Bruce Dias 
For the cricket world, IPL stands for glamour, creativity and success. Its popularity has led to talks in most cricketing countries of following suit, though the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) has been uniquely cautious about letting an IPL-style system in English cricket establish itself.
The franchise model of cricket has clearly proven effective, but the ECB doesn’t seem to be fond of adopting its more popular variation. But why? Let’s find out.
The Heritage Factor
England cricket is very traditional. The County Championship, for example, has existed in England for more than 100 years. This age-old home system has not only been a reliable source of talent for the national team, but has also created strong fan bonds with the county teams. For many, to replace or marginalise this historical model with IPL-inspired city franchises is to do a double take against cricket history.
The ECB knows this. They are also very well aware that England’s traditional following loves the sense of continuity and tradition county cricket gives them. An IPL franchise system might turn away this devoted audience.
For the ECB, it’s a matter of bringing the game up to date and saving the spirit. They’ve experimented with change, but if they go all-in on the IPL model, they run the risk of undermining the identity of English cricket.
Financial Realities and Risks
The IPL is an economic powerhouse, but it might not be possible to replicate the success of the IPL in England. England’s cricket environment is a completely different animal from India’s. IPL runs on a huge home market, has countless corporate backers, and enjoys the most fervent fanbase in the world. England cricket, popular though it is, is not as fanatical or viewed.
The ECB may not want to place its eggs all in the franchise cricket basket because of the financial stakes. England does not have the same prestige as India when it comes to cricket. An IPL-style English league might fail to attract the same investment and attendance, and leave the ECB with a brittle cricketing model and too few funds to support it.
International cricket is already a big part of the ECB’s revenue, especially the marquee Ashes series. It’s the fear that putting too much weight on a franchise league would drown out Test cricket, which has been at the heart of England’s cricket culture and one of the main income-generating sectors.
The Calendar Conundrum
Another aspect standing in the way of an IPL-type league being held in England is the cricket calendar. The English summer is already packed with international games and domestic tournaments. A commercial, city-based franchise league would have to be designed into this schedule from scratch.
And whereas India offers a time frame free for the IPL, England’s cricket schedule lacks that space. International games aren’t negotiable especially in the summer, as it’s the biggest revenue. And the County Championship, One-Day Cup, and T20 Blast all compete with each other. Add another big competition and scheduling can be chaos and players burnout.
Even the ECB has come under fire in recent years for leaving players on a frantic schedule. This problem may get compounded by the addition of an IPL-style tournament that can send players to the shade or leave England’s stars knackered long term
It hurts the players, people who like to bet on cricket matches on 10cric mobile app (it’s never fun betting on two exhausted teams, regardless of the outcome), and casual viewers.
Player Pathways and Development
We’ve talked about the franchise system of the IPL for helping bring in new stars and give them a chance to succeed. Yet the ECB considers their current arrangement to do precisely that job very well. County Championships and other events such as T20 Blast, gives youngsters a simple route to progression.
The ECB would probably fear that a franchise system would push this pipeline off the map. County cricket is a place where anyone can come through, both late-bloomers and unknowns. Under a franchise system, the focus may be overreaching to marquee players and international superstars, which means that more of the home talent gets no room to flourish.
They also worry a franchise league will give a crowded field. The better-off franchises could own the market for best players and no one else could keep up. The ECB has long desired more equal distribution of wealth between counties, keeping small clubs and the variety of talent that goes with them.
A Cautious Approach to Change
It’s perhaps conservative of the ECB to not embrace an IPL-like takeover, but it’s also a cautionary tale about how reform will proceed. Already they’ve gone out of their way to update the game, The Hundred being the best example of that. It is a new, highly polarising structure, but one that shows how the ECB is open to experimenting and not abandoning the existing form.
The Hundred itself was introduced as an attempt to appeal to a younger, more diverse cricketing public, and the first impression is that it’s done some of its job. But the reaction from old cricket fans attests to how polarising changes to the domestic game can be. For the ECB, perhaps incremental change is the best bet instead of trying to overhaul in the way of an IPL overhaul.
Conclusion
As things stand now. It’s not likely that the ECB will allow an IPL-style takeover of English cricket. The current systems and revenue models in place would make it nearly impossible. But that’s not to say it’s impossible.
The problem for the ECB is how to make a compromise between innovation and English cricket. They’re being conservative, which can upset some – but it’s also part of their knowledge of English cricket and its idiosyncrasies. We will never know if this policy will survive the pressure to modernise, but at least for now the ECB seems set on making its own way.
