Chris Waters: '˜Fast-food' T20 franchise scheme is all about survival

Former Yorkshire batsman Michael Vaughan, for example, believes that Twenty20 is “the saviour of the game” and predicts that the new competition will be “a huge success” in attracting new fans.

Others, such as former England all-rounder Vic Marks, believe that the proposal is “another fudge” that will leave existing fans “confused and exasperated”.

Marks points out – in a resonant comment from the opposition pulpit – that the promise of £1.3m a year to the financially stricken first-class counties to support the ECB’s plan tends to stifle measured debate.

My own view, for what it is worth, is that I do not really have one, for I have reached the point, as much as I love cricket, where I no longer care to any great extent about such change.

Indeed, as I wrote not long ago, the game is in a mess and there is no way now of clearing it up.

In other words, it is what it is.

Anyone who does not believe that cricket is in a mess is, in my opinion, either naive or in convenient denial, or perhaps both.

Why, you only have to look at the unfathomable fixture schedule; the surfeit of games; the fact that many first-class counties, including Yorkshire, are in crippling debt; the cuts to the County Championship, the fact that the best players rarely turn out for their counties any more; the diary clashes between new T20 franchise competitions and international/county cricket that increasingly impact on selection and availability; absurd tinkerings with traditions like the coin toss; the way that spectators are expected to tolerate it all.

I could go on, but you get the point.

If that is not a mess, then please define “a mess”?

So you will, I hope, excuse my insouciance about this new competition which, it seems to me, is neither a good nor bad thing per se – merely a reflection of the state in which cricket finds itself.

I have nothing against city-based T20 cricket – even though I have eyes only for Test and Championship cricket – and I sincerely hope that it proves to be successful for all concerned. And, now that it is coming, it must be given a chance.

Indeed, it may even help, through its financial might, to help preserve the traditional forms of cricket that I love so much. On the other hand, they may wither and die anyway.

Indeed, my belief is that the very invention of T20 probably sounded the death knell for traditional cricket in much the same way that the invention of the Internet sounded it for print journalism.

Ergo, it is only a matter of time.

The only time that my hackles are raised in the present debate is when I hear that T20 will help drive up standards, or that it is not about the financial bottom line.

That is clearly absurd, for why else would the counties back a competition in which they are not directly involved, with the eight competing franchises separate entities from the counties themselves?

Why else would they agree to further saturate an already saturated schedule with a tournament that can only devalue the existing NatWest T20 Blast, which will continue to run side-by-side?

Yes, the bigger picture is about trying to grow and expand the sport, and to keep it relevant, but this is also about potentially lucrative broadcasting contracts and, for the counties themselves, a simple matter of survival.

Twenty20 is growing rapidly – former England captain Vaughan believes that it will be the “main priority” for fans and players in 10-15 years’ time.

It will not be my priority, however, and perhaps a question that is often overlooked must also be addressed: namely, whether T20 has the necessary long-term substance to help keep cricket relevant anyway?

It is, after all, fast-food cricket in many ways. Indeed, the saddest words that Vaughan has written about T20 in my view is his admission that “the actual game is secondary to the entertainment and fan experience”.

But if the game itself is not the very essence of the entertainment and fan experience, what future does this “main priority” really have?