Hi Boris, I can't understand the disappearance of the buy-me-a-coffee link - but it certainly explains why I've been caffeine-free for a month or so! Anyway, many thanks for the sentiment and thank you in advance for the coffee, assuming the link returns!
The Big Bash is a fascinating case study - it's still the only league own by the host board with 'clubs' rather than Franchises, but the pressure is building to head towards private investment. I suspect that will happen in the next 2-3 years. At some point Cricket Australia will receive an offer (or offers) they simply cannot refuse. But there is still an obsession with signing overseas players, even if they are unheralded 20-year-olds from England. At least they're not being paid a fortune, I suppose... :)
It does make a difference as it seriously raises the profile of the tournament, which leads to greater TV audiences and bigger betting pools.
I would be happy to watch 2 school teams play, if they had the attraction/numbers a SA20 franchise can generate. You previous article noted just how India controls the purse strings - and the IPL backed teams have fanatical supporters who like to bet. I think its reasonable to assume high profile players would not be engaged in any form of match fixing, so there is greater confidence in the product, which leads to more audiences/more betting/more advertisers/bigger pies to slice.
As a rule - more is generally good. Who knows, it may even trickle down to CSA so the grounds can improve the seating/audio/facilities etc.
The only way to measure the non analytical "benefit" of a big name player to attendance, sponsors etc. would be to look at teams that don't experience improved performance or analytics with the big name input. I'd much rather have the data driven asset or even (as Dan Weston often theorises) the actual analytics specialist to find the strategic areas of improvement.
How peculiar... one reader suggested that sometimes the buy-me-a-coffee link doesn't show up if you're reading the column on your phone, or another small-screen device. But it should do! Anyway, keep an eye out for it on the next column and, in the meantime, I greatly appreciate the sentiment and thank you in advance. Mine's an Americano with one brown sugar and a splash of hot milk! :) What can I get you in return? :)
It does make a difference if there are marquee players playing especially if they have been loyal to a particular group or there is a core group of players. I was thinking of some sort of World XI tournament in different formats like it happened in 2004 against Australia to put more bums on the seat. I have read that they might have Afro-Asia cup in T20 format which happened in 2007.
Hmm, it might be cause I'm on the mobile but I can't see a buy-me-a-coffee button, even though there used to be one before 🤔
Personally, marquee players don't make a difference to me..a well played, close game of cricket is a well played, close game of cricket regardless of who the participants are.
But certainly from the example of the Big Bash League, the impact was very noticeable. In the early days, when all the best players were coming, the buzz was noticeable (and there was an 80,000 crowd for the Melbourne derby, if I remember correctly).
Now that it's harder to get marquee players, you can just feel there's a lack of excitement around it, just from the way the media covers it and the "vibes", to take a leaf out of the US political lingo. I would find it hard to quantify but 100 percent, I feel it:)
Hi Boris, I can't understand the disappearance of the buy-me-a-coffee link - but it certainly explains why I've been caffeine-free for a month or so! Anyway, many thanks for the sentiment and thank you in advance for the coffee, assuming the link returns!
The Big Bash is a fascinating case study - it's still the only league own by the host board with 'clubs' rather than Franchises, but the pressure is building to head towards private investment. I suspect that will happen in the next 2-3 years. At some point Cricket Australia will receive an offer (or offers) they simply cannot refuse. But there is still an obsession with signing overseas players, even if they are unheralded 20-year-olds from England. At least they're not being paid a fortune, I suppose... :)
It does make a difference as it seriously raises the profile of the tournament, which leads to greater TV audiences and bigger betting pools.
I would be happy to watch 2 school teams play, if they had the attraction/numbers a SA20 franchise can generate. You previous article noted just how India controls the purse strings - and the IPL backed teams have fanatical supporters who like to bet. I think its reasonable to assume high profile players would not be engaged in any form of match fixing, so there is greater confidence in the product, which leads to more audiences/more betting/more advertisers/bigger pies to slice.
As a rule - more is generally good. Who knows, it may even trickle down to CSA so the grounds can improve the seating/audio/facilities etc.
The only way to measure the non analytical "benefit" of a big name player to attendance, sponsors etc. would be to look at teams that don't experience improved performance or analytics with the big name input. I'd much rather have the data driven asset or even (as Dan Weston often theorises) the actual analytics specialist to find the strategic areas of improvement.
Manners i would love to buy you coffee but can't find the link anywhere
How peculiar... one reader suggested that sometimes the buy-me-a-coffee link doesn't show up if you're reading the column on your phone, or another small-screen device. But it should do! Anyway, keep an eye out for it on the next column and, in the meantime, I greatly appreciate the sentiment and thank you in advance. Mine's an Americano with one brown sugar and a splash of hot milk! :) What can I get you in return? :)
Or may be the champions league can be part of fixtures with new format and new teams from all the leagues
It does make a difference if there are marquee players playing especially if they have been loyal to a particular group or there is a core group of players. I was thinking of some sort of World XI tournament in different formats like it happened in 2004 against Australia to put more bums on the seat. I have read that they might have Afro-Asia cup in T20 format which happened in 2007.
Hmm, it might be cause I'm on the mobile but I can't see a buy-me-a-coffee button, even though there used to be one before 🤔
Personally, marquee players don't make a difference to me..a well played, close game of cricket is a well played, close game of cricket regardless of who the participants are.
But certainly from the example of the Big Bash League, the impact was very noticeable. In the early days, when all the best players were coming, the buzz was noticeable (and there was an 80,000 crowd for the Melbourne derby, if I remember correctly).
Now that it's harder to get marquee players, you can just feel there's a lack of excitement around it, just from the way the media covers it and the "vibes", to take a leaf out of the US political lingo. I would find it hard to quantify but 100 percent, I feel it:)