Why did the ETPL fail this time?

The latest postponement of an Irish franchise league seven years after the first attempt has finally been announced

Abhishek Bachchan, co-owner of the now postponed ETPL. 📸: Cricket Ireland

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me seven times, well, where does the shame go?

Irish cricket’s worst kept secret has finally been confirmed. Seven years after the idea for a European franchise tournament was first floated, the latest iteration of the artist formerly known as the Euro Slam has been postponed.

Cricket Ireland first tried for a franchise competition in 2019. This year, the Euro Slam was replaced by the European T20 Premier League. New year. New name. Same result: no dice.

We were told unequivocally that this time would be different. Why were European cricket fans at worst lied to, at best misled by hubristic ambition?

You’d be forgiven for missing the actual confirmation. The news dropped on Friday, six weeks after first being reported on this site. Cricket Ireland’s statement barely totalled 200 words. The word ‘postponed’ was not used once. Abhishek Bachchan, the Indian actor who previously was the public face of the competition, was not mentioned.

Neither men quoted, CI CEO Warren Deutrom or Saurav Banerjee of Rules Sport Tech, the organising company, gave a concrete reason why the can has once again been booted. The disrespect to fans and other stakeholders is unfathomable. It falls to the following information to explain why we once again ‘celebrate’ (absolutely the wrong term) the seventh annual edition of Slam/ETPL postponement day.

If selling off franchises proved to be a stumbling block in 2019, then 2025 brings a bout of deja vu. In March, Bachchan, co-owner of the league said “we are almost there” in the process of selling the six teams, necessary to fund player salaries. He cited non-disclosure agreements when declining to offer further details.

Bachchan’s confidence appears to have been at odds with the purpose of his trip to Dublin. One figure involved in organising the weekend suggested that the goal was not to announce details on the league, but instead to drum up attention to attract the required investment.

After Bachchan’s visit, internal ETPL communication stated that two IPL franchises were committed, with their investment to be finalised post March 31st. Two further franchises were said to be close to agreeing. By the time of the postponement, months later, one figure with knowledge of discussions said the final number of commitments was as many as four.

It is understood that the RPSG Group, owner of the Lucknow Super Giants, was one of the IPL investors involved. Sources have indicated that the owners of the Mumbai Indians were also approached, though these discussions are not believed to have progressed to an advanced stage.

In terms of owners handing over cash, $3 million per season over a 10 year agreement, no team was definitively sold.

Andrew Balbirnie makes his thoughts known via social media on the ETPL cancellation.

One industry source suggested that the cost of a franchise, $30 million in total, was prohibitive.

When the Pakistan Super League was constituted towards the back end of 2015, the most expensive franchise, the Karachi Kings, cost $26 million, also over 10 years. Adjusting for inflation, that would value the Kings at roughly $35 million today. Would a franchise in Europe be considered within $5 million of a team in a city with a population of over 20 million people? “The EU is not an evolved market yet for cricket,” said the industry source.

According to a document circulated to prospective team owners, projections said it would take between four-to-six years for owners to break even. The league wanted investors to stick around for 10 years, though agreements did feature a three-year break clause.

Along with the initial franchise fee of $3 million for year one, team owners were also asked to provide $1.25 million towards player salaries. The salary cap would rise each year, culminating at $1.85 million by the 10th season.

Prize money was also forecast to increase over time. In year one, the competition winner would receive $540,000. Second place would take home $270,000 with third and fourth both winning $90,000. The bottom two sides would receive no prize money.

KPMG India provided a projected profit and loss account, budgeting for a team which finished fourth every year over 10 seasons. According to the accounts, such a mid-table record would see a prospective owner lose close to $5 million over the first six years. Four years later, projected revenue was forecast to rise as high as $8.4 million, leaving a 10-year profit of just under $3.5 million. In other words, finishing fourth every year for 10 years would see the team owner earn a 12% return on their $30 million investment.

The improved projections include a central revenue figure rising from $2.29 million in year one to $4.63 million in year 10, sponsorship growing from $900,000 to $3.23 million and merchandise sales increasing from $10,000 to $160,000.

Cricket Ireland and the ETPL did not respond to requests for comment.

While some labelled the value of the investment as an issue, others pointed to the ongoing sale of franchises in the Hundred. Auctions have already taken place to sell off teams in England, followed by negotiations regarding participation agreements. The deadline for finalising sales has been pushed back, with deals yet to be completed. Given some prospective ETPL owners are involved in the Hundred sale - Lucknow included with Manchester Originals - their European commitment had to wait.

An initial target of March 31st was set to close deals with ETPL franchise owners. When Bachchan arrived on St Patrick’s weekend, that appeared to have been pushed back, the actor promising further announcements by the end of April. Word never came.

