Kentish Gazette Canterbury & District
We won’t compromise on players’ salaries
Despite several years of financial hardship, the one thing Kent have not cut back on is players’ salaries. The club have kept their annual playing budget between £1.3m and £1.5m – figures that compare favourably with other counties, particularly those playing their championship cricket in Division 2. Mr Clifford said the county have always tried to work within ‘sensible parameters’ but they also recognise the need to stay competitive on the pitch. He said: “What we’ve refused to do is drop back significantly in terms of players’ salaries, or our collective commitment to players. “Since 2009, our player salary line has been between £1.3m and £1.5m and when we’ve produced a homegrown player and they’ve established their market value, we’ve had to work hard to keep them. “One thing we pride ourselves on is keeping our talented players together and we’re desperate to do so.” Clubs must stick within a salary cap of £ 2.15m although Surrey and Middlesex both benefit from ‘London weighting,’ which was introduced this summer. Even so, Mr Clifford revealed Kent’s 2016 wage bill is higher than some clubs that host international cricket, including Durham, Gloucestershire and Glamorgan. He added: “I would think we’d be mid table, probably eighth or ninth in the list of all the counties so there are some Test match grounds which have spent less than us. “We think that (maintaining players’ salaries) is a key element because if you raid that line to deliver your savings, you’re potentially constraining your future ability to perform. “2016 will be our highest salary bill for some time but only marginally, we’re not talking going off the scale.” Mr Clifford admitted that the signings of Tom Latham and Kagiso Rabada had contributed to the increased budget but feels both represent excellent value. He added: “We’ve got two players at the start of their international careers so the economics of that works in the club’s favour. “When we went big in 2015 on homegrown and not recruiting an overseas there were sound cricket reasons. “We felt we’ve got a group of players here, particularly young up and coming ones, which we want to keep together and if you start parachuting in players above them what are they going to say when it comes to contract renewal time and they’ve not played? “They’re going to say ‘well, we’ll be better off playing somewhere else’ so there’s an element of that in what you’re trying to do. “We’ve not bought in a seam bowler for the whole season because it would have the same consequence, there would be a young (homegrown) bowler who would miss out. “You have to be mindful of what the unintended consequences can be as much as you can be because if you’ve got a player you could get another 10 seasons out of who is committed to the club and you displace him for an overseas player, it can be harmful to that player’s devolopment. “The whole thing with overseas players is interesting. “There’s often this feeling ‘let’s just defer to the overseas player.’ You can’t just expect one individual to come in and solve all your problems – team sport doesn’t work like that.”
‘2016 will be our highest salary bill for some time but only marginally’