Are the Big Three running out of cash?

[Junaids]

Today we have learned that Cricket Australia has had to cut salaries by 80% because they are running through their cash reserves without generating any revenue.

Meanwhile the ECB faces the prospect of a summer without cricket.

And the BCCI has just indefinitely postponed the IPL.

We have three major cricket boards with far higher TV revenue than the others, but with much higher fixed costs too in terms of player salaries.

Are they running out of cash? They already award hosting rights for all ICC tournaments to themselves and lock everyone else out. Are they now going to resort to diverting even more ICC revenue to themselves to fuel their unsustainable spending?

 

[Savak]

It is disgraceful and bizzare where these 3 boards who have the largest ICC share and have enjoyed tremendous revenues, profits for the last 20 years are already talking about pay cuts, layoffs, furloughs, bankruptcies in the face of one potential bad year and you have a board like the PCB which has not had much cricketing activity in Pakistan for the last 10-11 years and no series against India but it is sending no panic feelers about any losses, bankruptcy, paycuts or layoffs in the face of this situation

Did the Big 3 boards not save enough funds in the kitty and were spending beyond their means all this while?

 

[sweep_shot]

I don't think they ran out of cash. It is just that COVID-19 has given a blow to all boards (including the big 3 boards).

 

[Junaids]

I don't think they ran out of cash. It is just that COVID-19 has given a blow to all boards (including the big 3 boards).

All three Boards, like rugby league in Australia, have overspent as if TV income is guaranteed.

This, in my opinion, will make them push harder for a two-division international calendar, so they can maximise their bilateral series revenue.

 

[Junaids]

Cricket Australia has now disclosed to the states that they will run out of cash in August.....

 

[Rana]

Cricket Australia has now disclosed to the states that they will run out of cash in August.....

BCCI will come to their rescue

 

[Gamechanger72]

Today we have learned that Cricket Australia has had to cut salaries by 80% because they are running through their cash reserves without generating any revenue.

Meanwhile the ECB faces the prospect of a summer without cricket.

And the BCCI has just indefinitely postponed the IPL.

We have three major cricket boards with far higher TV revenue than the others, but with much higher fixed costs too in terms of player salaries.

Are they running out of cash? They already award hosting rights for all ICC tournaments to themselves and lock everyone else out. Are they now going to resort to diverting even more ICC revenue to themselves to fuel their unsustainable spending?

BCCI few day ago donated 51cr for PM care fund .

 

[Junaids]

The last published BCCI financial records were for 2016-17.

But they showed that the BCCI was insolvent unless it received at least twice as much funding from the ICC as any other country.

This is fascinating, because equivalent countries in football which deliver greater TV rights revenue for global events (such as Germany and Japan) don’t actually receive any more revenue from FIFA than anyone else.

It appears that the Big Three overspend so massively that they can’t actually pay their bills unless they are heavily subsidised by welfare payments from the ICC.

 

[Batsman e Azam]

I will agree to some extent with your claim. Actually, the main problem (India especially) will suffer and is suffering from, is giving too many luxuries to their players and higher level staff. They need an austerity program to reduce their expenses as otherwise it will start getting very tough for them.

The news going around is Australia and England have shown no interest in hosting an ICC event, during the 2023-2031 FTP. Whereas on the other hand, India has not even bothered to reply to the ICC email which wanted to gauge interest of countries. This shows that money is becoming rarer day by day for the boards as hosting an ICC event is not cheap at all. It would be very interesting to see that till when cricket doesn't get back properly and its effects on these 3 boards.

In my opinion, India will never run out of money because cricket is a huge market there, but I can't say the same for England and Australia. England and Australia might suffer big time.

What do you think? [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION]

 

[WhenSultansBowled]

Are they running out of cash? They already award hosting rights for all ICC tournaments to themselves and lock everyone else out. Are they now going to resort to diverting even more ICC revenue to themselves to fuel their unsustainable spending?

That's the thing with boundless greed.

