Why New Zealand Cricket overlooked Australian Big Bash League offer to back Kiwi competition
New Zealand Cricket continues to defend its decision to overlook a recommendation from consultancy firm Deloitte to pursue an opportunity to join Australia’s Big Bash League.
In March, New Zealand Cricket (NZC) opted to pursue an opportunity to create a franchise Twenty20 league, known as NZ20, after a lengthy and disruptive process that saw chief executive Scott Weenink and board member Dion Nash both resign.
However, that came in spite of Deloitte’s recommendation, which was tasked with assessing four options for the future of the shortest format, at a time where New Zealand remains the only major cricketing nation without a franchise-style model.
Instead, Deloitte put forward the creation of an NZC-run team to be entered into Australia’s franchise competition, the Big Bash League (BBL), as its primary recommendation.
That recommendation was not shared by NZC’s Major Associations – Auckland, Northern Districts, Central Districts, Wellington, Canterbury and Otago – as well as the New Zealand Cricket Players Association, all of whom wanted NZ20.
In particular, their concerns over the BBL revolved around dilution of opportunities at domestic level for men and women, in reducing the number of professional T20 teams from six to one apiece, with little assurance of funding for the game in New Zealand at lower levels.
But having been hidden from questions in the months since the decision, NZC chair Diana Puketapu-Lyndon fronted on Wednesday and pointed to three further reports by Kiwi strategic advisers In Your Corner and international consultants Honoco for its decision-making process.
“One of the things that was really important to us was the community game,” she told the Herald. “NZ20 supported the community game, it was a more complete package for us.
“There are six teams for us across the country, as opposed to one or two [in the BBL]. Fans get to engage directly with those teams, watching them at the venues – not just on TV.
“Player pathways, we felt, were better represented by having a league of our own here. We see privatised leagues all around the world and how amazing they are with fan engagement. This is our opportunity to bring that to New Zealand with a Kiwi flavour.
“It doesn’t mean we’ve got all the answers and have done all the work – there’s a lot of detail to work through. We thought it was a more complete package for sustaining and strengthening cricket at all levels in New Zealand.”
Despite the decision being made in March, NZC has still not released Deloitte’s findings in any form.
Two NZC life members – Sir Richard Hadlee and Lesley Murdoch – have written letters to the national body, obtained by the Herald, requesting it be made available. Both wrote of assurances given that the report would be released to them, but Puketapu-Lyndon said “Deloitte has not identified any record of a commitment to provide participants with a copy of the report”.
Deloitte has apologised to the pair for the lack of clarity.
Hadlee also outlined his preference was to see a New Zealand entity in the BBL, in order to strengthen ties between the two countries and “inspire younger players to dream big”.
While NZC wouldn’t have known at the time, the months since its decision have also seen the BBL face uncertainty. A decision from Cricket Australia to allow states to seek private investment has been met with mixed results and rejected outright by New South Wales and Queensland.
Puketapu-Lyndon’s Australian equivalent, Mike Baird, has stood down from his role as Cricket Australia chair as a result.
What’s more, there are no guarantees of how supportive the six Australian states or the Australian Cricketers Association would have been in allowing a Kiwi entry, even if Cricket Australia had given it the green light.
“[The Big Bash] is already established, there’s less of a risk in that regard,” Puketapu-Lyndon said of the BBL. “Financially, it was attractive – but this is not just about money. It’s about what is right for the game of cricket in New Zealand.
“Cricket Australia are having their own challenges at the moment and we feel for them. This is a complex situation that we’re in and their situation is not too dissimilar.
“There’s a governing body, a players association, [Major Associations] in our situation, states in their situation. That mix of interested parties is not easy. They’re going through their own challenges to get that across the line.
“At the time, we would have to have had faith that they could get that across the line. I wish them really well, because I know how hard this is.”
However, NZ20 is also far from the finished article. The competition is still yet to receive a licence to operate by NZC, while the search to find investors is yet to bear fruit.
So much so, the intended launch date of this summer has been pushed back a year, with reports suggesting further delays could see it moved back even further to the 2028-29 season.
Puketapu-Lyndon denied those reports, but outlined that NZC was working with NZ20’s organising committee to make sure the competition could begin in time for its new intended launch date.
“There’s work to do,” she said. “We’ve got a working group alongside NZ20 to explore these options [and] how we progress this forward.
“We’ve got Geoff [Allott] involved in that, we’ve got management from NZC involved in that and we’ve got board representation – Roger Twose and Kevin Malloy – sit on that working group.
“We’re currently looking at a licence agreement, there’s a lot of foundational work that needs to be done.
“NZ20 will be able to answer questions about where they’re at in that regard. But we’re confident that there’s progress being made.”
Alex Powell is a sports journalist for the NZ Herald. He has been a sports journalist since 2016.