The calendar debate continues—but with real ideas on the table
The broken state of international cricket’s calendar has become one of the most talked-about—and least acted-upon—issues in the sport. But a recent Cricexec poll shows a growing appetite for structural solutions, not just complaints.
The poll, based on former West Indies captain Carlos Brathwaite’s widely shared guest post for Cricexec, asked:
Do you agree with Carlos Brathwaite’s proposal to divide franchise leagues into Tier 1 (which get dedicated calendar slots) and Tier 2 (which run alongside international cricket)?
The result: 80% said yes, while just 20% said no.
That overwhelming support signals that Brathwaite may be onto something, even if the exact tier placements he suggested remain up for debate.
From chaos to calendar: Brathwaite’s call for order
In his guest post titled “From chaos to calendar – fixing global cricket’s broken schedule”, Brathwaite argued that cricket’s unchecked proliferation of franchise leagues is creating confusion for fans, burnout for players, and headaches for broadcasters and boards alike.
His proposed solution is simple but radical: divide leagues into two tiers, with Tier 1 tournaments getting exclusive windows on the calendar, and Tier 2 leagues coexisting with international fixtures.
The goal? Restore balance between club and country, and make the calendar legible and sustainable for all stakeholders.
A rare show of consensus—sort of
What’s striking about the poll isn’t just the result—it’s the tone of the discourse it has sparked.
Unlike many proposals that immediately polarize, Brathwaite’s structure-based suggestion is resonating across stakeholder groups. Executives, players, and commentators may disagree on which leagues deserve Tier 1 status, but many agree that some form of tiering is overdue.
Nick Cummins, CEO of Cricket Victoria, posted on X:
“I think it is an interesting concept but I don’t agree with the leagues Carlos has ranked in his tiers.”
In other words: the concept is sound—even if the implementation needs refinement.
Part of a broader movement for reform
Brathwaite is not alone in calling for a clearer, fairer calendar.
Earlier this year, the World Cricketers’ Association (WCA) released a landmark Global Game Structure Report, declaring that “the system is broken.” The WCA warned of the risks of unchecked growth in franchise leagues and the absence of long-term planning.
Similarly, SACA CEO Andrew Breetzke wrote in his guest post for Cricexec, “If you control the calendar, you control the sport”, that the calendar has become the single biggest driver of power, inequality, and instability in the game.
Structure vs sentiment: Why Brathwaite’s idea stands out
Many have diagnosed the calendar crisis—but Brathwaite is offering a structure, not just a slogan. By framing the problem through a tiered lens, he’s shifted the conversation from vague calls for “better coordination” to a practical framework that could be adopted, debated, and improved.
In that sense, the Cricexec poll result reflects a hunger for leadership and clarity—and a shift in tone from frustration to solution-building.
What’s next?
If there’s one takeaway from the poll, it’s that cricket’s stakeholders are ready to have the hard conversations. About prioritization. About sacrifice. And about what kind of global structure best serves the sport.
Brathwaite’s proposal may not be perfect, but it’s now a serious part of the discussion—and has the numbers to prove it.
Read Brathwaite’s full guest post here:
👉 Read full story
Related reads on the calendar crisis:
📌 The system is broken: WCA calls for global overhaul of cricket’s calendar and governance
📌 If you control the calendar, you control the sport – Guest post by SACA CEO
