Most club cricketers do not receive pay for their efforts – but some do, legally and illegally. Huw Turbervill, Managing Editor of The Cricketer magazine, looks at the pay gap in club cricket.
Heard the one about the club who pay £600 a match to each of their two star players ? Or the northern league side whose first-team playing bill each summer amounts to about £60,000 ?
Despite club cricket being ‘recreational’, it is well known that some clubs pay, and some do not; and some leagues allow it, and some do not. After a social media shout-out to our (Cricketer magazine) readers and followers, however, some of the figures quoted are eye-watering.
We must be careful. There could be malice or jealousy involved. This is not a witch-hunt, a naming-and-shaming exercise. Club professionals can provide great value. They coach youngsters, team-mates and their presence lifts everyone.
Also, non-League footballers are paid – so why shouldn’t cricketers ? It is a club’s business how it spends its money, isn’t it ? A former first-class cricketer is entitled to make what money he can – he may have devoted his 20s and 30s to cricket and be struggling to support his family once he has dropped out of the top level.
There are cases, though, where the amounts changing hands are ridiculous, unsustainable and put clubs in jeopardy. And yes, we have received reports of illegal payments – not just from clubs infringing league rules, but money being paid by allegedly taking it out of fruit machines.
One possible effect of paying players is that they perform well, the team improves, and more spectators come and spend money at the bar… but would the cash not be better spent on colts’ gear and clubhouse facilities ? And pitches... some of the surfaces at 3rd, 4th and 5th XI status are atrocious.
There have been claims that all some clubs care about is winning at first-team level, with lip-service and box-ticking at colts level. Are the egos of chairmen, boards, directors, coaches and captains creating monsters ? Is it a case of boys and their toys ? There have been examples cited of clubs plummeting once the moneymen become bored and pack up. The star players then seek the same rewards elsewhere, and in the meantime it is discovered a lot of the stalwarts and loyalists have already quit, with shells of clubs being left behind.
A knowledgeable supporter of Yorkshire cricket told The Cricketer: “I know sides who are spending more than £50,000 on players’ wages. I have not seen audit accounts of the clubs but it is general knowledge. One North-West club paid its first team £55,000 in 2016. Another is paying two players £600 a game each.”
Another reader who also wishes to remain anonymous told us: “The Bradford League is rife with paid cricketers in the premier league. One club has a wage bill – allegedly – of more than £60,000 per season. Second-team players get paid at some clubs. Players switch teams, going wherever they can to earn extra. Club loyalty is low (except for a few clubs). A concern my club has is that we have a good policy towards developing our junior players so that they can go on and represent us (and hopefully avoid the lure of the cash clubs).
Meanwhile quite a few other Bradford league sides pay no interest in their juniors – and put sides out to ‘tick a box’ to maintain their requirements to stay in the league. They will often cancel junior games because they don’t really want to be bothered by it – but it is a requirement of the league to run teams at nine, 11,13, and 15 to maintain Premier League status.”
Somebody involved with a Surrey club said: “Many Surrey Championship clubs have paid players, flown up the divisions, but then the cash runs out and the club is left in tatters and relegation after relegation occurs. Most cash players will be on a bonus as well as a match fee. It drives a culture of selfish, and not team, players.”
A member of another Surrey club said: “Obviously clubs are well within their rights to spend their money how they want – some do it so that they can push up the leagues, others so that they can remain competitive. For example, some clubs do it because their membership playing strength is not naturally strong enough to compete in the league that they are in, so they pay a few players so that the 1st XI in particular competes and everyone else in the club downwards enjoys their cricket more. But I just feel that the money would be better spent on improving facilities or on the club in general in the long run.”
Another reader told us: “As a member of a club that can just barely afford to pay expenses of a young overseas every year, when playing against these teams we feel like Accrington Stanley trying to compete against Barcelona. Money has distorted the very structure of club cricket in England, to a point where there is no point in smaller clubs competing. I guess that’s why they have to charge £8.50 for a glass of red wine.”
Some of our readers defend the system and say paid players can offer great value. One told us: “My old club pay £10,000 to a pro – a former first-class cricketer with years of experience. Difference is he grew up at the club and his family played there. He earns his cash and as well as playing is the captain, club coach, and develops the juniors. They have progressed massively as a result and his input has seen them grow from a two-team club on a Saturday to them putting out five sides. His loyalty is rewarded in both cash and in seeing his boyhood club develop. I’d like to see clubs utilise their professional players wisely – get them coaching the kids and improving senior player standards by taking on responsibilities such as ‘club coach’. But from what I’ve seen quite a few just freeload, pick up a cheque, play once a week, and give little genuine value to a club (other than runs and wickets... and some don’t always fulfil that.”
We have been furnished with similar reports from Birmingham, Cambridgeshire and Hunts, Derbyshire, Liverpool, Northamptonshire, Nottinghamshire, Worcestershire, and Halifax, where one reader joked: “Players do not get paid in the Halifax League… and Captain Blackadder definitely did not shoot the delicious plump-breasted pigeon, sir.”