They never cared about cricket so expect anything.

 

[HitWicket]

The ECB are insured for all international ticket and hospitality sales for the summer which will be equally as important as the broadcasting contract, any news on whether CA are also insured for that?

 

[HitWicket]

Cricket Australia has now disclosed to the states that they will run out of cash in August.....

Got a source on that? I've only seen statements saying they would have run out at the end of August if they hadn't reduced their spendings/salaries.

 

[Junaids]

Got a source on that? I've only seen statements saying they would have run out at the end of August if they hadn't reduced their spendings/salaries.

No, that's exactly it.

They have told the states that unless they renege on their contractual spending obligations - which is very difficult under Australian law unless you file for bankruptcy or your employees volunteer to take pay cuts - they will run out of money by the end of August.

We are on the same page.

 

[Junaids]

I will agree to some extent with your claim. Actually, the main problem (India especially) will suffer and is suffering from, is giving too many luxuries to their players and higher level staff. They need an austerity program to reduce their expenses as otherwise it will start getting very tough for them.

The news going around is Australia and England have shown no interest in hosting an ICC event, during the 2023-2031 FTP. Whereas on the other hand, India has not even bothered to reply to the ICC email which wanted to gauge interest of countries. This shows that money is becoming rarer day by day for the boards as hosting an ICC event is not cheap at all. It would be very interesting to see that till when cricket doesn't get back properly and its effects on these 3 boards.

In my opinion, India will never run out of money because cricket is a huge market there, but I can't say the same for England and Australia. England and Australia might suffer big time.

What do you think? [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION]

The BCCI - like every Australian football code - has got itself into a very difficult situation.

The reason why they vetoed the ICC's own independently commissioned (Woolf) report was because the BCCI wanted to do something which doesn't happen in any other sport, and requisition more of the international federation's money for itself.

Let's step aside for a minute from the pretext - that more of the ICC's revenue came from private Indian TV stations than elsewhere.

The bottom line was that the BCCI identified ICC money as a potential source for increasing their own revenue. And they have consistently spent rather than stockpiling all of their income.

The most recent published BCCI financial statements show that an extraordinary amount of their income is dispensed as non-transparent payments to the state cricket associations, with no requirements that it be spent on anything in particular. This is separate to infrastructure payments.

I will not speculate as to what services or patronage are purchased with those payments. I will merely say that these vast handouts by the BCCI make the BCCI itself reliant upon it getting a disproportionate share of ICC revenue, and if that ICC revenue dries up, the BCCI finds itself effectively bankrupt.

The last decade was an enormous opportunity for the BCCI to live within its enormous economic means and to make itself sustainable and powerful. But they have effectively done what too many famous footballers have done for decades: committed themselves to a level of spending which they cannot sustain if and when their income drops.

It's a very delicate time now. The three richest boards are now finding that they cannot fund their lavish expenses, and if anything they are likely to seek more, not less of the ICC revenue.

 

[wrongun]

No, that's exactly it.

They have told the states that unless they renege on their contractual spending obligations - which is very difficult under Australian law unless you file for bankruptcy or your employees volunteer to take pay cuts - they will run out of money by the end of August.

We are on the same page.

Seems to be the case. Every sport in Australia is in a similar position. The football codes have also recently taken large pay cuts to ride out the pandemic period without going broke.

CA will be ok as they have a proven successful business model, an in demand product /brand with global appeal and decent administration. They will be able to get credit or a loan if needed to get through the period.

At present the virus situation in Australia looks promising. Numbers are low & dropping. The measures brought in by govt have worked. As an island with few points of entry we can shut down very effectively and are fortunate to have technology & quality public health centres to deal with the pandemic. So CA can reasonably project that they will have cricket to bring in revenue by late 2020/early 2021. With NZ also in good shape, there is talk of a "trans tasman bubble" being formed which would even allow international cricket.

 

[Junaids]

Seems to be the case. Every sport in Australia is in a similar position. The football codes have also recently taken large pay cuts to ride out the pandemic period without going broke.

