The Declining (Near Zero) Attendances At Domestic Games Around the World

[PokerAce]

We should play domestic cricket somewhere people actually want to watch it - The Drum (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

This is an article by Matthew Bevan who bemoans the lack of attendance at Sheffield Shield games, and how the stadiums are practically empty.

The same can be said of Ranji games, and this despite the fact that all Ranji matches are FREE to attend.

I suppose England would perhaps be the only place where they get decent crowd for County games. In general though it seems there are few takers for domestic cricket in the rest of the world.

Bevan suggests in his article that it is better to take the games around to places where the people will watch, rather than play in an empty stadium. I don't think that is that practical a solution. I do think that something that could help is an influx of foreigners perhaps. This is the only reason why IPL is such a big thing, and Syed Mushtaq Ali Trophy a competition no one has heard of.

If all domestic sides in every domestic league are required to feature 2 players from another country, perhpas there would be more interest in the domestic matches for the general public. In addition to this players would get to play in conditions that are new to them, preferrably at an early age, and it could do wonders for their development.

However in general the decline in attendances around the world in domestic games, down to the point where the stadiums are empty is alarming.

 

[IceAgeComing]

I suppose England would perhaps be the only place where they get decent crowd for County games

...when? Bar maybe Roses games (this is a guess) Championship matches are ghost towns: you'll get a few hundred regularly but that's about it. There are only big crowds for the T20 games really: even the List A competition which had big crowds are usually empty, and the One Day Cup final is half-full at best now.

The issue with your solution is that there simply aren't enough players for that to be tenable. Sure it might help the Championship but we already have one overseas player a year and that doesn't increase crowds. Some counties go for the "decent player who isn't international standard" thing like Sussex and Magoffin and although he's a good bowler he's not exactly a crowd puller: while having Kane Williamson last year and Glenn Maxwell this year hasn't exactly been a boon for Yorkshire. But the Southern Hemisphere competitions would be a mess: you have six Australian sides, eight (?) South African teams, six New Zealand teams, six (?) teams in the Windies, around 25 Ranji Trophy sides (ignoring Zonal teams at the like) and a lot of First Class teams in Pakistan (don't know how many: I was thinking of building an "accurate domestic cometititons" mod for Cricket Coach but I gave up when I tried to look up Pakistan's domestic structure since I got very confused) and so on. In order to give each of them two international players you'd be digging the bottom of the barrel and you'd end up with Rob Key and the like forming the bulk of the international players and he's not someone who's going to be a crowd puller, despite being a perfectly good batsman. Also; I'd imagine that international players would probably ask for the sort of wages that would discourage them from being picked: which isn't a problem domestically because of Central Contracts.

I have no solution to Domestic Cricket: I think its because almost all Cricket fans and many of the administrators see Domestic Cricket as nothing more than a way to get players to play for the national side. If I may compare it to Baseball: International Cricket is the Major Leagues while the First Class Competitions are like the Minor Leagues. That perception needs a great deal of work to change, and I honestly can't think of a way to do it. One other factor is that players play for lots of domestic teams when you include franchise cricket; and I can think of no other sport like that.

 

[PokerAce]

I agree with you that Foreign players every team, every domestic side is somewhat impractical. However a few foreign players per round, being drafted into some sides could still help issue.

I will take the example of Ranji Trophy. Each round there are 9(?) games. Pick say two of them, and thats 4 teams. For that round each of the 4 teams will have 2 foreigners each, along with the top Indian players if any, who play for those sides. No missing of Ranji game that round.

Then atleast 2 of the 9 games that round should have a lot more domestic interest.

Or The way to do this properly could be that assign some foreigners to each nation. Like say these 6 players are assigned to Ranji, these 6 to County (I know they already have foreigners, but still), these six to Sheffield Shield, etc. Or 4 players.

Now till those 4 or 6 or whatever players are available to play, they will be assigned to play for sides in the domestic championship randomly, for each matchday. So say if they played one round in Hyderabad vs Bengal, for Hyderabad, then the next round they could be drafted into Karnataka to take on Orissa, and so on. That way at least one match (3 if 6 foreign players going by 2 per team, or 2 if 4 foreign players), will get more interest.

Its not much, but Domestic cricket is in a poor state and every little bit could help.

 

[Aravind.]

We should play domestic cricket somewhere people actually want to watch it - The Drum (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

This is an article by Matthew Bevan who bemoans the lack of attendance at Sheffield Shield games, and how the stadiums are practically empty.

The same can be said of Ranji games, and this despite the fact that all Ranji matches are FREE to attend.

I suppose England would perhaps be the only place where they get decent crowd for County games. In general though it seems there are few takers for domestic cricket in the rest of the world.

