 Only six England players so far have contracts for the summer |
English cricket has been forced to cut costs by �4m in the wake of the national team's boycott of their World Cup match in Zimbabwe. The budget cuts will be made across the sport, from the grassroots to the allocation of central contracts for the England team, the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) announced.
The International Cricket Council (ICC) announced last week that it would be withholding �2.3m from the ECB in case of compensation claims after England pulled out of the match in Harare citing safety worries.
The case is likely to be referred to the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne, where the ECB believes it will receive the full �2.3m plus interest.
But the game's governing body is holding back a further �1m from each team as a result of the sponsorship row that dogged the build-up to the tournament.
And the ECB believes it is "prudent" to keep cash back in case it does not receive any of its share.
Each county is expected to see �30,000 chopped off its originally intended allowance this year following a meeting of the First Class Forum (FCF), made up of representatives of each county.
"It is regrettable that these cost savings need to be found, but they are part of the financial fall-out from the 2003 World Cup," said ECB chief executive Tim Lamb.
"It is only right and proper that all parts of the game should bear the pain."
 Central contracts are something we've all been striving for and that is something we will keep in place |
FCF chairman Mike Soper told the BBC that central contracts would remain in place. The ECB introduced the contracts in 2000 to oversee the training of England's top players and to protect them from playing too much for their counties.
Twelve players were given contracts in the first intake, and it was announced last year the number was to be increased to a maximum of 20.
But only six players were given 12-month contracts prior to the Ashes in October, with the remainder of the squad handed six-month deals to cover the winter.
Soper said counties were not reliant on the World Cup money, and would have treated it more as a windfall.
"We were looking at it more to clear up things like pensions, but obviously there will be an impact," he went on.
MMIX
Email this to a friend 
Printable version 