CA will be ok as they have a proven successful business model, an in demand product /brand with global appeal and decent administration. They will be able to get credit or a loan if needed to get through the period.

At present the virus situation in Australia looks promising. Numbers are low & dropping. The measures brought in by govt have worked. As an island with few points of entry we can shut down very effectively and are fortunate to have technology & quality public health centres to deal with the pandemic. So CA can reasonably project that they will have cricket to bring in revenue by late 2020/early 2021. With NZ also in good shape, there is talk of a "trans tasman bubble" being formed which would even allow international cricket.

There are two problems with this - although I largely agree with you.

New Zealand is aiming for virus eradication, whereas Australia is aiming at containment of spread.

This matters in the current situation in which:

1. There is no vaccine, and no prospect of widespread vaccination before July 2021 if we are lucky.
2. There is no proven treatment, and no prospect of widespread availability of treatment this year.
3. All cases were brought in from overseas, and community spread has been prevented by a mixture of aggressive testing, contact tracing and a total ban on inbound travel from overseas.

That means that any sport played before mid-2021 will be behind closed doors, and with any overseas team unlikely to be granted entry into the country.

This has strong implications for both Cricket Australia and the ICC.

The National Rugby League will be the prototype for mainstream sport to be played in Australia prior to vaccine availability - and it seems unlikely that the New Zealand Warriors will be able to participate, but it also seems unlikely that New South Wales teams will be allowed into Queensland to play against the Brisbane Broncos, Gold Coast Titans or North Queensland Cowboys.

This effectively means that the ICC World T20 in Australia has precisely zero chance of taking place later this year.

The Australia v India Test series is also almost certain to be postponed. The chances of the India team and its entourage being allowed into Australia are non-existent currently.

This will leave Cricket Australia out of pocket on TV rights for the India series, and gate receipts, and the ICC in the same situation vis a vis the ICC T20.

It is difficult to see why a bank would loan Cricket Australia to compensate, or how Cricket Australia would service such a loan in the future.

 

[Junaids]

Seems to be the case. Every sport in Australia is in a similar position. The football codes have also recently taken large pay cuts to ride out the pandemic period without going broke.

CA will be ok as they have a proven successful business model, an in demand product /brand with global appeal and decent administration. They will be able to get credit or a loan if needed to get through the period.

At present the virus situation in Australia looks promising. Numbers are low & dropping. The measures brought in by govt have worked. As an island with few points of entry we can shut down very effectively and are fortunate to have technology & quality public health centres to deal with the pandemic. So CA can reasonably project that they will have cricket to bring in revenue by late 2020/early 2021. With NZ also in good shape, there is talk of a "trans tasman bubble" being formed which would even allow international cricket.

There are two problems with this - although I largely agree with you.

New Zealand is aiming for virus eradication, whereas Australia is aiming at containment of spread.

This matters in the current situation in which:

1. There is no vaccine, and no prospect of widespread vaccination before July 2021 if we are lucky.
2. There is no proven treatment, and no prospect of widespread availability of treatment this year.
3. All cases were brought in from overseas, and community spread has been prevented by a mixture of aggressive testing, contact tracing and a total ban on inbound travel from overseas.

That means that any sport played before mid-2021 will be behind closed doors, and with any overseas team unlikely to be granted entry into the country.

This has strong implications for both Cricket Australia and the ICC.

The National Rugby League will be the prototype for mainstream sport to be played in Australia prior to vaccine availability - and it seems unlikely that the New Zealand Warriors will be able to participate, but it also seems unlikely that New South Wales teams will be allowed into Queensland to play against the Brisbane Broncos, Gold Coast Titans or North Queensland Cowboys.

This effectively means that the ICC World T20 in Australia has precisely zero chance of taking place later this year.

The Australia v India Test series is also almost certain to be postponed. The chances of the India team and its entourage being allowed into Australia are non-existent currently.