Bevan suggests in his article that it is better to take the games around to places where the people will watch, rather than play in an empty stadium. I don't think that is that practical a solution. I do think that something that could help is an influx of foreigners perhaps. This is the only reason why IPL is such a big thing, and Syed Mushtaq Ali Trophy a competition no one has heard of.

If all domestic sides in every domestic league are required to feature 2 players from another country, perhpas there would be more interest in the domestic matches for the general public. In addition to this players would get to play in conditions that are new to them, preferrably at an early age, and it could do wonders for their development.

However in general the decline in attendances around the world in domestic games, down to the point where the stadiums are empty is alarming.

I have watched one of the Ranji Trophy game between Karnataka vs Baroda at Srikantadatta Narasimha Raja Wadeyar Stadium in Mysore along with 20,000 people, were no international matches are not being played due to seating capacity of only 20,000. There are many stadiums like this in India & locals in that rural region are not getting an opportunity to watch live International/IPL cricket, so they came in large numbers to see the stars such as Robin Uthappa, Manish Pandy, Vinay Kumar & Pathan Brothers etc. So the idea of moving Ranji Trophy cricket from metros to rural area stadiums will be a massive hit & i have experienced it.

 

[CerealKiller]

I was thinking of building an "accurate domestic cometititons" mod for Cricket Coach but I gave up when I tried to look up Pakistan's domestic structure since I got very confused

I'm willing to help you with that if you want.

 

[IceAgeComing]

Now till those 4 or 6 or whatever players are available to play, they will be assigned to play for sides in the domestic championship randomly, for each matchday. So say if they played one round in Hyderabad vs Bengal, for Hyderabad, then the next round they could be drafted into Karnataka to take on Orissa, and so on. That way at least one match (3 if 6 foreign players going by 2 per team, or 2 if 4 foreign players), will get more interest.

I think this is a very bad idea: and I'll quickly explain why. When I support a sports team, I think that everyone in that team should be in it together and the only reason they ought to miss games would be through international selection, or injuries or family emergencies and the like. Having some randomer play for my team one week and against it the other would hurt things, that guy wouldn't particularly care how he played since he wasn't with a team for a whole season but for one game and then off elsewhere for the rest of the year. It would turn domestic cricket into the KP show or whoever it would be and when h went away then it would die out again. One problem with Domestic Cricket and especially franchise Cricket is the fact that you have lots of "mercenaries" who skip around between lots of teams never really playing for one for a prolonged period, which is the opposite of almost every other sport I can think of.

The only way you can save something like that is by the slog of grass-roots work: there isn't any easy solution to the development of Domestic Cricket. One thing that I think England has right (and is going to lose soon) is that the Counties still play T20 cricket so they have an independent revenue stream that they can use to subsidise the other side of their operations: while with other places the big T20 competition uses franchises and the other domestic teams are almost wholly reliant on their national boards for support.

I'm willing to help you with that if you want.

I'll let you know if I need a hand: I'm waiting for the release of the next version since apparently that's before the end of the year and it'd be pointless . Its really the one missing link I have; I'm pretty sure I get how Ranji works now (although they'll probably end up changing it like apparently they like to do) and the other ones are all very simple and comparatively easy to get information on. My plan is to push out a "realistic" version and a very different version where I design domestic structures for associate teams and make everything in the way I think they should be.

 

[Markkkkk]

Its really the one missing link I have; I'm pretty sure I get how Ranji works now (although they'll probably end up changing it like apparently they like to do) and the other ones are all very simple and comparatively easy to get information on.

Except for the fact you said SA have 8 franchise teams

 

[IceAgeComing]

Except for the fact you said SA have 8 franchise teams

The question mark after my post should have made it clear that I was making a guess, six was the other thing I thought it could have been. The actual structure of the top level of South African domestic Cricket is simple - sure it gets more complex as you go down but we're talking about Cricket Coach, its a simplistic game!

 

[Ohm]

Domestic cricket could get shiner only if the International schedule is shortened. I think the International cricket is being over played around the globe and also it is over watched by the audience. Domestic cricket needs to be given its value back. In earlier days of cricket, domestic competitions used to be more interesting, used to be played more and the star players had to do much more with their domestic sides due to the lack of International activity. Now days, it's just an excess which has made it unwatchable and boring. This is why World Cup is not something totally a hot thing as it should be in a world wide standard. You get to see 50 overs world cup every 4 years and it's fine. But when there is more than enough International cricket has been played around, why you need to have 6 T20 world cups in 9 years? Also the champions trophy is much as the same compared to world cup since all the test playing nations get to participate, and after the decision of limiting participation of associate nations the actual world cup would be even rubbish.

