[ad_1]
The Hundred has been officially postponed after yesterday’s ECB board meeting. Since the severity of the Covid-19 pandemic and the resulting crash became apparent, it seemed highly unlikely that a new competition could be launched this year, with prospects of fans attending minimal games, travel bans limit the availability of overseas players and coaches, and many staff members involved in planning at host locations for their respective counties.
The ECB has repeatedly stated its intention to organize the competition next summer, highlighting in a press release that “reoriented efforts will now wait for 2021.” As it stands, there are questions to be answered regarding the contracts, the Kolpak players and the long-term future of the tournament …
2020 contracts
The contracts that the players signed after the October draft consisted of two parts: a player appearance contract and a work contract. Players have received a small percentage, around 5%, of their overall fee to date, and were due to receive a total of 20% of their fees before the tournament’s planned launch in mid-July.
ESPNcricinfo understands that players have yet to receive the final amount they will receive this year, but the fact that the competition has been postponed so early will likely reduce it, as that money had to be paid proportionally according to the date.
That means that while some of the top earners in the men’s competition could still pay around £ 15,000 without playing a game, the ECB will save most of the £ 9 million it was due to pay in player salaries this year (£ 8m to men’s squads, £ 1m for women). Another £ 1.7 million was set aside for the salaries of coaches and support staff, most of which will be saved.
Some players including Tymal Mills and Harry Gurney had taken out insurance on their contracts, but they are unlikely to receive a full payment as most policies only cover injuries and depend on the tournament being played.
The PCA is working collaboratively with the ECB to sort out the details, and talks will take place on Thursday afternoon between PCA representatives and some high-level players involved in the Hundreds to discuss the situation.
“Those discussions are underway,” Tom Harrison, executive director of the ECB, told the BBC. “The contracts contemplate situations like this, obviously it is not the exact situation, but we have the ability to have those discussions through what is written in the contracts.”
Withholdings
Under the tournament’s existing retention regulations, as seen by ESPNcricinfo, each team could retain up to ten players from its 15-man squad, in a negotiated salary band with the player. The most likely solution is to use something similar to that system, with a smaller eraser taking place sometime this winter.
Possible alternatives may include a complete new draft or an attempt to leave squads as they are, but neither approach seems to work in practice.
The first option would render last October’s draft useless, and its legality would be questioned given that it would apparently violate the regulations that support the players’ contracts.
The latter is likely to be impossible due to the fact that several teams have signed Kolpak players into non-foreign slot machines, and the expectation that the gap will close when the UK leaves the European Union at the end of the year means that they will have to be classified as foreign players in the 2021 edition. For example, the Welsh Fire team contains at least four non-foreign players: Colin Ingram, Ravi Rampaul, Simon Harmer and Leus du Plooy, who are unlikely to qualify as ‘local’ the next year.
ALSO READ: ECB should seek private equity to shore up Hundred, report says
That hurdle can still be avoided if the UK government seeks an extension of the transition period (the deadline for that eventuality is June 30), but sticking with something similar to the planned model appears to be the most likely solution. While the PCA has publicly endorsed the increase in the number of foreign players allowed in the County Championship and the One-Day Cup from one to two, it has not suggested the same move in the T20 Blast or the Hundred, reasoning that it would reduce the number of opportunities for local players too.
If the planned retention rules are used, teams may be willing to release some of their stars overseas with the expectation that a different group of players will be available next summer, when the Future Tours (FTP) Program is Currently more empty, although the existing gaps in the calendar may well be full of postponed series.
“If we can get other international players who were unavailable this year to strengthen the Hundred for next year through a mini draft, then we can attract a new audience to come watch cricket,” said Moeen Ali, captain. from Birmingham Phoenix on Wednesday.
“We are committed to delivering the Hundred the way we set out to deliver it this year,” said Harrison. “We will have conversations with players who have been selected through the draft, decisions have to be made about it.”
It is understood that some teams have already started discussing possible retention strategies, and there are likely to be more conversations between support staff in the coming weeks and months once the picture clears up. Several coaches talked about wanting to build a team that would lay the foundation for success over several seasons instead of just aiming for the 2020 edition in last year’s draft.
There will undoubtedly be some players who will be lost in the short term. For example, Dane Vilas was signed for £ 125,000 by Manchester Originals as a local player in the October draft, but he is significantly less likely to land a contract if he finds himself competing for one against foreign talent. Players like Liam Plunkett (35) and Ryan ten Doeschate (39) could find age accounts against them until 2021, while young domestic players looking at a substantial payday like Tom Abell and Phil Salt (both £ purchases 100,000 for the Originals) will be lost in what represents a life-changing sum of money this year at least.
Perhaps more urgently, tournament postponement could leave cricket players without a central contract in the lurch. Several players hoped to become professionals this summer despite not having a contract with England, through a combination of one of the 40 contracts available at the new regional centers, and a Hundred deal. While the ECB’s £ 20 million investment in women’s play over the next two years has been limited, those players face a significant short-term setback.
2021 and beyond
Many critics of the tournament have suggested that this is the perfect time to archive it for good. The circumstances are no different from those in which the ‘P20’ competition, initially planned as a rival to the IPL involving teams from abroad, It was shelved in 2009, with the global financial crisis and the resulting recession, meaning launching a new and lucrative competition became unpleasant.
But the Hundred is significantly ahead in terms of planning – it forms a central part of the ECB’s strategy for both men’s and women’s play, and the ink has dried on sponsorship deals and broadcast contracts. And while the costs of the competition’s first season are considerable (not far below £ 60 million) that figure includes payments of £ 1.3 million to each county that will be even more vital to their survival after a year without revenue.
That means the ECB has the cards on the future of the tournament and is relatively unlikely to face demands for change. Harrison confirmed in a press release that “the Hundred will forge ahead in 2021 when we can safely deliver everything we intend to do to help grow the game” and said there would be “an even greater need for the Hundred” after Covid- 19 crises and the financial disruption that English cricket has already caused.
This week, a report from advisory firm Oakwell Sports suggested opening competition to private investment and moving to a franchise model to achieve significant savings. Although the ECB is unlikely to want to relinquish control over the teams, Harrison acknowledged that current circumstances would require them to be open-minded about the investment.
When asked by Sky Sports whether the postponement represented an opportunity to look at a different business model, Harrison said, “Yes, it does, and perhaps the coronavirus and the financial impact of the coronavirus force us to a place where we have to look at some of those opportunities. But that’s something we will do with the game, and certainly not something we are going to jump into because we are in a very strong position as a game. And I am very confident that we can do it, in association with the game, build our way out of this. “
Instead, responsibility will fall on costs whenever possible. For example, the significant sum allocated to coaches’ salaries could be considered a luxury that the tournament cannot afford. The same goes for the £ 5.8 million allocated for ‘event delivery’ and £ 1.5 million for ‘admin’, while paying male players with central white ball contracts of up to £ 125,000 each seems like a significant expense that could be avoided. using an allocation system similar to that used for those with red ball contracts.