This will leave Cricket Australia out of pocket on TV rights for the India series, and gate receipts, and the ICC in the same situation vis a vis the ICC T20.

It is difficult to see why a bank would loan Cricket Australia to compensate, or how Cricket Australia would service such a loan in the future.

 

[wrongun]

There are two problems with this - although I largely agree with you.

New Zealand is aiming for virus eradication, whereas Australia is aiming at containment of spread.

This matters in the current situation in which:

1. There is no vaccine, and no prospect of widespread vaccination before July 2021 if we are lucky.
2. There is no proven treatment, and no prospect of widespread availability of treatment this year.
3. All cases were brought in from overseas, and community spread has been prevented by a mixture of aggressive testing, contact tracing and a total ban on inbound travel from overseas.

That means that any sport played before mid-2021 will be behind closed doors, and with any overseas team unlikely to be granted entry into the country.

This has strong implications for both Cricket Australia and the ICC.

The National Rugby League will be the prototype for mainstream sport to be played in Australia prior to vaccine availability - and it seems unlikely that the New Zealand Warriors will be able to participate, but it also seems unlikely that New South Wales teams will be allowed into Queensland to play against the Brisbane Broncos, Gold Coast Titans or North Queensland Cowboys.

This effectively means that the ICC World T20 in Australia has precisely zero chance of taking place later this year.

The Australia v India Test series is also almost certain to be postponed. The chances of the India team and its entourage being allowed into Australia are non-existent currently.

This will leave Cricket Australia out of pocket on TV rights for the India series, and gate receipts, and the ICC in the same situation vis a vis the ICC T20.

It is difficult to see why a bank would loan Cricket Australia to compensate, or how Cricket Australia would service such a loan in the future.

The NRL is going to be played in a single state- NSW, likely in a contained site, with QLD teams & NZ based in NZ for the duration. If circumstances permit (as is likely in a couple of months), the games may be expanded to other states.

 

[wrongun]

It is difficult to see why a bank would loan Cricket Australia to compensate, or how Cricket Australia would service such a loan in the future.

NRL & AFL have had no trouble getting loans, cricket won't either. If you can't see how CA can service it despite me plainly explaining CA's situation, then I guess you just can't understand it.

I didn't speak about the India series, I spoke about OZ NZ cricket at best, or BBL at worst. Both these will be up & running by late 2020/early 2021. If you can't see that then you have misread the situation in OZ & NZ.

 

[wrongun]

The NRL is going to be played in a single state- NSW, likely in a contained site, with QLD teams & NZ based in NZ for the duration. If circumstances permit (as is likely in a couple of months), the games may be expanded to other states.

EDIT- "based in NSW for the duration."

 

[Oxfordchamp]

Today we have learned that Cricket Australia has had to cut salaries by 80% because they are running through their cash reserves without generating any revenue.

Meanwhile the ECB faces the prospect of a summer without cricket.

And the BCCI has just indefinitely postponed the IPL.

We have three major cricket boards with far higher TV revenue than the others, but with much higher fixed costs too in terms of player salaries.

Are they running out of cash? They already award hosting rights for all ICC tournaments to themselves and lock everyone else out. Are they now going to resort to diverting even more ICC revenue to themselves to fuel their unsustainable spending?

BCCI gets roughly 3200 crores revenue per year from IPL and about 400 crores from ICC..So what ICC gives to BCCI is a fraction..

 

[Indiafan]

Maybe if you wish really, really hard, it might happen. Also I haven't seen a single source in this thread expect what you claimed happened

 

[Vastunna]

All claims and wishful thinking about BCCI and no sources and links. As usual moderation allows this tripe from [MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION] for clicks.

Imagine the plight of bankrupt boards like PCB CSA and others if a board like BCCI really goes kaput.

 

[Junaids]

NRL & AFL have had no trouble getting loans, cricket won't either. If you can't see how CA can service it despite me plainly explaining CA's situation, then I guess you just can't understand it.

