Franchise Leagues: A Threat to Cricket's Future?

Long gone are the days of playing cricket for pride and prestige, nowadays, money makes the world go round. If apportioned fairly, it has the ability to increase the accessibility, inclusivity, and overall participation, but in the hands of the rich few, cricket is becoming a monopolised business.

Behind all the glitz and glamour of franchise leagues, you'll find a stagnating cricketing ecosystem. These engineered all-star teams are draining traditional domestic set-ups of talent, making internationals less of a priority, and providing the 'big three' - England, India, and Australia - with the income required to reaffirm their positions at the top of the cricketing tree, stalling associate nation progression.

Depleted Domestics

The generic character of franchises seem rather dull when compared with some of the great domestic rivalries which have spanned centuries, such as that of Yorkshire and Lancashire. Born from the 15th Century battlefield rivalry between the Houses of York and Lancaster, 1867 saw things take a slightly more civilized turn, with the first Roses clash on the cricket field. Compare this with the birth of any franchise teams, who seemingly follow the 'off-the shelf' brand creation process which seems to involve throwing a dart at a map, followed by a flip through a thesaurus to find some ferocious animal or weather phenomenon to name themselves after.

The late journalist Martin Johnson was not wrong that "as a preparation for a Test match, the domestic game is the equivalent of training for the Olympic marathon by taking the dog for a walk." Franchise leagues pick the muscle from the bones of traditional domestic teams, just as the investments counties make in players start to pay dividends.

Not only do they pry away the 'cream of the crop', the cricketing schedule has become so crowded that franchise and domestic leagues often overlap each other, or in the case of the Hundred, stomps all over England's 50-over One Day Cup, despite the former not even being a form of cricket recognised by the ICC. The integrity of the cup has since been ruined, with teams having to put out 2nd XI sides.

Inferior Internationals

The pull of franchise cricket has also begun to impact the quality of internationals, with dangerous precedences being set. Such is the scheduling traffic jam, nations have begun to play simultaneous series: whilst India took on England in their 2021 Test series, a 'B' team was rolled out for a limited-overs clash against Sri Lanka, devaluing the sanctity of an international cap.

This was the same Test series which India cut short on the morning of the final match, due to worries over a Covid outbreak, which many suspected was used as cover so that the BCCI could ensure their stars made it back in time for the first matches of the rescheduled IPL.

Earlier in the Summer, key England players missed a two-match Test series against New Zealand to partake in the knock-out stages of the previous IPL, despite England management supposedly being able to call the shots through central contracts.

Many worry that Test cricket is dying in the current climate, and these antics do little to dispel concern. You cannot blame the players: they must make financial 'hay whilst the sun shines' in a profession with an ingrained expiry date. It is down to the national boards to protect and prioritise the integrity of their domestic and international fixtures.

Abandoned Associates

Associate nations require funds to finance travel, training facilities, talent pathways, domestic competitions, and professional contracts, but above-all, they require opportunities to play, which allow them to generate funds under their own steam through sponsorship, media coverage, and prize money. What really 'takes the biscuit' is the fact that interventions were put in place by the ICC to bring full member national boards back down to earth; to prevent them from sitting on their laurels, and even the playing field, but these were allegedly reversed due to the 'big three' flexing their muscles.

The fall of the ODI Super League

The ever-expanding gap between associate and full member nations was on the mend, with the introduction of a league structure in 2018 for ODIs making promotion and relegation commonplace. This ensured that every nation played the same amount of games in a cycle, and provided associates with the opportunity to make a run up the rankings, and sell media rights when the superstars were in town. Qualification for world events would no longer be a given for the incumbents, improving the quality of international bi-lateral series.

Frustratingly, it was then announced in 2021 that this structure would be discontinued after the 2023 50-over World Cup. Netherland's then-coach Ryan Campbell was rightly upset at this news, with his side having been the associate nation promoted to the 'Super League' as a result of having won the second division in 2017. He stated that "it was the first time in the history of Dutch cricket that cricket was shown live on Dutch television", and now "every Associate country is wondering what next? How do we play? Where do we get our fixtures?".

Campbell thought the reason for the reversal was down to the 'big three': "when you look at the last division of (ICC) money that was split up, England and India and Australia wanted more and that came out of the Associate pool and then within weeks, they were announcing billion dollar new TV rights deals". Associates are yet again stuck in a vicious political cycle: to partake in matches they require funds, but they can only gain funds by partaking in matches.

The collapse of the Inter-Continental Cup

The route for associate ascendance to the Test stage has not just stagnated, but similarly been completely abolished after constructive beginnings. The ICC Inter-Continental Cup was founded in 2004 as a platform for associates to finesse their skills in a 4-day league, in preparation for the step up to the Test arena. The competition came to a close in 2017, with the promotion of Ireland & Afghanistan to full members; suspiciously the same year originally set for the launch of the ICC World Test Championship for full member nations (consequently postposed until 2019). Whilst this has added meaning to the longest format, it is another example of money being funnelled away from associate progression, with it now impossible for any to fulfil the criteria for an upgrade to full membership.

A peculiar funding model

The ICC's revenue distribution model simply rewards the largest cricketing nations for the monopoly they have curated. Unbelievably, the BCCI were so unhappy with only being awarded almost a quarter of the total funds in the 2015-23 cycle, that there were rumblings circulating of a 2017 Champions Trophy boycott. This is the same national board who ban Indian players from playing in any T20 (or shorter) leagues outside of the country. As for the current 2024-27 cycle, they are taking home over 38% of the distributed revenue, with 51% split amongst the other 10 full members, and leaving only 11% remaining to be shared between 94 associate nations.