cricket
Latest News:


WELCOME TO THE MIDDLESEX ROOM, THE ONLY MESSAGE BOARD ON THE INTERNET DEDICATED TO MIDDLESEX CCC

Champions of England we know what we are

 

Goto Page: 12Next
Current Page: 1 of 2
Headingley crisis
chunkyinargyll (IP Logged)
20 March, 2017 19:14

 
Re: Headingley crisis
BeefyRoberts (IP Logged)
20 March, 2017 19:21
You just beat me to it Chunky,

Well,the Yorkie crisis seams to go from one week to another,seeing they owe the grocer around £20m within a debt of £25m,how the hell did they get in this mess?
Will they get the same treatment as Durham did,although Durham owed LESS
Leeds City Council have pulled the plug on a £4m grant,they want to rebuild the football ground end I presume with help from the rugby club.

But,as I said,Durham got screwed so why not Yorkshire follow suit?

 
Re: Headingley crisis
chunkyinargyll (IP Logged)
20 March, 2017 19:25
Relegate 'em to Div 2, with a 48 point penalty.

Actually, their debt is 25 million, whereas Durham was only 8 million- so make that a 144 point penalty-

No, on second thoughts, 48 point penalty, three years running would be better.

(Sm1)

 
Re: Headingley crisis
dingy bags (IP Logged)
20 March, 2017 20:46
Once again I am reminded how much all this stinks.

Any conflict of interest here?

 
Re: Headingley crisis
21 March, 2017 05:11
No conflict of interest at all DB , The Grocer would never see his team relegated for financial problems whereas they made an "example" of Durham.

If you are only in tut game for the benefit of your own back pocket like he is why shot the goose that owes you all that money ?

No div 2 for Yorkshire, should be relegated straight to the minor counties for running up that sort of debt.

 
Re: Headingley crisis
chunkyinargyll (IP Logged)
21 March, 2017 07:42
Has Headingley got a Costcutter store yet?

[www.retail-week.com]

 
Re: Headingley crisis
adelaide (IP Logged)
21 March, 2017 10:25
Interested in the idea that Graves is only in it for his own back pocket. Whatever you think of the man or his ideas, the fact is that most of Yorkshire's debt is owed to the Graves family trust. Until there is a prospect of the money being repaid, his ((or the trust's) back pocket is lighter, surely. There may be no such prospect, in which case his (or the trust's) back pocket is permanently lighter.

My understanding is that Durham owed large sums to bodies who were quite likely to call it in, irrespective of whether doing so might push the club under. No prospect of that with Yorkshire.

There are potential conflicts of interest here, the obvious one being that depriving Durham of international matches improves Yorkshire's chances of getting said matches and thus of the Graves trust getting some of its money back eventually. But the more likely scenario is that the debt to the trust will never be called in; in a sense there is a conflict of interest between calling it in and getting some of the money back (as the club implodes) and letting things ride and getting nothing back.

The statements by Yorkshire are surely designed in part to put pressure on the local authority, which is aware that the local economy benefits from international cricket. The message is - give us a good deal (via a loan or approving controversial housing development which will fund the scheme) or lose that revenue from the local economy. In its most naked form this sort of approach can also be seen when NFL franchises move city, or trying to persuade a major employer to locate in your city. I think there's some of it too in the noises coming out from Spurs about needing more tangible local authority support for the WHL stadium project, and the deal West Ham got for the Olympic stadium. It might not be the case here but there is sometimes a lot of bluff, brinkmanship and crying wolf involved in these matters.


Adelaide

 
Re: Headingley crisis
Sussex Seaxe (IP Logged)
21 March, 2017 11:25
There does seem to be a lot of misplaced schadenfreude on here, which I find a bit sad. I am no fan of the proposed re-structure and the consequent damage that will be done to the county game, but I just don't accept that Graves gives nothing to the game and is only in it for himself. Similarly, I don't get all this anti Yorkshire stuff - imagine if similar things were said about blacks, or Jews, or Belgians? Well, ok, perhaps Belgians....