I didn't speak about the India series, I spoke about OZ NZ cricket at best, or BBL at worst. Both these will be up & running by late 2020/early 2021. If you can't see that then you have misread the situation in OZ & NZ.

I respectfully disagree.

The CEO of the NRL has just quit because the league has no cash or likelihood of sourcing a loan, which is why they have set 28 May as a resumption date because they need the income from TV rights.

We have seen sports in Australia and overseas overspend on the assumption that TV revenue is guaranteed. And now they see that it isn’t, but they have huge fixed expenses to cover.

 

[wrongun]

I respectfully disagree.

The CEO of the NRL has just quit because the league has no cash or likelihood of sourcing a loan, which is why they have set 28 May as a resumption date because they need the income from TV rights.

We have seen sports in Australia and overseas overspend on the assumption that TV revenue is guaranteed. And now they see that it isn’t, but they have huge fixed expenses to cover.

NRL CEO Greenburg has been sitting without his contract being renewed all year amidst speculation he would be moved on. He just jumped instead of waiting to be fired. The Chairman Vlandys is handling negotiations without CEO Greenberg present anyway.

THE NRL already has a loan. As usual, you are wrong. The NRL is my favoruite sport, I follow it religiously. You pretty clearly just have a vague knowledge or are tryoing to research as you go. Any actual supporter knows these things.
https://www.weeklytimesnow.com.au/n...he-nrl/video/e1434e5a553a4696416e3c313396e6e0

Do you understand that loans aren't expected to be paid back in a single year? Or can be staged so as re-payments don't even begin for 2-5 years? You think CA is not going to get a loan? Their last broadcast deal was 1.2 billion Australian dollars, or 800 million USD. But you think their business is now worthless because of a few months shut down? It's embarrassing for you.

NZ is moving out of lockdown already in stages. Oz is reporting 20-40 new cases a day, trending down, amid one of the most widespread testing systems available & the PM's worst case scenarios are 6 months- meaning cricket season barely even started.

 

[wrongun]

So since the NRL has a loan, the chairman is still trying to get NRL up & runnning ASAP- since that is his job! To get the game running.

So CA as yet has no need of a loan- although we have established it would easily get one. It has 90 million currently in assets which can be fairly quickly liquidated (bank deposits & stocks) although it would prefer to wait for the markets to rise again.

Given other sports are restarting, in 6-8 weeks, it seems EXTREMELY likely that in 7-8 months lol that the BBL at least will go ahead as normal. International cricket next summer, even if with NZ seems possible - OZ & NZ often have free movement deals & if both are virus free in 6-7 months as seems 90% likely then cricket will be played.

So where is all your alarmism about CA running out of money based on? The fact India can't tour? So what, we have BBL & NZ to play. With no other game in town & NZ having a strong team, it will still make money.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/sp...s/news-story/98cf09b86518b89f07a64533ef93a39a

 

[MMHS]

Imagine if this is the state of CA or BCCI as aftermath of CV19...... what is likely to be the state of other Boards!!!!!

 

[Saj]

I worry for the financial health of all Boards during this time, not just the Big3.

It will be interesting to see how cricket comes out of this crisis.

 

[Junaids]

[MENTION=129939]wrongun[/MENTION]

To be precise,

1. Aussie Rules got a loan.....secured against Docklands Stadium.

2. The NRL has been turned down for a loan by all Australian lenders. They have the equivalent of a Payday loan on offer from Oakwell Sports Advisory in the UK, at an impossible interest rate, and they have not signed up to it yet because they hope that by restarting the season they can avoid its punitive terms.

As [MENTION=9]Saj[/MENTION] says, we can only wonder how the other Boards are doing. But the fixed expenses of the Big Three are why they are in such financial distress, because without TV revenue they can’t find their liabilities.

Cricket South Africa’s contract budget for the 20 contracted national players is around $1.5 million in total.

Cricket Australia pays its contracted international players $1 million per year each.

