More Twenty20 gluttony on the cards
Pietersen - Hawks or Bangalore - what'll it be?
The Rajasthan Royals' formation of Royals2020 - a self-professed 'dynamic partnership of leading cricket clubs' - leaves Peter May to ask a few telling questions of such a contrived league.
The Rajasthan Royals on Monday at Lord's announced the formation of Royals2020: "a dynamic partnership of leading cricket clubs with the aim of creating the 'World's First Global Sporting Franchise'."
Teaming up with Hampshire Hawks, Trinidad & Tobago, Cape Cobras and in future Victoria Bushrangers, the plan is for all sides to wear the same kit under the same name and to share profits and players.
The first of a supposedly tri-annual Royals Festival, each a three-day shindig, is scheduled for England at the end of July.
The introduction of such a contrived platform begs a few questions...
Is it really the world's first global sporting franchise?
Er, no.
Player sharing is a pipe dream, at least where the leading names are concerned. The following are just a tiny fraction of those who will be kissing the Royals 2020 badge at some point during the calendar year, while at other times playing for their rivals: Kevin Pietersen (Hawks/Bangalore), Imran Tahir (Hawks/Titans), JP Duminy (Cobras/Mumbai), Kieron Pollard and Dwayne Bravo (T&T/Mumbai Indians), Dirk Nannes (Bushrangers/Delhi).
The deals that tie those stars to their non-Royals 2020 clubs cannot be undone - and Rajasthan are not suggesting otherwise. So it will be a question of sharing a few promising youngsters at most.
The issue will become more complicated over time as freelancing becomes more common. It's not impossible that someone could end up tied to five different 'global franchises' on five continents as player power will always trump the kind of brand marketing wet dream touted at Lord's on Monday.
Profit-sharing is similarly a mystery. Hawks chairman Rod Bransgrove made much of the fact that he has previously aspired to £200,000 in Rose Bowl shirt revenue but will now be getting a share of the Royals' £4million.
But what sort of share? About 5 percent would seem fair. Hampshire are presumably bringing their £200,000 to the table but hardly creating wealth elsewhere. No-one in Jaipur, Melbourne, Cape Town or Port of Spain is going to get a shirt with Michael Lumb's name on the back. Similarly Southampton society will continue to function if the Bushrangers come unstuck on Tasmania. The Hawks' most saleable asset, a long-standing relationship with Shane Warne, is something Rajasthan already own.
It is in the first instance nothing more than a business networking opportunity. A few ideas, costs and up-and-coming players shared but the world order remains intact.
Is no-one worried about fixture congestion any more?
One of the few ways in which Royals 2020 have concrete plans to make money and build a global team is through their triannual festivals. The first is planned to coincide with quarter-finals of the English Twenty20 Cup, which as a passage to the Champions League now has quasi-grail status. The Royal2020 Festival will be strictly second-class. Indeed if Warne isn't there, will anyone else be?
But although the ECB can see off this challenge to its prestige, it is nevertheless under pressure to grant yet more fixtures on a calendar that is already obese; Elvis 'I'm just taking the crossword and this syringe of horse tranquiliser to the stalls' obese.
Where does this leave the county system?
Creaking more noisily than ever. All 17 bridesmaids from this deal will now talk with IPL franchises but there are only seven to go around. It's musical chairs but the opening scenes will bear the violence and desperation of Saving Private Ryan. Those left standing will be bereft and there are no prizes for guessing which counties will finish losers.
Although this is a relatively small development, the gap between rich and poor will grow yet again. It's another nail in the coffin of the 18-county professional system but our sympathy is tempered by the fact this has been coming for some years. The smaller counties had their chance to initiate change but refused to accept the inevitable.
What does this mean for the national boards?
A reminder of their impotence. The ECB had a Twenty20 domestic monopoly for five years and did nothing with it. There has followed two years' fighting and no results. Now their powerbase is chipped away again. Later in the year the Australians will similarly have to weigh up the attractiveness of a Royals 2020 Festival. Hampshire has said they are initiating this to get global business income rather and reduce reliance on ECB handouts. T&T, Cobras and Victoria no doubt all feel the same.
One exception is the BCCI, who have expressed surprise and disappointment at the scheme. No-one asked them if it were permissible to set up a festival in another country during another season, and they seem somehow irked by that. But until this shows itself to be a development of any real consequence they will stay calm.
Will it last?
Three years ago we wrote that international cricket "will come under threat from a global franchise system" and were mocked. However, this isn't really any more than a speculative networking exercise. There is no reason particularly to say it won't last. But no reason either to think it will be a marked success, at least as long as there isn't any serious money in it.
Peter May