The Death of County Cricket?

County cricket will not survive if members are taken for granted

Cost of supporters asking for their subs back could be as much as £15m, which would send clubs to the wall

NICK HOULT

Daily Telegraph CHIEF CRICKET CORRESPONDENT

For years county members have been taken for granted. Clubs chase Friday night Twenty20 crowds because they spend money on food and beer.

Meanwhile, the county member pays his or her subs in the cold winter months, often brings their own food and drink to matches (normally championship games) does not shell out for Twenty20 tickets or spend a lot of money in the ground. Because they can vote at AGMs they have the power to make life awkward for ambitious chief executives eying bigger jobs and chairmen responsible for the bottom line.

It is no secret that the majority were angrily opposed to the Hundred, and bemoaned their clubs selling out to the ECB and falling in line behind the competition.

A sign of how they have been a marginalised and forgotten is that it is very difficult to ascertain the number of county members. It is estimated there are around 80,000 and at the end of this summer there should be a central audit to understand this important root of support because they are needed more than ever before. The county game is in dire financial trouble.

The ECB’s emergency £61m bailout runs out in July. They are currently meeting each county and evaluating their books to decide what future funding they need to survive.

But one area that is causing deep worry is whether members will ask for a refund if there is no cricket. One county chief executive estimated the loss could be between £10-15m across the county game if that happens. In this crisis English cricket has been reminded of its most important "stakeholder", the loyal county fan. It could not come sooner given the rush to embrace new audiences. The Hundred represents progress and its success is central to cricket's growth ambitions but the sport has to emerge from this with a greater understanding of those fans it already serves and make them feel a little bit more wanted.

Luckily, many county chief executives believe their members will not ask for a refund. They have been buoyed by messages of support. Surrey have expanded their membership this summer to 13,000 and held a forum with some over Zoom last month. Many pledged loyal support. They realise that asking for money back would cripple the club they love.

But some members will have lost jobs, had their income cut and may need that money back. Others will not be rejoining in 2021. The long-term effect is still unknown. It is why clubs are writing to members asking them to consider donating this summer’s fees. Others are using players to call individual members to maintain contact and make them feel appreciated.

Lancashire this week announced record profits thanks to the World Cup and Ashes. But their losses will be staggering with their events and hotel business on hold and major matches to be played behind closed doors.

The country’s second richest county wrote to its members on Tuesday offering the chance for them to enjoy "loyal member" status and donate their fee to the club even in the event of a blank summer.

In return, among other things, they were offered a 25 per cent discount for next year, their name on a commemorative wall in a new stand and an invitation to a thank you dinner with a "Lancashire legend".

Unless told otherwise by August 1, the club will assume members are happy for the club to keep their money. If not, then a "route to a refund" will be announced in October.

It feels as if county cricket is the least likely form of the game to be played this summer. The work behind the scenes to prepare biosecure venues to meet government standards is very complex but England expect to play West Indies from July 8.

Clubs are preparing to return to nets too and this week a government advisor, Sir Jeremy Farrar, told The Cricketer magazine he believes grassroots cricket could start in August.

If clubs can play, they why not counties? The reason is financial. The government’s job retention scheme has been a lifesaver. All but two counties have furloughed players, coaches and non-cricketing staff, a source of funding that will remain in place, in some form, for the rest of the season.

There is no way county cricket can afford a testing regime to meet biosecure protocols and there cannot be one rule for England players and another for county cricketers.

But to bring staff back off furlough and pay their salaries again can only happen if county cricket can generate significant income through tickets, hospitality and food and drink sales.

This requires mass gatherings to be allowed again. The same government advisor also told The Cricketer that he cannot envisage that happening until 2021.

There will soon be pressure on the ECB to make a call on the domestic season by the middle of next month to give clubs clarity so they can plan for 2021 when it is hoped, once again, those loyal members will pay their subs. Perhaps they will be valued a little bit more in future.