The sale of The Hundred: ‘Can it make up for what has been lost?’

The sale of the eight Hundred franchises brought more than half a billion pounds into the English game. But why was the money invested, how should it be spent, will it help or hinder county cricket – and where should the tournament go from here?

Dan Feist, Essex chief executive

This summer, we celebrate our 150th year. The funding provided by the Hundred sale is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, and we have to make sure we are still here in another 150 years. I don’t know where we, or other counties, would be without this money. As in other sports – look at rugby – costs have risen but income has stagnated. Some factors are beyond our control: the changes to National Insurance in 2024, for instance, whacked hundreds of thousands of pounds on our outgoings overnight.

Rightly, the ECB have put guardrails in place: even a big number can disappear quickly, and we have to make a business case for our allocation. Some counties will pay down debt, though we are lucky not to have any, so we plan to invest. Chelmsford has a special atmosphere, but the facilities for players and the experience for fans need upgrading. It’s about 30 years behind standard; the tricky thing is future-proofing it for 30 years’ time. And everything we do will have the women’s game in mind.

Clubs like us also need to make ourselves more financially self-sufficient and sustainable. Championship and one-day cricket don’t do that, and the loss of one home Blast match per season is worth £130,000. We have to create other revenue streams. Many of our members feel a strong disconnect from The Hundred, which is difficult. But they are renewing their subscriptions, and the passion for county cricket remains. I believe that is a strength of the game: we have something for everyone.

This new era has led to much thought about the purpose of the club. We want to use cricket to bring together a community that is diverse in every respect. We never felt much connection to London Spirit, with whom we were affiliated. But if you look at the demographics and the size of our catchment area, you’d think investors would be interested. Nobody knows when The Hundred will expand, but we must be ready to be part of it.

Kavya Maran, head of Sun Group – owners of Sunrisers Leeds

When the opportunity arose to invest in a Hundred team, it was a no-brainer. At Sunrisers, we want to be part of cricket’s evolution, and I believe this league can carve its own space in the game’s ecosystem, just as the IPL has. In an era when attention spans are shrinking, the ECB have been forwardthinking by targeting family audiences. It stands out from the pack. We also felt an immediate connection with Yorkshire.

The main reason for owning cricket teams across other leagues is to expand the Sunrisers brand globally. Each country has its own strengths and, by having teams in multiple leagues, we can create synergies that benefit players, fans and the sport itself. We want to contribute to the growth of cricket beyond India, and expand its reach beyond traditional markets. Everybody knows England is where it all began. We had to be involved.

There were other reasons. The gender-parity element was important to us. We have not invested in a women’s team before, because the WPL has not yet opened a Hyderabad franchise. It is a new challenge.

The depth and talent of English cricket were appealing. People talk about getting current Indian men’s internationals involved – it comes up in every meeting. Yes, that would be transformative for The Hundred, but it will have to wait because of BCCI restrictions.

For now, the focus should be making the local talent pool as deep as possible, and available for the whole tournament. It is players such as Jos Buttler and Jofra Archer who will bring in fans and drive the tournament’s value. As with our team in Port Elizabeth [Gqerbha], we want to build a strong local core.

We have to nail the UK market. Everything else overseas is a bonus. We will tailor our approach for fans in Yorkshire, like we do in PE or Hyderabad, but they are all part of what we call the Orange Army.

I am happy with the 100-ball format. With new ownership, brands and players, we shouldn’t change much else. The format provides us, as owners, with a point of difference from other leagues, and fits strategically with the double-headers and family vibe.

Annie Chave, editor and director of County Cricket Matters

My love affair with Somerset began when, aged seven or eight, I watched Viv Richards and Joel Garner. I was a silent supporter for a long time but, when my son went to university, I began talking about cricket on social media. The Hundred had just come in, and I became a fierce advocate for the counties.

We have 18 first-class clubs, but The Hundred uses eight grounds, so we are handing the prime month of the summer, with kids on holiday, to a few super-counties. The rest get four games in the One-Day Cup. It’s a dead time of year for most of cricket, which is crazy because it should be the height of it. I understand why they want to play The Hundred in August, but it was railroaded through, and steps on the toes of so much that was good. August is when red-ball cricket is at its best, with warm weather and spinners in the game. We have a fantastic domestic system that is followed religiously by many, yet it has been derided for much of its history. Now, access to the red-ball game has basically been taken away from children. Kids have been told they have no attention span, but there is no reason why they cannot fall in love with cricket through the Championship. Festival cricket was a joy for my son growing up.

