Sussex appeased as new T20 deal moves closer

Opposition to the proposed eight-team Twenty20 competition looks to be weakening after Sussex signalled that they were ready to abandon their resistance to the plans.

Jim May was one of only three county chairmen to vote against the ECB's plans back in September - although several other counties also expressed reservations before giving the governing body licence to pursue the plans and reserved the right to reject the final proposals.

Now May, who will stand down as Sussex chairman at their annual meeting at Hove on March 28, has indicated that their three main sticking points had all been answered.

Sussex's retreat will further delight the ECB hierarchy, led by the chief executive Tom Harrison and chairman Colin Graves, as they prepare for a meeting of all counties on March 27 which will consider changes to the constitution which would be necessary for any new competition not involving the 18 counties to take place.

All indications are that resistance has now crumbled and that counties, whatever their reservations, will accept the changes, either because they increasingly believe in them, or because they fear the consequences - either for the game itself or for themselves - if they do not fall into line.

May told The Argus: "There were three things we had concerns about but we have had reassurances on all three. No teams in the new competition will be able to use existing names like Surrey or Yorkshire and the existing NatWest Blast will continue, albeit with fewer games.

"We were also determined that there would still be cricket played at Hove while the new competition is taking place and it looks like the 50-over competition will be staged then. There is still a long way to go but I am really pleased the ECB have taken on board the points Sussex and other counties have made."

Sussex's stance is intriguing considering the recent arrival of Rob Andrew as the county's new chief executive. Andrew spent a turbulent decade as the professional director of the Rugby Football Union, a period in which he felt his greatest success was in quelling the acrimony that existed in rugby in 2006 and brokering of a deal in which the 12 Premiership clubs and England could flourish together and the development of players was enhanced.

Sussex's weakening opposition is a blow to a handful of counties, led by Surrey, Essex and Kent, who hold out hopes that the future of Twenty20 in England can still be based solely upon the 18 first-class counties which historically have comprised professional cricket in England and Wales.

Attendances in the NatWest Blast have grown markedly in recent years, heading towards the 1m mark, but the ECB continues to believe that a marketing-led eight-team tournament is considerably more lucrative and that it will attract a new generation of fans to the game.

With the county game more than £150m in debt, and the financial benefits of international cricket uncertain as T20 leagues proliferate around the world, English cricket is picking its way through a minefield.

"When we voted against the competition it was because we were voting against the only thing put on the table," May said. "We wanted to look at two options, an eight-team competition and one that involved all 18 first class counties.

"I think we are getting more comfortable now with how it is looking. In fairness to the ECB they are listening to the counties and doing a great deal of consultation."

Counties have been promised a minimum of an extra £1.3m from the ECB as a direct result of the new competition which is due to begin in 2020. However, they will take a financial hit which will undermine the benefits of the payout. They will lose two home games in the NatWest Blast and could suffer a loss of sponsorship revenue should the county competition be perceived as comparatively second-rate.

The 50-over cricket played by the counties while the new T20 competition takes place would also be seriously sub-standard, weakened with the loss of roughly 100 non-overseas county players to the new competition on top of the England players habitually excluded.

The question that will not go away is whether an 18-team professional circuit can possibly prosper alongside a highly-marketed eight-team completion, or whether the counties will effectively be quickening their eventual demise.