brandon
U19 Debutant
They won’t, not in Tests anyway. They’ll get to the position where they just think “what’s the point?!”The smaller nations will end up playing each other more as a consequence.
They won’t, not in Tests anyway. They’ll get to the position where they just think “what’s the point?!”The smaller nations will end up playing each other more as a consequence.
Yeah it could. But the counter argument is there's always between just 2-3 strong nations (historically) who have kept Test Cricket alive.It would be the death knell for Test Cricket in my view though, creating a structure that excludes the other nations would kill Test Cricket in rapid time.
This isn't true.So for example England, they only make a profit two years out of four years when Aus or Ind come over. The other two years are a loss. They are looking to remove one of the loss years and simply have a three year cycle, so that they can make profits two years out of three.
Well, these figures include everything. All sources of revenue. These don't tell us what they made from hosting tests.This isn't true.
ECB's last 4 financial results:
Profit/Loss
2023/24: £21.8m
2022/23: £13.4m
2021/22: £21.4m
2020/21: (£16.1m)
So, not a loss (every second year) then.Well, these figures include everything. All sources of revenue. These don't tell us what they made from hosting tests.
There were still pretty solid attendances at those Test Matches. But that's kind of the problem, the WTC in its current format simply hasn't been a catalyst for people attending Test Matches in most countries. S Africa knew if they beat SL and Pakistan they'd be in the Final, yet hardly anyone turned up to watch.Would like to see their figures for the last summer when they hosted WI and SL though we'll only know later this year .