'It's still up for grabs,' say counties, despite city cricket vote

Richard Gould, Surrey's chief executive, has led calls for the ECB to remember the interests of the sport's traditional fans, as the battle for the future of county cricket intensified in the wake of Wednesday's historic meeting at Lord's.

Surrey were one of three clubs - Kent and Sussex being the other two - who went against the majority in what has been described as an "informal" vote to consider plans for a new eight-team city-based league to be established from 2018 onwards.

However, despite an apparently emphatic 16-3 verdict in favour of the proposals tabled by the ECB hierarchy, several clubs have since made a point of insisting that nothing has yet been agreed, emphasising that their members will be consulted before any further decisions are taken.

Gould, however, believes that the yes voters have backed themselves into a corner by accepting a situation in which there are no alternatives left on the table.

"There is still a huge amount of detail to be unveiled," he told ESPNcricinfo. "However, in deciding on the future direction of the game, we wanted more than one option to be considered at the next stage. Other counties, however, disagreed and needed to see only one option.

"It's not what we wanted, but it is what we got, and it is now all about making a success of the new position."

Gould added that many Surrey members had already made it clear to him that they would be uncomfortable if "another team, under another name" were to play their home matches at The Kia Oval under the new proposals. Yorkshire's fans, he suggested, would feel similarly aggrieved if Headingley were to host a non-county side.

However, Gould denied comments made by Essex's chairman, John Faragher, during an impromptu members' forum in Chelmsford, that Surrey would be reluctant to lease out The Oval for the planned new competition.

"We have to be bound by what the ECB want," Gould said. "Surrey has a very large supporter base, we've been fortunate to see huge crowds for our NatWest T20 Blast home fixtures, but we started that competition from a low base. We want our club to go from strength to strength, but we are not yet sure how that will be achieved through the new proposals."

Faragher, who had been taking questions from the floor during the final day of Essex's home match against Glamorgan at the ECG, insisted that the city cricket plan was "not a done deal".

"I haven't given this game away," he told the room. "We have to make change that is right and suits everybody. There is a lot more to be done."

Some of the strongest views in the aftermath of the vote came from the chairman of one of the most traditionally vulnerable clubs. Writing in a series of posts on Twitter, Derbyshire's chairman, Christopher Grant, echoed the sentiments expressed in the ECB's pitch during the Lord's meeting, that the sport was failing to attract enough new fans.

"Cricket simply isn't reaching enough children," Grant said. "Yesterday's landmark decision at Lord's will go a long way to changing that. Out of 9.4 million cricket followers in this Country, only 990,000 come to games at present. Yesterday was about unlocking the 8.5 million!

"There was consensus around having two thriving T20 competitions, with new brands in the new T20 to unlock a new audience," he continued. "Most counties struggle financially to avoid going under every single season. The proposals for a new T20 competition will change that.

"How does counties going bust, which they will do given their perilous financial state, benefit cricket and kids in their locality?"

Middlesex, whose future would be particularly precarious under the new proposals given that they lease their home ground, Lord's, from MCC, were another club who let it be known that their members would be canvassed before any further decisions were taken.

"We made it very clear to the ECB that we could not consider voting for such a dramatic change to the domestic cricket landscape without first consulting our members," the club said in a press release.

Sussex said that their "strong preference" was that all domestic tournaments should feature all 18 first-class counties, but added that they were "open to considering change in the schedule".

"We recognise the current financial risks to counties," said the club, "including over-dependence on international income, and the opportunities to develop interest in the game, including the changing media landscape.

Somerset and Gloucestershire, two West Country rivals who might be expected to hold particularly strong views about the city-based aspects of the ECB's proposals, are set to host member's forums on September 20 and 22 respectively. The need to secure a concession to allow a proportion of matches to be played at county cricket's smaller grounds is likely to be high on the agenda.