The former opening batter and coach is concerned T20 is dictating terms.
He is troubled by how much focus is put on the bottom line.
And he has questioned whether you need any more lawyers or accountants running the game.
The Otago Daily Times approached Turner for comment on the proposed NZ20.
Earlier this week, New Zealand Cricket announced it would pursue NZ20 as its preferred option. It is set on revamping the Super Smash and favours a private ownership model.
It is still in the planning stage. But you might say it is ahead on the Duckworth-Lewis-Stern calculation.
Turner said he had not studied the details around the NZ20 and had no firm ideas on it. But he does resent the trajectory in which the game is heading.
‘‘To me, the game of twenty20, or whatever you want to call it, it’s a money grab,’’ he said.
‘‘And I feel very sad that they’ve allowed it to dictate the whole programme of cricket to the extent that the rest of the stuff, the real game, if you like, is suffering as a consequence.
‘‘I refer to 20-over cricket as slash. There’s no pun really intended there.
‘‘It’s more to say it’s the waste product of the game, like it is the waste product of cutting down trees... and leaving the slash.
‘‘Then you get heavy rains come down the hillsides and it takes out bridges and so on.’’
It is a vivid analogy and not one grounded in just a colourful imagination.
The NZ20 proponents want to carve out an international cricket-free window in January to stage the new competition.
That could alienate cricket’s traditional fan base, who may much prefer to watch test cricket during that period than, say, the Tauranga Super Kings.
Don Mackinnon, the chairman of the steering committee for NZ20, has suggested the proposed league will help keep New Zealand’s best players in the country as well as lure stars from abroad.
Private ownership will help pay players a competitive salary, and downstream from that, the competition’s profile will grow and fans will be more engaged with the tournament.
It is a win-win.
But Turner does not go along with that thinking.
‘‘If things revolve totally around money, which is what we’re talking about here, then how can we match it with much bigger countries, with bigger budgets and so on and so forth?
‘‘So it just seems to me that we’re likely to end up being a feeder nation.’’
Some would argue New Zealand already is a feeder nation, and if something is not done, the drift away will only get worse, not better.
Turner does not think it is credible to suggest the competition will be a drawcard in the way it has been described, though.
Former Black Caps all-rounder Dion Nash resigned from the board hours after it announced it wanted to pursue the NZ20 option rather than pursue a spot in the Big Bash.
Late last year, Scott Weenink, a former first-class cricketer, announced his resignation as chief executive, citing fundamental differences with key stakeholders.
It is clear there is a divide within NZC about the direction of the game. Not everyone is on board.
‘‘It seems to me that the game... throughout the world is being run by non-cricket people,’’ Turner said.
‘‘I mean, how many lawyers and accountants do you need on these boards? You know, you need cricket knowledge and it seems to me that it’s more difficult for cricketers to get on [the boards].’’