Someone with Graves' wealth could easily live a life of luxury, sailing a yacht, or whatever constitutes a life of luxury these days. As it is, he gives not only money, as Adelaide has reported, but countless hours to working with people trying to shape the future of the game and ensure it is on a sound footing.

Now, whether we all agree with his plans is another matter, but I would hazard a guess that few of us would be willing to give that amount of time to the game. Most of us give time to watching it, talking about it and thinking about it, but not much else. I am sure there are others on here who, like me, have played, coached, umpired etc, but not spent endless evenings in meetings for which you receive little thanks, as the authorities must. So what, if they get a free gin and tonic as a result?

Similarly, I have no wish to see Headingley struggle. Surely we should all want cricket to be thriving at all levels and in all parts of the country? Otherwise it's a slippery slope, I'm afraid.

 
Re: Headingley crisis
adelaide (IP Logged)
21 March, 2017 13:13
If you look at the Yorkshire supremacist garbage posted by one or two posters on their forums, that might explain some of the anti-Yorkshire stuff that appears elsewhere. Most Yorkshire people do not deserve that. It remains one of the hotbeds of English cricket, one that produces a string of top class players, and if we lose them it would be the start of the end. I'm a cricket supporter first and foremost and (unlike those one or two posters) I really don't want to see my team winning through lack of strong competition.

My understanding is that Graves basically stopped YCCC going bankrupt. Abramovic did much the same at Chelsea but he kept on spending, unhindered by a salary cap or (for many years) any concept of a need not to make losses. Yorkshire has imported some good players but not an inordinate number and the number of home-grown players its sides feature is to be admired, so I don't think they can be accused of financial doping.


Adelaide

 
Re: Headingley crisis
chunkyinargyll (IP Logged)
21 March, 2017 14:25
Like a lot of wealthy people I think Graves wanted fame to go with his fortune. Buy a football club? Well, in his case it was cricket that offered him a chance to buy himself a position of power and influence, by first rescuing Yorkshire, and then getting himself elected to head of ECB. If Graves were a Geordie Durham would still be in Div 1 (courtesy of his financial input) and Yorkshire in Div 2

Tha delight at any Yorkshire misfortune is largely down to a couple of rogue supporters who spectacularly let down the club they claim to support.

 
Re: Headingley crisis
dingy bags (IP Logged)
22 March, 2017 18:59
I am not anti-Yorkshire. My two trips to Scarborough have been some of the best cricketing experiences of my life and I love the way people talk cricket with you when they see the cap/shirt.

BUT, the way Durham were treated, at this particular moment in English cricket history, looks to me like the ECB flexing their muscles and making an example, to warn counties as to what will happen to those who oppose the ideas of a few who want to sweep everything else aside for the sake of a new T20.

As I understand it, we have a county that has been baled out of much deeper debt by the man (or by trusts linked to the man) who is chairman of the ECB. If Yorkshire are treated the same as Durham, it could take decades to get the money back. Now, we hear, that Yorkshire need to spend another lump of money on a stand, to keep getting big games at the ground. Please correct me if I am wrong on this.

I await developments with interest. Any further light people can shed will be gratefully accepted.

 
Re: Headingley crisis
Sussex Seaxe (IP Logged)
23 March, 2017 09:31
I'd be delighted if somebody could actually set out the facts. What I read on here is a lot of blind prejudice towards somebody, who I assume none of us know personally, just because many of us don't like the policies of the board that he chairs.

This makes me rather sad.

 
Re: Headingley crisis
adelaide (IP Logged)
23 March, 2017 11:01
Dingy - Durham needed to be bailed out of debt because they could find no financial saviour. Yorkshire had, so no such need. If a club has to be bailed out centrally, there has to be a price to pay, to avoid "moral hazard". The bit that stinks is that it was the conditions set by ECB to permit Durham, combined with ECB's encouragement of a bidding process for international matches between an increased number of grounds, that were at the root of Durham's problems. Neither of which, of course, happened under Graves's regime; perhaps if someone like him had been in charge at the time the seeds of the mess would not have been sown.

