
It's so interesting, isn't it, that you've got New South Wales and Queensland, one position, and then you've got the total opposite with, you know, three other states saying, yeah, we're on board.

South Australia, somewhere in the middle, hooky, almost saying, let's test the waters.

And that in itself was really interesting because they did it away from the SCG because cricket New South Wales are against it.

And so you've got this, you know, really – fascinating position potentially could be great for players more money you know great exposure better players better better competition but on the flip side you know the hundreds going through some massive issues with this and if it goes into the wrong hands ownership it could be a total disaster so i don't know it feels like to me it could go either way um we're just going along for the ride

So the argument that's put is, well, it's more money into the game, and so therefore we can sign some of the best players in the world.

And I would argue that there's not too many bigger names in world cricket right now than Ben Stokes.

Then I've heard the argument that this is all about being able to pay the players more, the best players more.

Yet Cricket Australia is absolutely adamant that they're not going to change the terms of the split of payments out of general revenue into the player payment pool, that they're adamant that that should stay at 27.5. And all of this money isn't for the players.

But they also then at the other side of their mouth say that test cricket's the best thing for the BBL because it gives them great eyeballs for people watching cricket, watching the test cricket before they lead into watching the BBL as well.

It's so interesting, isn't it, that you've got New South Wales and Queensland, one position, and then you've got the total opposite with, you know, three other states saying, yeah, we're on board.

South Australia, somewhere in the middle, hooky, almost saying, let's test the waters.

And that in itself was really interesting because they did it away from the SCG because cricket New South Wales are against it.

And so you've got this, you know, really – fascinating position potentially could be great for players more money you know great exposure better players better better competition but on the flip side you know the hundreds going through some massive issues with this and if it goes into the wrong hands ownership it could be a total disaster so i don't know it feels like to me it could go either way um we're just going along for the ride

So the argument that's put is, well, it's more money into the game, and so therefore we can sign some of the best players in the world.

And I would argue that there's not too many bigger names in world cricket right now than Ben Stokes.

Then I've heard the argument that this is all about being able to pay the players more, the best players more.

Yet Cricket Australia is absolutely adamant that they're not going to change the terms of the split of payments out of general revenue into the player payment pool, that they're adamant that that should stay at 27.5. And all of this money isn't for the players.

But they also then at the other side of their mouth say that test cricket's the best thing for the BBL because it gives them great eyeballs for people watching cricket, watching the test cricket before they lead into watching the BBL as well.
The rest of this transcript — segmented and speaker-labeled, so you land on the exact moment something was said
Search every transcript — by keyword, by phrase, or by meaning, across every show Radar indexes
Trends — what is surging across podcasts, measured against its own baseline
Alerts — when a name you follow appears in a newly indexed episode
No account is needed to search Radar.