 

[Convict]

This is assuming you trust Kevin Roberts. Given he has already backed down once the state associations demanded to see the books...
My guess is that CA is concerned about Channel 7 and Foxtel claiming force majeure as an excuse to hold back payment (as Foxtel is rumoured to have already done with the A-League) and is hedging against the T20 World Cup and India test series being cancelled.

CA is a not for profit organisation and spends most of its revenue. Rather than keep money in the bank, I'd imagine that CA makes investments and the stock market has collapsed. Normally they'd sell these investment if they needed cash but they'd rather not sell on a huge loss.

There is also the very real possibility that Foxtel will go bankrupt. Foxtel will be desperately hoping that the NRL and AFL can complete some sort of season.

 

[Convict]

I respectfully disagree.

The CEO of the NRL has just quit because the league has no cash or likelihood of sourcing a loan, which is why they have set 28 May as a resumption date because they need the income from TV rights.

We have seen sports in Australia and overseas overspend on the assumption that TV revenue is guaranteed. And now they see that it isn’t, but they have huge fixed expenses to cover.

The NRL is not in trouble, individual clubs are in trouble because the pokie revenue from the leagues clubs has gone.

Worst case scenario - cricket still has 868 years of freehold title over prime real estate smack bang in the middle of the Perth CBD.

 

[Savak]

The PCB has decided against spending the Rs 4-6 billion they had planned to on renovating other cricket stadiums in the country for now.

 

[Junaids]

The NRL is not in trouble, individual clubs are in trouble because the pokie revenue from the leagues clubs has gone.

Worst case scenario - cricket still has 868 years of freehold title over prime real estate smack bang in the middle of the Perth CBD.

I know that we have fought in the past, but I thought your two posts here were terrific.

I think that the NRL is worse placed than the AFL, which strikes me as a much better run commodity. (But I live in NRL-land, so my understanding of AFL is much sketchier than of NRL).

I look at my own experience and see why sports are struggling everywhere. As a doctor I have assumed that my income is absolutely safe, and my spending is predicated upon that. And I am probably in a tiny minority being pretty safe with that.

The NRL has made some foolish decisions. They actually had a future fund - and they spent it. They made the insane decision to lobby the NSW Government to demolish the Sydney Football Stadium next to the SCG and to largely fund its replacement. But they don't own it - the SCG Trust does - and the NRL has now seen one of its two main stadia demolished and can't afford its share of the construction to replace it.

You are right that 50% of NRL money is distributed to the clubs. But it goes out from the NRL to the clubs as soon as it arrives from Fox Sports TV, and that is a major worry, because that is precisely the financial model of the BCCI.

I used to work in Britain's National Health Service, where the pension liability is unfunded and new contributors pay each week for what retired staff are disbursed. Now I work in the equivalent Queensland and New South Wales services where the money is invested, which of course carries risks too but not to anything like the same degree.

The NRL loan offer from Oakwell Sports Advisory reportedly involves absolutely punitive repayment arrangements which would not be serviceable. That's why an obscure British lender is willing to offer a loan that no Australian lender will touch with a bargepole, and it's also why the NRL is contemplating producing a chopped-down NSWRL series rather than signing up for that loan.

Cricket is in a very vulnerable situation. Two of the Big Three - Australia and England - have boards which are entirely reliant upon TV revenue from the same source as the NRL - Rupert Murdoch's Pay-TV empire. The third member of the Big Three - the BCCI - is by far the richest, but spends so extravagantly that it is reliant upon a disproportionate share of ICC revenue.....and now each Full Member eyes that funding relatively more as there is no prospect of an Indian tour to sell TV rights.

Cricket Australia has not just sold its Australian rights for sold its rights for $200 million per year, it also has sold them for a large sum in the UK to BT Sport, as well as anticipating huge revenue from the Indian tour due in December 2020 and the anticipated deal with Sony.

I fear that the only cricket this summer will be Sheffield Shield and possibly a Big bash without international players. That's going to really hurt Cricket Australia.

