge than Nottinghamshire or more people would watch Manchester play at Old Trafford rather than Lancashire.  I honestly think that reducing the counties to 8 francise teams would be a disaster.  I think you would lose far more people than you would gain.

I agree with you but there are so many people, mostly ex-pros, saying that we must learn from the IPL and BBL and go with franchises that I believe that the bandwagon will gather pace and it will happen in a couple of years.

Offline Andy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7973
Re: Big bash comparison
« Reply #14 on: February 02, 2015, 06:05:13 PM »
JasonP I'm afraid you're wasting your breath. Had this out on here and of FB. Seems people forget that this country is not Australia (heavily centred on 6 urban centres) plus the fact that the T20 competition has generally worked well, despite the almost constant tinkering. Looking at how interest declined in the IPL once local big name players started moving franchises and the inevitable corruption one gets with

Unfortunately, seems so-called supporters of this club want to destroy it for the sake of certain big name counties who have nearly bankrupted themselves over the past decade with ridiculous building projects, based on overly optimistic assessments of the interest in a game that, fundamentally, is killing itself through no terrestrial TV coverage and stupid money being paid for mediocre players and agents.  That was a long sentence.