The Lancashire Problem: Will it Impact Others?

The Manchester based side announced that access to LancsTV+ would be at no additional charge to existing members and new members could access the feature for £20 this season.

The new platform will feature the full production of live streamed home matches across all formats as well as other features such as special documentaries, extended interviews and behind the scenes footage. Lancashire will become the only county in England to have their live stream behind a paywall and it’s safe to say the reaction hasn’t been great.

Former Lancashire and England legend David ‘Bumble’ Lloyd took to X to express that he was saddened by the decision. This is off the back of a revelation last month that Lloyd himself is involved in a so called ‘rebel group’ against Lancashire’s board. They have expressed concerns that the current board’s attention had been diverted from cricket and more towards events at Old Trafford and they wish to have more cricketing brains on the board. As well as expressing their discontent for this decision by Lancashire, some on social media have even hypothesised that this could be the start of a trend across county cricket and fans will be left to foot the bill, despite an already uncertain economic climate.

From a fan’s perspective, it is easy to see why this decision has sparked ire and immediate push back. Being asked to now pay for something you’ve already been getting for free is never going to go down well and when you take the timing into context as well, it becomes even more confusing.

With two games already played in the County Championship and for Lancashire, both being played at Old Trafford, it seems a strange time to now introduce a paywall. Suddenly the £20 season pass that some might be ready to pay works out more per game than it would have done if the paywall had been introduced at the start of the season. Yes, those two games were available for free, but as a consumer, it may seem as if you’re paying more per game than you might have done.

Secondly, the sale of the Hundred franchises had a supposed £520 million pumped into the county game from those sales. Surely this is the cash injection all the counties have been waiting for to make wholesale improvements to their infrastructure? It seems completely illogical that fans are being asked to put their hand in their pocket for a service that was provided for free before this cash injection. Especially, when there appears to be no promise of an improvement to the service, such as more camera angles or special graphics that would cost more but enhance the user experience.

Supporters concerns that if this works for Lancashire, other clubs will likely follow suit are legitimate. Kent attempted a similar move for their T20 Blast campaign at £5.99 per game for non-members in 2023, but quickly U-turned after receiving a reception one would think Lancashire would’ve learnt from. Many Lancashire fans might find themselves in a catch twenty-two situation this summer, of course wanting to watch along and support their side, but not wanting to contribute to a greedy mining of cricket fan’s pockets, especially in challenging economic times.

While my concerns are prominent, there is a world that exists in my mind that says this could actually help to bring people to the ground more and help counties to learn more about their own communities. I will stick with Lancashire as the example in my explanation.

Currently, Lancashire offers several tiers of membership ranging from £609 to £35 for adults. If they decide to incorporate LancsTV+ into their membership tiers, it might persuade those who were perhaps on the fence about joining, into signing up. Dependent on the tier of membership you purchase, free entry to the ground on a certain number of matchdays is one of the benefits of membership. Some also offer a complimentary guest ticket.

Financially county cricket is in an uncertain position in multiple departments. The announcement from Lancashire came on the same day as BBC Radio Leicester announcing that their long-term commentator, Richard Rae, loved by supporters, would be scrapped from coverage in place of BBC local staff members. LancsTV currently share commentators with BBC Radio Lancashire, led by Scott Read. With the BBC radio coverage being covered by the ECB, who themselves have left it late in confirming that partnership in recent years, adds the question of whether this would be feasible for other counties to follow even if they had to.

There’s been no suggestion that Lancashire will now be using their own commentary on LancsTV+ and many other counties also utilise the BBC Radio commentary for their streams (Glamorgan do for the County Championship but use in-house commentary for home white-ball fixtures). Are the ECB even sure they’re pumping enough money to have county cricket covered – if not, how can counties expect the average fan to pay?

New members who before might have stayed at home and watched the live stream are now more encouraged to go to the ground themselves. Getting fans through the turnstile as we all know is a huge focus of all 18 counties and adding more benefits to becoming a club member or as part of a season ticket package might be a small step into seeing fuller grounds across the country.

We also must be aware of the age we live in. I’m referring to is the age of data farming. Why are we seemingly asked to create an account for every website we visit nowadays? Data. Our personal data, however invasive it may seem tells businesses so much about the people they are selling to. Businesses like to build as big a profile of their customers as possible so they can tailor their products, services and marketing towards them.

This makes me feel as uneasy as the next guy but sometimes it’s not all bad. The more memberships Lancashire can sell, the more data they will have on the people who consume their products and services. It might tell them something about their fan base that they didn’t know. Such as a particular area of the county many of their members are from, a certain demographic of people watching their streams and this could allow them to strategize in a way that gives those people what they want and enhance their enjoyment of cricket.

There is a legitimate argument to be made that this decision has been based on greed, especially in the context of the Hundred sales this winter and if it is successful, it could spread across the county game like wildfire. It feeds into the narrative that cricket has become a corporate shill of its former self. The Hundred continues to be divisive and there is seemingly a new franchise tournament popping up somewhere around the world every year. You’d have to question the alternative too. Live streams can be monetized on YouTube and have ads and sponsorship plastered all over them anyway. Lancashire could’ve opted to go that way to attract money in; by making their viewership more exclusive, they’re gambling with a loss (if upsetting their loyalists isn’t one already).

However, it might serve as a catalyst to get people to the ground, to soak in the atmosphere, to form bonds with fellow fans, stewards and other members. It might spark parents to take their children along and ignite a passion for the game that they might not have got sat at home watching the stream. It might allow counties to do the right thing with our data and not just use it to sell us things but to invest in grass roots initiatives, improve facilities for fans, allow players to visit clubs and meet supporters.

It might just be a necessary evil to make county cricket the product we want it to be. Full stands, an electric atmosphere, top class entertainment and an environment that feels welcoming, friendly and connected. In a world where we crave convenience, sometimes removing the lazy option is the only way to show people what they’ve been missing.

You might not be able to connect the dots in this case just yet, but could Lancashire’s unpopular decision actually be a stroke of genius that the rest of county cricket hadn’t thought of or didn’t have the proverbials to implement?