Article reproduced by kind permission of The Cricketer magazine.
Heard the one about the club who pay £600 a match to each of their two star players ? Or the northern league side whose first-team playing bill each summer amounts to about £60,000 ?
Despite club cricket being ‘recreational’, it is well known that some clubs pay, and some do not; and some leagues allow it, and some do not. After a social media shout-out to our (Cricketer magazine) readers and followers, however, some of the figures quoted are eye-watering.
We must be careful. There could be malice or jealousy involved. This is not a witch-hunt, a naming-and-shaming exercise. Club professionals can provide great value. They coach youngsters, team-mates and their presence lifts everyone.
Also, non-League footballers are paid – so why shouldn’t cricketers ? It is a club’s business how it spends its money, isn’t it ? A former first-class cricketer is entitled to make what money he can – he may have devoted his 20s and 30s to cricket and be struggling to support his family once he has dropped out of the top level.
There are cases, though, where the amounts changing hands are ridiculous, unsustainable and put clubs in jeopardy. And yes, we have received reports of illegal payments – not just from clubs infringing league rules, but money being paid by allegedly taking it out of fruit machines.
One possible effect of paying players is that they perform well, the team improves, and more spectators come and spend money at the bar… but would the cash not be better spent on colts’ gear and clubhouse facilities ? And pitches... some of the surfaces at 3rd, 4th and 5th XI status are atrocious.
There have been claims that all some clubs care about is winning at first-team level, with lip-service and box-ticking at colts level. Are the egos of chairmen, boards, directors, coaches and captains creating monsters ? Is it a case of boys and their toys ? There have been examples cited of clubs plummeting once the moneymen become bored and pack up. The star players then seek the same rewards elsewhere, and in the meantime it is discovered a lot of the stalwarts and loyalists have already quit, with shells of clubs being left behind.
A knowledgeable supporter of Yorkshire cricket told The Cricketer: “I know sides who are spending more than £50,000 on players’ wages. I have not seen audit accounts of the clubs but it is general knowledge. One North-West club paid its first team £55,000 in 2016. Another is paying two players £600 a game each.”
Another reader who also wishes to remain anonymous told us: “The Bradford League is rife with paid cricketers in the premier league. One club has a wage bill – allegedly – of more than £60,000 per season. Second-team players get paid at some clubs. Players switch teams, going wherever they can to earn extra. Club loyalty is low (except for a few clubs). A concern my club has is that we have a good policy towards developing our junior players so that they can go on and represent us (and hopefully avoid the lure of the cash clubs).
Meanwhile quite a few other Bradford league sides pay no interest in their juniors – and put sides out to ‘tick a box’ to maintain their requirements to stay in the league. They will often cancel junior games because they don’t really want to be bothered by it – but it is a requirement of the league to run teams at nine, 11,13, and 15 to maintain Premier League status.”
Somebody involved with a Surrey club said: “Many Surrey Championship clubs have paid players, flown up the divisions, but then the cash runs out and the club is left in tatters and relegation after relegation occurs. Most cash players will be on a bonus as well as a match fee. It drives a culture of selfish, and not team, players.”
A member of another Surrey club said: “Obviously clubs are well within their rights to spend their money how they want – some do it so that they can push up the leagues, others so that they can remain competitive. For example, some clubs do it because their membership playing strength is not naturally strong enough to compete in the league that they are in, so they pay a few players so that the 1st XI in particular competes and everyone else in the club downwards enjoys their cricket more. But I just feel that the money would be better spent on improving facilities or on the club in general in the long run.”
Another reader told us: “As a member of a club that can just barely afford to pay expenses of a young overseas every year, when playing against these teams we feel like Accrington Stanley trying to compete against Barcelona. Money has distorted the very structure of club cricket in England, to a point where there is no point in smaller clubs competing. I guess that’s why they have to charge £8.50 for a glass of red wine.”
Some of our readers defend the system and say paid players can offer great value. One told us: “My old club pay £10,000 to a pro – a former first-class cricketer with years of experience. Difference is he grew up at the club and his family played there. He earns his cash and as well as playing is the captain, club coach, and develops the juniors. They have progressed massively as a result and his input has seen them grow from a two-team club on a Saturday to them putting out five sides. His loyalty is rewarded in both cash and in seeing his boyhood club develop. I’d like to see clubs utilise their professional players wisely – get them coaching the kids and improving senior player standards by taking on responsibilities such as ‘club coach’. But from what I’ve seen quite a few just freeload, pick up a cheque, play once a week, and give little genuine value to a club (other than runs and wickets... and some don’t always fulfil that.”
We have been furnished with similar reports from Birmingham, Cambridgeshire and Hunts, Derbyshire, Liverpool, Northamptonshire, Nottinghamshire, Worcestershire, and Halifax, where one reader joked: “Players do not get paid in the Halifax League… and Captain Blackadder definitely did not shoot the delicious plump-breasted pigeon, sir.”
Article reproduced by kind permission of The Cricketer magazine.