The idea of having foreign players per domestic sides is okayish. People would actually love to watch domestic thing if their favorite home stars show regular participation. IPL is 20 overs format and all the Indian national team players get to play in it. I'd say that's something make IPL popular in India, and rather I'd not believe the idea that only the presence of foreign players make it a watchable thing. If you compare the IPL/CPL with BBL/Natwest T20, there are couple of things to point out regarding this attendance issue. BCCI and West Indies cricket board allow their national players to participate throughout the whole competition, until it ends, by dropping to play International series. On other hand, Australia and England's national team players are busier with the national duties during the summer when these T20 leagues are played. All four leagues have foreign players included per each side but still IPL/CPL would beat BBL and Natwest T20 audience wise. By the way, BBL can afford more of foreign star players than West Indies as players choose to earn some experience in Aussie conditions. Still CPL produce more attendance per match than BBL does. So basically having the lack of home star players in a domestic league bar it from being populated in it's own country. Actually the idea of foreign players make it popular world wide or in the countries beside the competition is located.

In modern cricket International cricket has been played more and more. That really don't give national players enough time or energy to appear for their domestic sides. Reducing International activity would cause a very little chance for people of watching their favorite national team players playing. Since such short activity would rise importance of International cricket, that would definitely result in squad rotations time after time. So people would just have to go and book tickets of a domestic match if they wish to see their favorite players playing the actual cricket. Having very few International breaks could even produce high quality competition for the national teams as players and team management have to get together a little time and have to sort out with the team chemistry.

 

[IceAgeComing]

The International Calendar is a little off-topic but I disagree with you partially: the Big 3 certainly play more than enough International Cricket but the smaller teams don't play anywhere near as much. I'm personally fire the Champions Trophy into the sun: retain the World Cup in its current cycle, have the World T20 be on a four year cycle starting from 2018 and then put Cricket into the Olympics - it makes a more balanced international schedule with three competitions that everyone would want to win.

Getting back to domestic cricket: it goes far beyond franchise cricket IMO; I'd argue that has hurt traditional domestic Cricket in lots of countries. T20 is the big money-spinner, and I'd imagine that when Australia moved to the BBL format the traditional State teams lost a fair amount of revenue. That's my big concern and the reason that I'm opposed to Franchises in England: it'll hurt all of the counties especially the smaller ones and make them a lot more reliant on the ECB for their funding: and that's only going to hurt the County game in the other two forms which is going to not help LO and FC cricket. There's also the whole "mercenary" thing which doesn't help: in other sports players generally will stick with teams for a few years at a time, which in Cricket you'll have players that'll play for four or five domestic teams over the course of a year sometimes leaving one to play for another, and that means that they aren't going to be seen as loyal by fans. Cricket will always be different to other sports in that it you have two clear "seasons" and no real off-season, but if you could encourage players to stick to one team per season (two per year), then that might do something to help slightly...

Also the champions trophy is much as the same compared to world cup since all the test playing nations get to participate

tell that to Zimbabwe and the West Indies

 

[PokerAce]

I personally don't think the CT takes that much of a space on the calender. Its barely a 3 week tournament, and is not held in a year that any other big tournament is held. So that leaves plenty of room for domestic cricket. I would like CT to be made even more exclusive, perhaps nothing more than a top 5 or 6 teams playing in it. It would give some much required meaning to the ODI Points table.

 

[cricket_icon]

good good good post! Good thread too.

I've witnessed a lot of county cricket and I can tell you, without any doubt, attendances are poor...at best. It's always troubled me. Empty stands, no atmosphere, no care for the result. If a cricket match is played and no one is there to witness it, does it matter? lol

But it is a serious problem, one which was supposed to be fixed, or at least helped by t20 cricket, where t20 would draw in new fans, who would then convert to the longer forms of the game. In recent years, the t20 tournament has fallen flat and...well...there aren't many new fans. Having said that, test cricket in England and in Australia, is still very strong, often playing in front of big crowds. What has alarmed me the most, is the almost complete lack of crowds for test matches in the Windies, Pakistan (now UAE), India and often New Zealand. At times, I have witnessed good crowds in SA but not always. If these countries can not attract fans to the domestic game in its longer form, they will not turn out for test matches either. I understand, a country like Pakistan is facing unique political issues within cricket and India has become a nation which devours t20 cricket and nothing else. The two biggest markets, for various reasons, can not and will not have a sustained interest in long form domestic cricket.

