Cricket is in a state of flux, but some traditions endure, for instance, the great Ashes autopsy.  As people cast around for solutions to England's cricketing woes there is a consensus  Andrew Strauss is an integral part of a better future.  Michael Vaughan suggests he'd be a good chairman of the ECB, Michael Atherton sees him more in the Chief Executive's role and Tim De Lisle (Guardian) thinks he is right man to reset English cricket, but seems happy to leave him in his current role of chairman of the ECB's cricket committee. From the little bits I've seen, Strauss is a good man who speaks and, presumably, thinks clearly.  But I'm less convinced he's the right man to run English cricket and I find his treatment in the media a little odd.  Tim De Lisle for one seems to be in favour of a mythical Andrew Strauss.   In today's article in the Guardian De Lisle writes:  " It was Strauss who saw, in 2015, that something drastic needed to be done about ...

This is a post on the ECB's financial statements for the year to 31 January 2020.  Previous posts on the ECB's accounts are   2017    2018 2019   The Mystery of the W orld Cup Payments  The 2020 accounts show a profit for the period of £6.9m.  This is disappointing, for a year that included an England World cup and an ashes series.  You'd expect a substantial surplus to fund other, less profitable, years.  But the strategic report for 2020 provides a (partial) explanation for the lack luster performance. " The group's administrative expenditure at £164m was an increase of £22m as compared to the prior year at £142m, the increase was largely due to the £1m paid to each of the Counties in respect of CWC 19. " That's a pretty good reason isn't it?  The ECB has distributed a share of its revenues from the cricket world cup to the first class counties, explaining the low profit for the period.  It's such a good reason the ECB have used ...

This is a post on the ECB's accounts for the year to January 2019.  My review of the 2018 accounts is here and of the 2017 accounts is here .  The ECB had income of £172m in the period and costs of £168m, leaving it with a £4m surplus. The ECB had an accumulated surplus at 31 January 2019 of £10.5m.  This is a big reduction from the £70m of reserves held at January 2016 and is, to a large extent, caused by additional payments to the first class counties that, in my opinion, were made in exchange for the ECB assuming  control of domestic cricket in the UK.  So Is The ECB In "Difficulties" There was an interesting piece by George Dobell in cricinfo suggesting the ECB was experiencing cash flow difficulties.  As regular readers will know I don't like the way the ECB runs English cricket and the idea of Colin Graves and Tom Harrison reaching down the back of the sofa for emergency funds is appealing.  But I don't really think it's true. ...

Colin Graves did an interview with the BBC on the 14th May.  As well as blethering on about the 100 he said something interesting about the subject of payments to Glamorgan  for not bidding for test matches . " Graves said: “No payments have been made to counties at all, full stop. I floated an idea talking to four or five county chairmen, that would need to be agreed by the board to go any further. No payments have been made. No payments have been promised. End of conversation.” [Quote taken from the  Guardian ] This is a bit embarrassing for me.  In my previous post on Glamorgan I wrote :  " Glamorgan have accounted for the full £2.5m non - staging payments as income (see page 8 of the accounts).This would only be appropriate if they were assured the payment would be made.   And although the years covered by the payments are 2020  - 2024 it seems Glamorgan have already  received some of the cash.  It's only I guess but I w...

A flurry of activity in the sale of broadcasting rights. First the BCCI signed a 5 year US $944m deal with Star for international matches in India.  This was quickly followed up by the Australian Cricket Board selling all its rights for $1,118m for 6 years. These deals compare with the ECB's  5 year a rrangement with Sky worth approximately $1,500m. The deals aren't strictly comparable, along with the perils of converting local currency amounts to US $ they have different start dates and there are different rules on how much can be put behind a pay wall in each country.  And the Indian government has forbidden India v Pakistan matches which would be a huge draw to a broadcaster. (How much would the ECB / ACB get for a program with no ashes tests)? Still on a simple per year basis the ECB comes out best with an annual fee of $300m with India and Australia all the way back on $190m each year.  Of course the six slogging, dancing girl bothering, ...

I have only seen two days cricket at Cardiff.  One before the ground was modernised and the other the Anderson /  Panesar / Rorke's drift ashes game, but not the final day, sadly.   I don't really follow the county but from what I can see this is the  history  of the redevelopment and why it is causing such controversy in 2018 . In 2007 Glamorgan began work on a £9.5m redevelopment of its Cardiff ground, financing coming from Allied Irish Bank ("AIB") and Cardiff Council ("CC").  The sad fact was  Glamorgan, like other counties who redeveloped at the same time, couldn't generate enough cash to pay the financing costs on debt incurred.  Glamorgan's plight was particularly desperate, in part due to bad luck and weather and, perhaps, because there is limited enthusiasm for cricket in Wales. By 2015 Glamorgan CC was in a desperate state, the £9.5m million borrowed had swollen to £16m and there was little prospect of it ever being paid...

A previous post  bemoaned the lack of transparency in the ECB accounts.   The excellent  By The Sightscreen  blog reveals a more forthcoming ECB.    As well as filing accounts at Companies House the ECB, as an employers association, files an annual return with the "Certification Officer" neither document is, generally, very informative.  The ECB normally attaches a set of accounts to the annual return. However, for the period to 31 January 2016 the ECB attached, not the public accounts filed with Companies House, but the ECB's own management accounts, providing a detailed analysis of income and expenditure for the period. If you would like to take a look go to  link .  It's the 2015 return you are after (for the period to 31 January 2016). By The Sightscreen has some fun with the numbers disclosed - including £275k for "public policy and foreign relations" which  presumably includes the cost of keeping Giles Clark fed ...

The ECB introduced central contracts in 2000.   Under the central contracts system the best players remain "associated" with a county but the ECB pays their wages, controls when they play and provides coaching. Central contracts have also improved the pay of England players relative to their county colleagues .  In the 17 years since their introduction central contracts have increased in numbers and were extended to England's elite women cricketers in 2014. The ECB's accounts for the period to 31 January 2017 showed 42 cricketing employees compared with 12 central contracts in 2000. The introduction of central contracts was a belated recognition of the centrality of the England teams to cricket in Britain, both as the focus of interest and drivers of revenue.  The point of central contracts was to improve playing standards.  On the original introduction of central contracts Simon Pack, then England International Teams Director, said: "Centrally contrac...