- Joined
- Oct 2, 2004
- Runs
- 217,450
More than 60 per cent of leading players would consider turning their back on international cricket to play solely in domestic franchise leagues according to recent survey data.
And more than 80 per cent want specific windows for internationals as the congested global cricket schedule stretches towards breaking point.
The boss of the global player union – FICA – says bilateral cricket is likely to be a casualty as he revealed a conference of top players will be held this year with the goal of finding workable solutions to fix the fixturing mess.
In the week that Australian representative quartet Marcus Stoinis, Ashton Agar, Andrew Tye and Jason Behrendorff bypassed state contracts with Western Australia in order to become freelancers on the global white-ball circuit, FICA chief Tom Moffat said that data confirmed players were increasingly willing to decline central deals to chance their arm as sole traders.
While FICA is still compiling the findings of its global player survey from earlier this year, Moffat told this masthead that 61 per cent of players would contemplate rejecting a national contract to play solely in domestic leagues, up from 49 per cent from 2022.
“There is now a global market for players and it’s not hard to understand why they would take the opportunities presented to them,” Moffat said.
“Structural solutions are also important and the same national governing bodies who schedule international cricket also own and schedule most of the domestic leagues and want the best international players to come and play in theirs. It makes sense to coordinate scheduling to minimise overlap, and we know that 84 per cent of players now want to see global scheduling windows, another all time high.”
Moffat also called for greater cooperation when it came to scheduling, saying that 84 per cent of players polled now wanted clear space in the calendar for both domestic leagues and international cricket.
“We will be holding our first player led global scheduling symposium later this year. We think we have a good understanding of many of the issues, and led by the players, we’re going to go a layer deeper on what solutions could look like, including looking closely at the numbers. The players are at the coal face and collectively have as much interest as any stakeholder in the global game being sustainably successful,” he said.
“Solutions will require compromise from everyone and we would encourage administrators around the world to work with players collectively in their own countries, and at global level, on them. Realistically the future looks likely to be more focussed on domestic leagues and ICC events, with bilateral international cricket increasingly squeezed. We know players want to play in cricket that has meaning, and like employees in any other industry, they are going to gravitate towards where they are looked after best.”
The survey had 330 respondents – mostly international cricketers – from across 16 countries.
The growing tension between franchise leagues and internationals was laid bare earlier this year when South Africa sent what was akin to a third-choice squad to New Zealand after Cricket South Africa prioritised its stars’ participation in the SA20 competition.
The West Indies also sent a weakened squad to Australia, although the tourists miraculously drew the series on the back of Shamar Joseph’s heroics at the Gabba.
Moffat said something would soon have to give, pointing the finger at shortcomings in management from some nations.
“Most of the game’s wealth is currently shared between the biggest few countries who play against each other in international cricket three times more than everyone else. We might see a similar situation if a couple of big clubs had the reigns on AFL scheduling as opposed to the AFL, which is how it works in cricket. The revenue gap, and frankly sometimes average management, has left many of the other countries struggling to retain and put their best teams on the park in international cricket. Evening up scheduling and revenue distribution, and introducing minimum payment levels, would be one way to address this,” Moffat said.
“Structural solutions are also important and the same national governing bodies who schedule international cricket also own and schedule most of the domestic leagues and want the best international players to come and play in theirs.”
The survey data comes against the backdrop of Indian Premier League expansion. The competition runs for more than two months this year and there is speculation in cricket circles that organisers have long-term aspirations of a league more like the NBA, running for half the year if not more.
Indian players do not fall under the auspices of FICA, and the powerhouse nation has not been immune to tension between first-class cricket and franchise leagues after star pair Ishan Kishan and Shreyas Iyer pulled out of Ranji Trophy matches ahead of the IPL.
And more than 80 per cent want specific windows for internationals as the congested global cricket schedule stretches towards breaking point.
The boss of the global player union – FICA – says bilateral cricket is likely to be a casualty as he revealed a conference of top players will be held this year with the goal of finding workable solutions to fix the fixturing mess.
In the week that Australian representative quartet Marcus Stoinis, Ashton Agar, Andrew Tye and Jason Behrendorff bypassed state contracts with Western Australia in order to become freelancers on the global white-ball circuit, FICA chief Tom Moffat said that data confirmed players were increasingly willing to decline central deals to chance their arm as sole traders.
While FICA is still compiling the findings of its global player survey from earlier this year, Moffat told this masthead that 61 per cent of players would contemplate rejecting a national contract to play solely in domestic leagues, up from 49 per cent from 2022.
“There is now a global market for players and it’s not hard to understand why they would take the opportunities presented to them,” Moffat said.
“Structural solutions are also important and the same national governing bodies who schedule international cricket also own and schedule most of the domestic leagues and want the best international players to come and play in theirs. It makes sense to coordinate scheduling to minimise overlap, and we know that 84 per cent of players now want to see global scheduling windows, another all time high.”
Moffat also called for greater cooperation when it came to scheduling, saying that 84 per cent of players polled now wanted clear space in the calendar for both domestic leagues and international cricket.
“We will be holding our first player led global scheduling symposium later this year. We think we have a good understanding of many of the issues, and led by the players, we’re going to go a layer deeper on what solutions could look like, including looking closely at the numbers. The players are at the coal face and collectively have as much interest as any stakeholder in the global game being sustainably successful,” he said.
“Solutions will require compromise from everyone and we would encourage administrators around the world to work with players collectively in their own countries, and at global level, on them. Realistically the future looks likely to be more focussed on domestic leagues and ICC events, with bilateral international cricket increasingly squeezed. We know players want to play in cricket that has meaning, and like employees in any other industry, they are going to gravitate towards where they are looked after best.”
The survey had 330 respondents – mostly international cricketers – from across 16 countries.
The growing tension between franchise leagues and internationals was laid bare earlier this year when South Africa sent what was akin to a third-choice squad to New Zealand after Cricket South Africa prioritised its stars’ participation in the SA20 competition.
The West Indies also sent a weakened squad to Australia, although the tourists miraculously drew the series on the back of Shamar Joseph’s heroics at the Gabba.
Moffat said something would soon have to give, pointing the finger at shortcomings in management from some nations.
“Most of the game’s wealth is currently shared between the biggest few countries who play against each other in international cricket three times more than everyone else. We might see a similar situation if a couple of big clubs had the reigns on AFL scheduling as opposed to the AFL, which is how it works in cricket. The revenue gap, and frankly sometimes average management, has left many of the other countries struggling to retain and put their best teams on the park in international cricket. Evening up scheduling and revenue distribution, and introducing minimum payment levels, would be one way to address this,” Moffat said.
“Structural solutions are also important and the same national governing bodies who schedule international cricket also own and schedule most of the domestic leagues and want the best international players to come and play in theirs.”
The survey data comes against the backdrop of Indian Premier League expansion. The competition runs for more than two months this year and there is speculation in cricket circles that organisers have long-term aspirations of a league more like the NBA, running for half the year if not more.
Indian players do not fall under the auspices of FICA, and the powerhouse nation has not been immune to tension between first-class cricket and franchise leagues after star pair Ishan Kishan and Shreyas Iyer pulled out of Ranji Trophy matches ahead of the IPL.