I never thought The Hundred would just disappear. But when Richard Gould and Richard Thompson took over at the ECB, I hoped they could find a way to spread the competition across the counties. I hoped it could work with the counties, not against them, but that didn’t happen. Now, after the sale, the divide in our game feels deeper than ever. I fear for the future. It is great that counties such as Somerset receive £25m. But, as much as that sounds, I don’t think it’ll go that far. And can it ever make up for what has been lost?

David Lloyd, broadcaster

I would move The Hundred from August into September, and make it a celebration of the summer’s cricket, a fun way to end the season. And because I think it will inevitably become a T20 competition, I’d sacrifice the Blast, expand The Hundred from eight teams to 12, with new franchises in Chelmsford, Taunton, Chester-le-Street and the Midlands, and make sure the extra funds are used to compensate the 18 first-class counties for the loss of Blast revenue.

With August completely freed up, the Championship could then be played on good pitches at the height of summer. My preference would be for three random groups of six, with semi-finals (the three group winners, plus the best-placed runner-up) and a final. And here’s the killer: the winner picks up £20m, paid for initially by the sale of the Hundred franchises, and after that by TV rights for the new expanded tournament. Think of the quality of overseas players you might attract to the red-ball game if each player knew he might win £1m or so. That would focus the mind, and we’d have created space in the schedule, which as we all know is one of English cricket’s biggest problems.

Bryan Henderson, director of cricket at Sky

I have watched The Hundred grow from concept to reality and, whenever I walk round a ground, I still pinch myself at the number of kids and families. It is a rare sporting event to which I’m thrilled to take my son, aged ten, and my daughter, seven. Look at Lord’s. The Test crowd has a certain demographic. The Hundred is different, but they can complement each other. That new audience helps protect and grow the game.

So does the external investment, which – in many people’s eyes – gives the tournament credibility. Some still see it as a bit of a joke competition. But the finances prove this is a serious sporting event, and an engaging and inclusive product for those watching at home. The involvement of the Tech Titans in the Lord’s franchise changed everything – not just financially, but in terms of expertise and credibility. It’s a great blend of investors.

Without The Hundred, I suspect English cricket would have been left behind. There is a global trend of sport and entertainment converging, with the Super Bowl the prime example. The biggest events are getting bigger, but those in the middle are being squeezed, such as contextless bilateral white-ball series. The sums don’t add up.

At Sky, we want to help the tournament grow. There is pressure on the investors to do just that, to justify their outlay. I am intrigued by how it will work now it is not run centrally, with eight teams competing on and off the field. We need to attract better players, and improve pitches. Top-class cricket is non-negotiable, but we also need to get to 100% attendances, and to improve audio systems and big screens to help the in-ground experience. If that happens, I see no reason why The Hundred shouldn’t become the best family sports competition in Europe.

Justin Langer, Manchester Originals men’s coach

The Hundred is an awesome tournament, but three things must not change: 1) the short, sharp length, which is perfect; 2) the availability of England internationals; 3) the number of teams. It’s easy to say you should expand from eight, but then the domestic talent pool gets stretched, and the quality drops.

Keep that recipe, and The Hundred can be the second-best league in the world, after the IPL, which is an outlier: there is nothing like it, and there is nowhere like India. India can sustain more teams, and games that go on all night. There’s no need to try to compete with it.

I wouldn’t change to T20. The Hundred is different enough that it’s unique, but not so different that it’s unrecognisable. It was a strategic challenge for captains, choosing whether to bowl five or ten balls, though the data told us a second five from the same bowler was usually more expensive. It was also hard to know the style of batsmen required. With just 100 balls, you can’t let up the attack, but that is tricky when the wickets are tired, as they have been in England lately, and the ball is swinging and seaming. That was my biggest lesson.

The best thing was the double-headers. It was so good for building a club mentality, and for linking with fans. The women’s game has made huge strides, and I’d never been involved in something like that before.

David Wright, Surrey member

I first became a member aged 14 in 1983, after my dad started there in the mid-1950s. I love my club, and the county game more widely. I can’t imagine supporting Oval Invincibles – or MI London, as they are now. At least when “Oval” was in the name, we could see the connection, and some members have embraced The Hundred. I don’t see myself going to a game, but I’m not resistant to innovation: I love a T20 night at The Oval as much as the Championship.

I am not convinced people will ever have the same attachment to a franchise who play eight games a year as they do to a county with history. I have been worried about the impact of The Hundred from the outset. It’s not the format: that’s a red herring. I worry about the impact on the fabric of English cricket, and the traditional county system. I always felt that, with the right marketing budgets and TV exposure, The Hundred could secure a new audience. But I now feel it was more about creating a product to sell.