 

[wrongun]

Australia has had only 13 cases in the last 24 hours. Footy seasons are going ahead on May 28th.

The idea there won't be BBL by summer is laughable.

 

[Junaids]

Australia has had only 13 cases in the last 24 hours. Footy seasons are going ahead on May 28th.

The idea there won't be BBL by summer is laughable.

No offence, but you are completely misunderstanding how a Pandemic works. Minimal cases is a reason to stay closed, not to open up!

Of course Australia has that few cases. But still the bottom line remains:

1. This is a novel virus from which no-one has any immunity.
2. You can only acquire immunity by catching it, or from being vaccinated when a vaccine arrives....which won't be before mid-2021.
3. Most people under 50 don't get severe symptoms - they get cold-like symptoms or nothing. But they can become asymptomatic carriers.....which means that as soon as you stop the lockdown, their kids give it to other kids at school (who are asymptomatic), who give it to parents (who are also likely to be asymptomatic) who pass it on at work or in the supermarket.....and suddenly you have a far bigger second wave, just like Singapore.

This means two things.

1. You can't open up your borders until a vaccine arrives. (You possibly can if you are the UK or USA and everyone has been exposed already. But if you are Australia or New Zealand, you can't even open your borders up to people from New South Wales, let alone India).

2. You need to maintain distancing until the vaccine arrives because otherwise the asymptomatic carriers in your own community spread the virus and you end up becoming London or Milan. That's why opening up the beaches and schools is such a bad idea at this stage.

I repeat: the fact that so few Australians have been exposed is actually a reason to stay locked down, not a reason to open up. Probably 45% of British people have been exposed to this virus already. Probably 1% of Australians have.

Rugby League wants to reopen because they can't afford to take the British loan with its punitive conditions. But there are huge risks incurred in a place which has avoided mass infection suddenly allowing more normal community interactions. And as I wrote, young athletes are at fairly high risk because they will mainly be asymptomatic carriers and because if they are camped away from home for several months they will very quickly turn to Tinder to scratch their itches, and suddenly we will be London or Milan or New York.

 

[Convict]

No offence, but you are completely misunderstanding how a Pandemic works. Minimal cases is a reason to stay closed, not to open up!

Of course Australia has that few cases. But still the bottom line remains:

1. This is a novel virus from which no-one has any immunity.
2. You can only acquire immunity by catching it, or from being vaccinated when a vaccine arrives....which won't be before mid-2021.
3. Most people under 50 don't get severe symptoms - they get cold-like symptoms or nothing. But they can become asymptomatic carriers.....which means that as soon as you stop the lockdown, their kids give it to other kids at school (who are asymptomatic), who give it to parents (who are also likely to be asymptomatic) who pass it on at work or in the supermarket.....and suddenly you have a far bigger second wave, just like Singapore.

This means two things.

1. You can't open up your borders until a vaccine arrives. (You possibly can if you are the UK or USA and everyone has been exposed already. But if you are Australia or New Zealand, you can't even open your borders up to people from New South Wales, let alone India).

2. You need to maintain distancing until the vaccine arrives because otherwise the asymptomatic carriers in your own community spread the virus and you end up becoming London or Milan. That's why opening up the beaches and schools is such a bad idea at this stage.

I repeat: the fact that so few Australians have been exposed is actually a reason to stay locked down, not a reason to open up. Probably 45% of British people have been exposed to this virus already. Probably 1% of Australians have.

Rugby League wants to reopen because they can't afford to take the British loan with its punitive conditions. But there are huge risks incurred in a place which has avoided mass infection suddenly allowing more normal community interactions. And as I wrote, young athletes are at fairly high risk because they will mainly be asymptomatic carriers and because if they are camped away from home for several months they will very quickly turn to Tinder to scratch their itches, and suddenly we will be London or Milan or New York.

What will happen is that an Australia v New Zealand summer will be organised with profits shared between both boards.

CA might try hyping up some SOO NSW v VIC etc with all the international players playing.

 

[Junaids]

Just to expand on my previous point.

