Great piece. Would've never known about the viewership fall/forceful hiding of cricket on TV sets.
Also, I am hesitant for privatization of BBL.
The 49% stake one is complete nonsense, it's rather an easy way for them to give complete entry into your team and then, it's their club and they could do, whatever they wished to, like naming MI ahead of the city or renaming Sydney Sixers as Sunrisers Sydney and go with Orange jersey, which, for me, will be by far the weirdest thing that could happen, as a Sixers supporter, as our rivals Scorchers don that colour.
Thank you! Your point around the 49% is well made. Just this morning I heard that another of the Hundred franchises - Manchester -is actually owned 70% by their new owners. Which is as good as 100% really!
Initially I had 'ODI' rather than 'T20I' for the 5-match series v India after the 3 ODIs. Corrected now. Apologies!
Great piece. Would've never known about the viewership fall/forceful hiding of cricket on TV sets.
Also, I am hesitant for privatization of BBL.
The 49% stake one is complete nonsense, it's rather an easy way for them to give complete entry into your team and then, it's their club and they could do, whatever they wished to, like naming MI ahead of the city or renaming Sydney Sixers as Sunrisers Sydney and go with Orange jersey, which, for me, will be by far the weirdest thing that could happen, as a Sixers supporter, as our rivals Scorchers don that colour.
Thank you! Your point around the 49% is well made. Just this morning I heard that another of the Hundred franchises - Manchester -is actually owned 70% by their new owners. Which is as good as 100% really!
And now that franchise has used that leverage to get 3 players from that side to sign for their SA20 side. Everything is wheeling dealing nowadays.
Also, have explained that better in my new article on SA20 retentions.