The ECB will update its central contracts system in an effort to avoid the temptation of franchise agreements

To combat the growing danger of franchise events, the ECB will increase match prices overall and implement multi-year contracts for their centrally contracted male players.

The adjustments follow a number of players declining England call-ups for the limited-overs trip to Bangladesh in March in favour of participating in the Pakistan Super League, which offers a higher salary.

It was a wake-up call for the ECB, whose affluence had previously protected them from the detrimental effects that global T20 leagues have had on the talent pools of nations like the West Indies and South Africa. While those who elected to skip the tour were not centrally contracted, it was nonetheless a wake-up call for the ECB.

How and when central contracts are awarded will also alter as a result of the circumstances surrounding Harry Brook. 

Incremental contract of reportedly £58,000 was given to Harry Brook in October. The 24-year-old, though, has since made a name for himself in many forms, having won the T20 World Cup and scoring four hundreds in five Test matches during the winter. He will also be a part of England 50-over World Cup preparations later this year.

With match costs and win rewards added on top, the complete 12-month central contracts awarded for this cycle varied from £200,000 to £800,000. The impact Brook has suggests that he would control a position somewhere around the top of that category. 

Although the timing of contract awards will be flexible in the coming future, Brook will have to wait until the end of the 2023 summer for an enhanced agreement because the ECB budgets are determined annually. 

The disparity in compensation for his services is highlighted by the fact that he is now playing in the IPL for Sunrisers Hyderabad on a £1.3 million contract.

One of the players who opted for the PSL over Bangladesh, Sam Billings, said that match costs and central contracts needed to “resolve itself” to prevent England players from making the same choice in the future. 

Due to Sam Billings‘ present lack of a national contract, he would have received significantly less money than the contract he upheld with Lahore Qalandars for any ODI and T20i trips in Bangladesh. He would have received £5,000 and £2,500, respectively, in addition to a tour fee.

“This is where we are going to end up having to take different approaches in the way we contract our players,”

Gould said. 

“Whereas there have been collective bargaining arrangements largely, those do have validity but they will have less validity as more opportunities come up in the market and players want to do other things. Therefore, I think we will be trying to tailor contracts to the needs of each individual in order to ensure we can secure their services for when we need them.”

“I’m sure there will be some flexibility on that when players come through. When you are contracting players, it is a futures market. You are securing talent for the future and sometimes that doesn’t present itself nicely on the final day in September. I’m sure that is something we would be keen to look at.”

He was direct when it came to the matter of increasing match fees for men and women, which will vary depending on any potential conflicting interests at the time: “We’re going to have to pay them more money.

“That’s probably likely to be based on appearance money rather than the central contract element because I think that gives us the most cost-effective way of dealing with any particular competitive tournament at that particular time. We’ll be looking to get the match fees up, both with the men and the women. Sometimes it’ll depend on what the games are clashing against.”

The advantages of these adjustments for Gould are numerous. The greatest concern is the genuine financial risk to the England team’s output. 

This was marked by the Bangladesh Cricket Board’s surprise at the lack of interest in the rights to a tour of Bangladesh by a reduced England team. (Home boards are in charge of distributing for series they host). The UK broadcast rights had to be purchased by Sky at a cost that was borne by the ECB.

“We don’t have a choice in this,” Gould said. “If we don’t secure the services of our best players, the media rights will drop. This is an existential issue for us – we cannot afford not to have our best players available when we really need them, otherwise our values will drop.”

In addition to protecting England’s assets for the future, the county game must be safeguarded against spending time and resources on producing cricketers merely for franchises to select the best and brightest. 

As the CEO of Championship team Bristol City before joining the ECB, Gould is well aware of the necessity to adjust to market forces when it comes to on-field talent.

“We had north of 70 of our male players playing around the world this winter, and I think there were up to 15 or 20 of the women as well. You can see that our talent pathway is the envy of the world when you recognise how many of our players are in demand.

“The player pathway is what we really do need to protect. If you look at any franchise tournament around the world, they don’t have academies, they don’t have player pathways. They will get their talent by just taking the cream off the top.” 

“I think this is an issue for all franchise tournaments. We need to make sure franchise tournaments are paying and they are contributing towards the cost of the player development pathway, both men and women.”

“Our responsibility is to make sure we can compete in the global player market to ensure that our players want to play for us – men and women, both for England and within our domestic competitions. But to do that, we’ve got to make sure we’ve got the financial clout to retain them.

“Often, I think people will place a huge emphasis on playing for England, and we’re grateful to them for their loyalty. But we need to make sure that we can pay the going rate, and having come back from football, player markets are something I know pretty well, and we need to make sure we can compete.”

When asked if he was dissatisfied that the ECB launched the review, overseen by Sir Andrew Strauss, Gould responded that he had no problem with counties maintaining their position. 

He also mentioned that a 4-0 Ashes loss combined with poor Test cricket play was what prompted the assessment. These problems are no longer as urgent given that the men’s Test squad has a streak of 10 victories in 12 games.

“There are many ways we can drive forward towards success and those recommendations came about as a result of performances delivered over 12 months ago.

“I think with what we’ve seen, in terms of the way the England men’s team have performed over the last 12 months, would indicate there were other issues in play as well, not just the structure.

“Every time there is a reversal in the Ashes, there is always a review. As a result of those reviews, we always find things to move forward with and improve. But we don’t always adopt all of them. I’m sure we will have future reviews.”