Coronavirus has a very high level of transmissibility combined with a relatively low mortality rate - the precise opposite of Ebola.

That means that low case numbers are a not a ticket out of lockdown and towards resumed sport - the ticket out of high levels of population immunity due to either a vaccine or prior infection.

Herd immunity requires 60-65% of the population to have been vaccinated or to have already had the virus.

If the UK has had 30-45% of the population infected, they are halfway to reaching herd immunity.

If Australia has had 1% of the population infected they are not even 1/60 of the way towards herd immunity.

In the absence of a vaccine, low case numbers are an obstacle to returning, not an argument for it.

 

[Junaids]

What will happen is that an Australia v New Zealand summer will be organised with profits shared between both boards.

CA might try hyping up some SOO NSW v VIC etc with all the international players playing.

Unlikely, for the same reason.

NZ is aiming at eradication and closed borders until a vaccine arrives.

Australia is aiming at slowed spread until a vaccine arrives (although we are doing as well as NZ is).

New Zealand won’t form a Tasman bubble with an Australia that does not share that eradication goal. It undermines their entire strategy. The Tasman bubble is pretty much an Australian concept, not a Kiwi one.

 

[Junaids]

Cricket Australia has in the last hour announced that if the India tour and World T20 are cancelled they face losses “in the hundreds of millions of dollars”.

They have just floated the idea of India arriving two weeks earlier than usual (to be quarantined) and then playing 5 Tests instead of 4, behind closed doors.

Josh Hazelwood has already suggested that Adelaide should be the venue.

 

[wrongun]

What will happen is that an Australia v New Zealand summer will be organised with profits shared between both boards.

CA might try hyping up some SOO NSW v VIC etc with all the international players playing.

Tried to tell him this 3 times but perhaps he'll listen to it coming from you.

 

[wrongun]

[MENTION=132916]Junaids[/MENTION]

I'll just say sport in Australia is restarting in May- 5 months BEFORE the cricket season even starts...

Every sport in Oz that needed one got a loan...

And cricket is likely to restart in the Trans-Tasman bubble..

0 from 3 bro...

https://www.smh.com.au/sport/cricket/trans-tasman-cricket-chiefs-plan-to-seize-on-travel-bubble-to-restart-game-20200512-p54sbh.html

 

[chazam]

Unlikely, for the same reason.

NZ is aiming at eradication and closed borders until a vaccine arrives.

Australia is aiming at slowed spread until a vaccine arrives (although we are doing as well as NZ is).

New Zealand won’t form a Tasman bubble with an Australia that does not share that eradication goal. It undermines their entire strategy. The Tasman bubble is pretty much an Australian concept, not a Kiwi one.

You know it was suggested by Jacinda Arden not Aussies. Thats a verifiable fact if you had listened to her.
She attended the National Cabinet of Australia and suggested it during that because Trans-Tasman bubble will help NZ more than Australia.

 

[chazam]

Today we have learned that Cricket Australia has had to cut salaries by 80% because they are running through their cash reserves without generating any revenue.

Meanwhile the ECB faces the prospect of a summer without cricket.

And the BCCI has just indefinitely postponed the IPL.

We have three major cricket boards with far higher TV revenue than the others, but with much higher fixed costs too in terms of player salaries.

Are they running out of cash? They already award hosting rights for all ICC tournaments to themselves and lock everyone else out. Are they now going to resort to diverting even more ICC revenue to themselves to fuel their unsustainable spending?

Locking out will definitely happen you are correct there. India, ECB and Australia will first and foremost prioritize series among themselves to generate lost revenue and ICC cannot do anything. In fact i think ICC will tag along as long as they also make some bucks. Other boards will be left to pick up scraps. Pakistan is a good option for ECB and Australia and they will look to collaborate with them as well. Except Major revenue source India will not play but still i think Pakistan will be in a better situation then rest of the boards. Unless India pulls a card to ECB and Australia to not play with Pakistan which can happen in current situation as well.