It is strange that mid tournament Channel 9 won't be able to broadcast the remainder of the tournament, I can't remember that ever happening before
Yeah, but do you recall Australia ever split hosting with another country a tri-series before?
This t20 tri series wasn't in the Future Tours Programme when Ch9 bought the rights to international games played in Australia and doesn't qualify as "major international event" like the Ashes or World Cup does to fall foul of the Government restrictions.
http://images.supersport.com/content/FTP-2015-to-2019-as-at-Nov-2014.pdf
What was anticipated was 5 ODI's and 1 T20 in NZ. But as NZ decided to swap a 3rd test in 2015/16 for a ODI series, that would have meant NZ had hosted Australia for an ODI series 3 years running (not including the World Cup).
So NZC, presumably being its meek self, suggested this T20 tri series, which means NZC gets less host broacasting against an in-demand opposition. And now faces a probability of holding a final in a big near empty rugby stadium for a match played between England and Australia which may unfortunately jeopardise any further tri-series endeavours. Still perhaps 2 additional t20 games in NZ will outrate in India a t20 vs Australia and 5 odi's, plus a t20 vs England; and NZC are playing this smart. But even if t20 rate higher, why not simply have Australia play 6 t20s in NZ and England still play 1?
I am unaware on any subsequent financial arrangements, but at first blush this tri series looks like a total bonus chance to profit for Ch 9 (and CA), even if they only get 3/7 of the series to broadcast. NZC appears to have given a lot; as a 5 odi versus Australia in NZ, the Chappell Hadlee games don't appear to struggle to get ratings globally when broadcast nor sell tickets locally; all for 2 more t20 games, 1 of which NZ is no certainty to play in. Given NZ has no winter away tours this year, I again question what is going on at NZC head quarters.
