Fortress Chelmsford?

[adelaide]

So two of our Blast matches will be played at Chelmsford, to save the setup costs at Radlett. But it's OK because Chelmsford is only 20 minutes by train from Stratford (which I think was never part of historic Middlesex anyway, admittedly only missing out by half a mile or so).

Needs must, I suppose. I can't imagine that the crowds will be good - though they ought to be better behaved than the usual Blast attendance there - but do we get the gate money less a fee or do we get a fee and Essex keep the gate money? I imagine that Essex would keep the catering income and so on.

I think we can take it as read that anyone who went to Radlett because they lived nearby will not be travelling to Chelmsford. I suppose the question has to be asked as to whether this means some of the investment in Radlett was wasted but to be fair I suspect that playing Blast matches there was not foreseen in those days well before the Hundred.

Someone said on the World Cup thread that they felt a bit dirty supporting Australia. Anyone feel the same about Chelmsford as a home ground? Having said which The Oval gave us a very happy memory in the form of St Dawid's Day.

[MIDDLE EXILE]

The obvious alternative venue would of course have been The Oval. Far more accessible for most than Chelmsford. It would be interesting to know if this was considered, and if so for what reason we will not be going there.

[adelaide]

The obvious alternative venue would of course have been The Oval. Far more accessible for most than Chelmsford. It would be interesting to know if this was considered, and if so for what reason we will not be going there.

No doubt we shall (not) be old in due course. My guess would be cost. I doubt that Surrey would have made it more difficult, as mom basket-case Middlesex is in their interests too, but they have to cover the costs involved.

The other possibilities might be other commitments or the risk of overuse of the square but for a couple of T20s the latter seems unlikely.

[Sillypoint]

Costs have gone up "with the enhancements made to the member experience at out-ground matches." do they mean that tiny stand and a few portaloo? I'm a bit confused at what they mean. Why did they invest in the place if they are gonna bail. It feels rudderless. Can't imagine many will go. The locals won't turn out

[adelaide]

Costs have gone up "with the enhancements made to the member experience at out-ground matches." do they mean that tiny stand and a few portaloo? I'm a bit confused at what they mean. Why did they invest in the place if they are gonna bail. It feels rudderless. Can't imagine many will go. The locals won't turn out

To be fair they would not have been expecting to bail when they invested. Temporary stands and portaloos are presumably rented, thus not investment.

I've just had a thought - play the two Chelmsford matches as double headers. That might get a few more in.

[Jonathan Winsky]

I felt pessimistic about how well attended Middlesex’s two home matches at Chelmsford will be when both matches showed on BBC as starting at 2:30pm on a Thursday or Friday. Even though the matches are now shown as 7:00pm starts, I am still unsure how many people will be happy to travel from London (where I imagine that many of our supporters live) for a match starting at that time. The amount of Middlesex supporters at these matches could be outnumbered by those who support our opponents - who will be Kent and Gloucestershire - or who have affinities to neither of the two competing sides.

I was brought in mind of a Twenty20 match we played v Somerset at The Oval in 2014 when my memory was that the attendance was a lot lower than we have tended to attract at Lord’s and Surrey have tended to attract at The Oval, and my memory has not deceived me, as Cricinfo’s report says “The crowd numbered few more than a healthy Championship attendance”. If we can’t get a good attendance at The Oval, what chance do we have at Chelmsford? Then again, whereas that match in 2014 took place during the FIFA World Cup on a day when Spain, Netherlands and Australia were in action, I don’t think our matches at Chelmsford will clash with any major football, as they will take place either side of Euro 2024.

My guess is that Middlesex have somehow calculated that even if the matches at Chelmsford are not well-attended, it will work out financially better than setting up at an outground.

Thinking from a cricketing point of view, I am surprised to read Andrew Cornish suggesting that our players are happy about this on the basis that Chelmsford is a first-class ground with first-class facilities. That may be the case, but I am sure I have previously heard it said that our players are fond of playing at Radlett and Merchant Taylors’ School due to the fact that they are familiar with those grounds and feel at home there. By contrast, I doubt that our players will be much more familiar with Chelmsford than Kent and Glos will be, which would mean that the matches will be more or less as much an away match for us as it will be for our opponents.

Oh well, at least the match v Kent on 31st May will give us an insight into Chelmsford which should come in great use when we play Essex there two days later!

[Sillypoint]

Yeah the players being happy thing is the reddest of herrings. I doubt any of them had any say in this at all. It's beyond a little depressing to be officially having to borrow random grounds to save cash and to expect members to slog over to Essex to get their memberships worth. I've still no idea where all those costs are coming from as they should be making the most cash from outgrounds on the catering etc....

[adelaide]

You have to be careful making pronouncements about what the platers prefer as the clear implication is that the players do not like the standards and facilities for match days at Radlett, which is pretty much the opposite of what has been said in the past. It's like an incoming player saying he always wanted to play for X (just as he had said when moving to Y and Z beforehand). Or - my favourite - a Spurs signing saying he had joined for the opportunity of working with Christian Gross.

My guess is that the set up costs at an outground would be acceptable for a festival type of thing - several matches over a fortnight - as everything can be left in place but that would not be the case for matches two weeks apart.

Incidentally, one of the reports saw said that Middlesex lease Lord's from MCC. Quite the opposite, of course; we get a fee but forgo the income. It would be interesting to know the details of the arrangement with Essex - like who benefits from a higher attendance. Of course I have every confidence that our financial wizards will have negotiated the best possible deal. Don't I?