Incidentally, there are heated debates (to quote Mrs Merton) on the Yorkshire forums too about Graves and all he stands for. And about YCCC finances and the new stand. The general assumption, probably correctly, is that Graves will never ask for his money back, so the major focus in their debates is whether the stand makes financial sense even if you discount the debt to his trust.


Adelaide

 
Re: Headingley crisis
dingy bags (IP Logged)
23 March, 2017 18:48
Thanks Adelaide.

I am still struggling to understand how it is ok to live so far beyond your means (a point made by Mr Boycott) if you have a sugar daddy to help you, but out of order to be much less in debt when you don't.

Even if we accept that having rich backers is ok, there is still the issue of the fact of who they are. If linked closely (and I still say if) to the man who is to all intents and purposes the boss of English cricket, then I am not comfortable with that person sitting in judgement on a neighbouring county.

Our chairman resigned to avoid any conflict of interest.

 
Re: Headingley crisis
adelaide (IP Logged)
23 March, 2017 20:46
Dingy - Was Graves involved at all in the Durham judgement? He may have a better appreciation of the niceties than we think; if he did try to get involved in the "rested players" debate, which arguably was a bit unfair to Yorkshire, he wasn't successful! He too resigned as the county chairman when he became ECB chairman, so no difference there. He has the family trust owed £20m or so by the county but I think that is his only involvement now. In theory there is a conflict of interest inasmuch as decisions he makes could affect repayments to the trust, but as nobody expects such repayments to be made it's not a real conflict.

It's not morally OK to run up huge debts, whether or not you have a sugar daddy but practically it makes a huge difference, and if Graves's involvement stopped Yorkshire going under that is the lesser of two evils. LP might be surprised to know that I would not have wanted Chelsea to go under either. The difference of course was that even if Graves had wanted to "loan" more and buy up loads of players, the salary cap would have stopped him.


Adelaide

 
Re: Headingley crisis
chunkyinargyll (IP Logged)
23 March, 2017 21:04
Read the 5th post on this forum-

[www.readytogo.net]

Graves and 3 others heard on a train discussing Durham's fate a week before it became public knowledge- so yes, Graves involved. As far as I can tell poster was quoting an article in The Times, because it was behind a paywall, unless you subscribe,

It explains how journalists all of a sudden, with extreme accuracy, predicted Durham's fate a couple of days before it was announced.

Discussing sensitive information in a public place.

Tut tut Mr Graves.

 
Re: Headingley crisis
Primrose Hillbilly (IP Logged)
24 March, 2017 08:33
There are many, many people who post on here more knowledgeable than I.

Please can one or two enlighten me as to how this business concerning Yorkshire differs from the Durham financial imbroglio, at the end of which we know what happened.

Is it just that Durham are in hock to the ECB?

 
Re: Headingley crisis
adelaide (IP Logged)
24 March, 2017 11:16
PH - Yorkshire are largely in pretend hock, as most of their debt is to the Graves family trust and is very unlikely to be called in. Durham were in real hock so yes, in effect they had to looks to the ECB to save them.

A (not particularly good) analogy would be the difference between being bailed out by your parents and being bailed out by a bank. The bank is sure to want its repayments, your parents less certain and a lot more flexible. I suspect that the Graves trust is even less likely to demand repayment than parents ... at least while Mr Graves is breathing.


Michael

 
Re: Headingley crisis
Primrose Hillbilly (IP Logged)
24 March, 2017 11:30
Thank you, Adelaide.

With, of course, your parents not having a stake in the industry in which you are triyng to make a living.

 
Re: Headingley crisis
Sussex Seaxe (IP Logged)
24 March, 2017 12:14
I have to admit that many years ago, I worked in a bank - pause for abuse - and had a little to do with accounts of corporate customers.

As I recall, a great may of them had an item in their accounts called 'Directors Loans', which were funds put in to increase liquidity in a business in which they clearly had an interest. Some would get the money back, some wouldn't, but it didn't worry any potential lenders or investors. This seems to me analogous with the debate here.

Goto Page: 12Next
Current Page: 1 of 2

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment. We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals. We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards. If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing abuse@sportnetwork.net
 

Who is online?

Total users online:  

Most users online:  

Users on this site:  

Where are they?