The money will be welcome everywhere but, while the numbers are big, it will run out quickly if not used right. It’s amazing that more than £25m does not go that far when redeveloping a ground, as some counties are discovering. I worry about the financial them-and-us between Test and non-Test venues. That wedge will probably only become bigger now the hosts have even greater advantages.

The Hundred has already seen the One-Day Cup downgraded, and taken ticket sales from the T20 Blast, because of the extra publicity, prime summer dates and subsidised prices. The consequences have been clear, and it could do further damage to the Championship. With wealth comes power, and the franchise owners hold the cards. It would be a crying shame if we lost counties, as it would mean fewer opportunities for cricketers, job losses, and the disappearance of a part of the local community and its history.

Kate Cross, England fast bowler

The Hundred has been monumental for women’s cricket. When it first came along, we didn’t know what to expect. There was talk about it being a game-changer, about us promoting a product, though we didn’t really know what we were promoting. I can say now it’s been exactly what domestic cricket needed. The number of balls was irrelevant, but playing at the main grounds, on TV, under pressure, has been so important. Overseas players talk about how special the crowds are and, while some franchises do it better than others, the one-club-two-teams thing is special.

I look at my Northern Superchargers (now Sunrisers Leeds) team-mate Davina Perrin, who is on track to play for England. When I made my international debut, I had played a bit of county cricket, but had never bowled on successive days, or played in front of a big crowd. In 2025, Davina lit up the finals weekend, and that can only stand her in good stead when she makes the step up. The investment clearly marks a change for the women’s competition. Ultimately, I am optimistic, because it’s such a big figure for every level of the sport, which is surely a good thing.

But, as players, we haven’t been told much and, because The Hundred has been so good until now, there is anxiety about how things will look for the women’s game. Cricket’s history has been shaped through the men’s game, with women an afterthought. I hope that is not how the franchises view it, and that – when making changes – the ECB will protect what’s been built. It’s a step into the unknown. From what I’ve seen, the tournament will keep moving in the right direction. Salaries are rising again, which is great, but I’d like to see the base level rise, not just the top players make a killing. And I’d hate to see separate match days.

Vikram Banerjee, managing director of The Hundred

I am delighted with the point we have reached after the sales process. The breadth and calibre of those involved are amazing. Our ambitions are unapologetically high. We want families sitting around the dinner table at Christmas planning their summer in the belief this is an unmissable event.

We have had five seasons, and reached a brilliant baseline. After 15 or 20, we want The Hundred to have redefined cricket in the UK. We are seeing fandom and tribalism grow, but the next stage is moving from a great day out for the family to real love for your team, where a result takes you high or low, and where you attend away games too.

The money should be transformational for the game in England and Wales. It is being closely monitored by our finance, audit and risk committee, and the ECB board. It’s unlikely we will ever do anything like this again, so the money needs to be used for paying off debt, building reserves, or investing in infrastructure. We are still working out exactly what to do with the 10 per cent ring-fenced for the recreational game.

The board votes are one-third ECB, two-thirds teams. It would be foolish to bring in such talented people and not give them a say in the tournament’s future, but we have retained a clear set of reserved rights on the most important issues: the duration and format of the tournament, gender parity, the number of teams. I like the balance, but that doesn’t mean there won’t be conflict and robust debate.

The 100-ball format and the number of teams will not change until at least 2028. If they do, it will have to be for the right reasons. There is no rush. And while we have given responsibility to the clubs, we still have control over kids ticket prices, and the cheapest 15% of tickets overall. And there are guardrails in place over sponsorships, to ensure the family feel remains.

Ellie-Jo Ball, Staffordshire Under-18 all-rounder

I was a tennis player to begin with, but I wanted to be part of a team, so in 2021, when I was 12, I played a bit of cricket. The following year, I went to The Hundred for the first time – I was attracted by the shorter format and fast pace. After going, I started properly learning about, and investing time in, the game. Within a couple of years, I was opening the batting and keeping wicket for my age group at Staffordshire.

I next saw The Hundred in 2024, when I went to a lot of matches, and made a lot of friends. What struck me most was the community it brought together. When you walk in and see lots of families, you feel you belong. My nan, grandad and sister have got into it, and now we go to watch Warwickshire in the Blast as well. I now watch all the formats, and franchise cricket over the winter. In 2026, I’m hoping to attend my first Test match, when England’s women play India at Lord’s.

Follow Wisden for all cricket updates, including live scores, match stats, quizzes and more. Stay up to date with the latest cricket news, player updates, team standings, match highlights, video analysis and live match odds.