According to internal documents, a player auction was to be held this week between June 5th-10th. It also states that organisers were in discussions with Travis Head, Rashid Khan, Nicholas Pooran, Sunil Narine and Faf du Plessis as marquee overseas players. Retired Indian internationals had also been approached. Bachchan was asked about signings from Pakistan, given IPL teams do not sign such players. He said recruitment was the prerogative of individual owners.

As the timeline continued to be pushed back, industry confidence in the ETPL dwindled. In mid April, this publication reported that the league would not take place during its originally scheduled window at the end of July. September was considered an option by organisers - it is understood at the request of one of the prospective IPL owners - but that was always going to prove difficult given the international schedule. One source indicated Scotland’s games in early September could have been moved to facilitate.

It’s unclear when the final decision on postponing the 2025 edition was made. It has been suggested that organisers first mentioned postponing long before Friday’s announcement, only for some officials to insist on carrying on.

For many, the visit of Bachchan, his willingness to speak to the press and visit local cricket clubs, combined with Cricket Ireland’s announcement of an ICC tournament sanction in January, suggested this was no false dawn. In 2019, they got as far as holding a player auction, even paying some high profile figures just to attend. Surely, after such public fanfare fell flat with no on-field product, they would learn their lesson regarding a premature sell?

Apparently not.

As the public face of the competition, Bachchan deserves scrutiny for promising without delivering. Yet some of his comments paint a picture of a man either badly advised or simply ill-informed, asked to lend his celebrity to an operation which wasn’t as close to completion as he had us believe. Bachchan incorrectly said Covid was the main reason for the old Euro Slam failing to get over the line. He appeared mistaken on the exact nature of what was promised by an ICC tournament sanction. He said he looked forward to naysayers buying their tickets watch the games in ETPL stadiums, seemingly unaware that no cricket stadium currently exists in Ireland, Scotland or the Netherlands.

Through the ETPL, Bachchan has been asked for comment.

The end result, whoever responsible, is that European cricket fans have once again been led up the garden path. Players who were promised franchise payments have been deprived of likely income along with much-needed game time. No replacement matches have been announced for a two-week window in the height of summer.

After the latest failure, questions need to be asked on the viability of this project. In a franchise market becoming more saturated by the year, is there room for another tournament in a market lacking the same cricketing heft as rival competitions in the UK, Sri Lanka and even the USA? Local fans would almost certainly prefer a busier international calendar over the creation of new teams with limited ties to the community.

Attention should turn to those responsible. While Cricket Scotland and the KNCB stand to benefit from the ETPL, they are junior partners waiting to be invited to the party. Cricket Ireland is driving the bus, for some time looking to sell franchises as a much needed revenue boost, hoping to take 20% of the franchise sales and divvy it up across the three nations. After seven years of chasing such a financial boon, spending resources on a futile project, at what point must the wisdom of decision makers be questioned?

Ger Siggins in the Irish Daily Mail reported that CI is left with a €700,000 hole in their budget as a result of this failing. After the ICC refused to release withheld funds in 2024, this is the second such year in which budgeting forecasts have not played out in reality. Given the recent Dutch AGM featured ‘derisive’ laughter at the mention of the ETPL, it seems they did not plan for a windfall. It remains unclear if Cricket Scotland planned for any financial budgetary decisions.

Critics of Cricket Ireland point to the CEO remaining situ for close to 20 years. To them, the repeated Euro Slam/ETPL failing is simply the latest iteration of repeated ideas from stale leadership of a stagnating organisation, signalling the need for fresh faces. Those at the top would point to achievements elsewhere, such as the government’s commitment to Abbotstown.

What, if anything, will happen as a result of this latest postponement? Some might express outrage. Others will shrug their shoulders in unsurprised ambivalence. Journalists can write critical pieces expressing a desire for scrutiny. But there are only a handful of people - those on the Cricket Ireland board - with any real power to hold the birthers of concept Slam to account.

Some board members have expressed dissatisfaction with the current state of the governing body, but they are believed to be in the minority. The board is a group which in 2020 outlined their concern for recruitment starting from the contacts book of the then chair or CEO. As recently as last year, CI’s CEO acknowledged that he asked former ICC boss Dave Richardson to put his name forward for a vacancy on the body to which he is answerable.

Inevitably, a perception of a lack of accountability has built. After the latest edition of a years-long failing, questions on the tenability of Deutrom’s role will only grow louder. The response of those in power will be the only thing that can defend them from an ever worsening reputation.

The extent of the fallout remains uncertain. We have been told once more that next year is different with Bachchan believed to be committed to trying again in 2026 - even if his name was conspicuously absent from the postponement announcement.

The eighth time may well be a charm. Otherwise we won’t need to ask who deserves shame after we’re all fooled again.