It baffles me, that here in England, on home turf, where the domestic game is so heavily funded, especially with big Sky dollars and various stadium revamps, there's hardly a crowd of 100 people. I understand that people can not attend for all 5 days but surely one of the days, possibly the last day of a fun and exciting match but no, there's nothing and no one. Does the game require more promotion? Where are all the millions of pounds disappearing to? Does there need to be a revamp at international contracts and overseas players? After all, we know the likes of Imran, Viv, Roberts and so on got attendances up in the 70s and 80s. Would that work in a modern, very busy cricket calendar?

or, is it too late? Is domestic cricket at the end of its lifespan in the long format? i think it may be. It is now a place to hone skills, not to entertain.

 

[War]

The International Calendar is a little off-topic but I disagree with you partially: the Big 3 certainly play more than enough International Cricket but the smaller teams don't play anywhere near as much. I'm personally fire the Champions Trophy into the sun: retain the World Cup in its current cycle, have the World T20 be on a four year cycle starting from 2018 and then put Cricket into the Olympics - it makes a more balanced international schedule with three competitions that everyone would want to win.

Getting back to domestic cricket: it goes far beyond franchise cricket IMO; I'd argue that has hurt traditional domestic Cricket in lots of countries. T20 is the big money-spinner, and I'd imagine that when Australia moved to the BBL format the traditional State teams lost a fair amount of revenue. That's my big concern and the reason that I'm opposed to Franchises in England: it'll hurt all of the counties especially the smaller ones and make them a lot more reliant on the ECB for their funding: and that's only going to hurt the County game in the other two forms which is going to not help LO and FC cricket. There's also the whole "mercenary" thing which doesn't help: in other sports players generally will stick with teams for a few years at a time, which in Cricket you'll have players that'll play for four or five domestic teams over the course of a year sometimes leaving one to play for another, and that means that they aren't going to be seen as loyal by fans. Cricket will always be different to other sports in that it you have two clear "seasons" and no real off-season, but if you could encourage players to stick to one team per season (two per year), then that might do something to help slightly...



tell that to Zimbabwe and the West Indies

Reckon you have slammed the nail on its head with this one.

 

[PokerAce]

If these countries can not attract fans to the domestic game in its longer form, they will not turn out for test matches either. I understand, a country like Pakistan is facing unique political issues within cricket and India has become a nation which devours t20 cricket and nothing else. The two biggest markets, for various reasons, can not and will not have a sustained interest in long form domestic cricket.

You could not be more wrong. India loves cricket (all forms) period. There is a huge fan following for tests in India, much more than T20 can ever hope to achieve. I don;t know how people get the IPL impression, but the truth in India is that most of the people don't even know who is playing who on that day in the IPL. All they know is that a game is on, and in all likelihood some sixes are being hit.

Also the problem with T20 is that when it was new it was a fresh thing and people scoring at runs per over was deemed exciting. So the crowds went in. However now T20 has been around for a while and losing its charm. Scoring 8 runs per over was new and exciting at one point but now its become par for the course and thus nothing to write home about. Team X scored 180 in 20 overs - when T20 first came around, that was mind boggling, now people go "oh ... so what else is new".

So T20 exists for one reason and one reason only - Money. Both for the administrators and the players. I support T20 domestic leagues only because it helps cricketers earn big bucks, even the average ones. Players earning money is good. However as cricketing value goes T20 has little to offer. Int'l T20 cricket is an abomination.

 

[cricket_icon]

You could not be more wrong. India loves cricket (all forms) period. There is a huge fan following for tests in India, much more than T20 can ever hope to achieve. I don;t know how people get the IPL impression, but the truth in India is that most of the people don't even know who is playing who on that day in the IPL. All they know is that a game is on, and in all likelihood some sixes are being hit.

Also the problem with T20 is that when it was new it was a fresh thing and people scoring at runs per over was deemed exciting. So the crowds went in. However now T20 has been around for a while and losing its charm. Scoring 8 runs per over was new and exciting at one point but now its become par for the course and thus nothing to write home about. Team X scored 180 in 20 overs - when T20 first came around, that was mind boggling, now people go "oh ... so what else is new".

So T20 exists for one reason and one reason only - Money. Both for the administrators and the players. I support T20 domestic leagues only because it helps cricketers earn big bucks, even the average ones. Players earning money is good. However as cricketing value goes T20 has little to offer. Int'l T20 cricket is an abomination.

Every time I've seen an IPL game or spoken to Indian cricket fans, they pretty much know what is going on and the stadiums are packed.

Attendances for first class cricket all overt he world are dropping and from pics and videos I've sen of various matches, they are largely played in front of empty stands. I know, you'll probably post something about 20000 fans at some stadium at one time but they are the odd occurrence, not the rule. Often as a result of free ticket giveaways.

Now I'm sure most Indians love watching all formats of the game on their TV sets, as they do in Pakistan or Sri Lanka or the Windies but let's be honest, during the longer forms of the game, stadiums sit empty for the most part.