Cricket Australia (CA) chair Mike Baird and his New South Wales counterpart John Knox grabbed a quiet coffee on Monday, trying to take some of the heat out of the debate over partial privatisation of the Big Bash League. CA chief executive Todd Greenberg then fronted two lengthy radio slots, telling the ABC and SEN that, yes, administrators “could have, and should have” done a sharper job spelling out why outside investment is on the table.
“We’ve desperately tried to run this project with our stakeholders, with our members, with our players,” Greenberg told SEN on Tuesday. “I do think it’s easy to run the other argument … people don’t like change in any form of life, cricket particularly. Change comes hard.”
So far, change is coming in patches. Victoria, Tasmania and Western Australia are keen to test the market, eye-balling possible valuations for slices of their BBL clubs. NSW and Queensland have pushed back. South Australia is hovering in the middle, wanting more detail before it moves either way. CA’s current fallback is a hybrid plan – sell down a handful of teams first, prove the money and the governance work, then invite the undecided states to follow.
Greenberg’s preference, though, remains a national, all-in model. “One of the things I am proud of is, despite some tension in the system, relationships are really strong,” he said. “Healthy debate is a good thing for cricket … we just should be having them in the right tone, which we are.”
Privatisation talk has bled into contract season. Five senior men’s players knocked back initial CA offers last week. A dozen domestic Big Bash names are weighing up overseas deals for the coming summer, citing the widening pay gap between local stars and headline overseas signings. The players’ association is quietly backing the stance, arguing that private capital could unlock funds for home-grown talent.
Western Australia, part-owner of the six-time champions Perth Scorchers, likes the upside. Scorchers officials believe extra cash will let them keep the core of a side that has dominated under coach Adam Voges. NSW, by contrast, fear loss of control and the possibility of private owners pushing short-term returns ahead of state pathways.
Those concerns were aired, at least informally, when Baird – himself a former NSW premier – met Knox in Sydney. Neither man briefed reporters, but insiders say the conversation was “frank and useful”. A formal CA board meeting, pencilled in for later this month, is expected to decide whether market testing proceeds with just three states or is paused for more consensus work.
Industry analysts reckon a 25-30 per cent sale across the eight clubs could fetch north of AUD 500 million, depending on broadcast and digital rights beyond 2031. That number, though, relies on the league lifting crowds and TV share after three flat summers. A private investor would also want clarity on player availability – something Greenberg admitted remains a juggling act with the global T20 calendar.
The players themselves are watching closely. “The large gap between salaries for local stars and overseas players has been the main source of frustration,” one senior pro told SEN, asking not to be named. The comment echoes dressing-room chat that domestic batters can earn three or four times less than an overseas all-rounder parachuted in for a month.
Greenberg stopped short of criticising the hold-outs but hinted that extra capital would allow CA to lift the cap. “If we unlock value we can invest back into the competition,” he said on the ABC. “That means better wages, improved facilities and, crucially, a product that stays relevant.”
Opponents argue the BBL is already profitable and that CA should simply divert a greater share of central revenue. They point to the record AUD 1.5 billion broadcast deal signed last year. Greenberg counters that the money is thinly spread across the elite men’s and women’s programmes, grassroots pitches, country cricket, diversity initiatives and, lately, a beefed-up Australia A schedule.
For now, the sides are circling. NSW and Queensland administrators want tighter guarantees on governance – board seats, veto powers and minimum spends on junior pathways. WA, Victoria and Tasmania believe those guardrails already exist in draft term sheets. South Australia’s stance, according to one official, is “we like the sound of it but show us the numbers first”.
There’s also the calendar. CA would like a resolution before the men’s T20 World Cup in September, allowing a marketing push through spring. Realistically, though, state boards rarely make big calls in the middle of the winter off-season. Another possibility is a pilot sale – one club floated as a proof of concept – yet no state is rushing to volunteer as the guinea pig.
Away from the boardrooms, coaches are simply hoping for clarity. “You just want to know what levers you can pull,” one BBL list manager said. “If there’s more money, brilliant, we’ll plan for it. If not, we’ll work with what we’ve got. The uncertainty is the hardest bit.”
Greenberg accepts that point. “These are big conversations to have, so we’ve got to be having them together,” he said on SEN. Whether together means all six states at the table – or three in the room and three peering through the window – should become clearer inside a month.
